Queen Archivist 29.09.2006 19:12 |
I know that a lot of QZ-ers hate me, Greg Brooks, and that's ok becase we are all entitled to an opinion, and indeed to express it. Good luck to you, to anyone with an opinion to express publically. HOWEVER... that is NOT the case on Queenzone. I pasted up two threads on here earlier today, and they both seem to have been removed. DELETED??????????? YV... Barb (???) has said some things about me and my work in the past, and that is completely fine. Today i did exactly the same thing, in reply, but apparently that is NOT fine. Barbara, was it you that removed them???? was it you that deleted both my threads??? Was it you that took it upon yourself to decide that your QZ community cannot see/read that which I pasted because it offends YOU???? Surely not. Tell me I'm wrong. Tell me you are not that petty. Surely that's not the case. YV, tell me, tell us all, that YOU have not cencored QZ for your own reasons, and thereby made FREEDOM OF SPEECH a thing of the past here. is QZ a dictatorship now, and no longer a democracy? If you have removed my threads then IMMEDIATELY and UNQUESTIONABLY, by definition you have CENCORED me and thereby removed my freedom of speech. It cannot be denied. What century are you living in? QUEENZONERS... you should all be appalled if it is the case that certain people's threads can be taken down, deleted, if certain QZ' Seniors' don't like it. That is an abomination. It could be YOU next that YV takes exception to. Richard... please give me an explanation as to why you have allowed this to happen. My God! Who else do you censor? What else do you decide cannot be read or seen by the QZ community? This is really discusting and shocking. Togg, Lester Thingy, John Stuart, and all you others out there, FORGET your greivances with me and stand up right now, even if it makes you unpopulare, and DEMAND that freedom of speech prevails, and cencorship does not. Otherwise your site is UTTERLY WORTHLESS and without credibility or worth. You cannot delete comments just because Barbie or JSS or some other sensitive soul might be upset. I get tons of crap aimed at me and I take it on the chin, so why can't you???? If it is the case that YV has influenced the removal of my threads, or actually done it herself, then shame on you. How dare you decide what QZ-ers can read, and not read. This is 2006, not 1806. Offer an explanation if you think there is one.... |
Lester Burnham 29.09.2006 19:17 |
Lester Thingy? I have a name, you fool, and if you want me on your side, you should use it properly. |
Queen Archivist 29.09.2006 19:19 |
I don't want you ON MY SIDE, you fool. Read it properly. I simply want you and others to stand up for what is right. Fredom of speech is right. Censorship is an abomination. So... express your outrage and be a man. |
newcastle 86 29.09.2006 19:48 |
i see the fat boy has obviously had a drink bless him.! the spelling is up to junior school standard i see. well done greg. loads of love as always |
Sebastian 29.09.2006 19:49 |
Greg: Fuck Off |
YourValentine 29.09.2006 19:51 |
I did not delete anything and from experience you should know that I don't delete threads from you. So, you can calm down. You know Richard's email address if you have a complaint. |
newcastle 86 29.09.2006 19:58 |
All of his threads should be deleted he contributes fuck all to this site |
magicalfreddiemercury 29.09.2006 20:22 |
newcastle 86 wrote: All of his threads should be deleted he contributes fuck all to this siteHe has the right to post here just as we have the right to ignore him. I say we should all excercise our rights. |
Queen Archivist 29.09.2006 20:46 |
YourValentine, Can you categorically confirm you said nothing and did nothing that resulted in my threads being removed? Come on YV it is perfectly simple and reasonable for you to tell the whole truth. I accepy you did not actually delete them, but you have not said you were not at all involved in them being deleted. Did you say anything to anyone about my threads that was contributary to them being removed? Be honest. |
Queen Archivist 29.09.2006 20:49 |
YV. You know more about this site than I do, by a huge margin. Can you please explain to me how it can happen that my two threads were removed. How many people have the 'power' or capability to delete threads? Is it just Richard? Do YOU have that access YV? |
Lester Burnham 29.09.2006 20:57 |
Look Greg, instead of barging in here like a bull in a china shop, why not privately contact Barb and ask her why? Just explain that to me, without hurling venom and your overblown, misspelled words at me. |
Wiley 29.09.2006 21:08 |
Oh, come on Greg. Is your job so stressing or lame that you have to come here and make that kind of statement? It is precisely freedom of speech that allowed you to attack YV directly in the first place, as it allowed you to post your "what were Queen's number ones" type of questions and it also allowed many users to call you names and everything else. If there were no freedom of speech over here you would have been banned from this forum the first time you came, when you were just "GB" and enjoyed to randomly pick on people just to prove your silly point about the use of nicknames and being anonymous and not to be taken seriously. I believe users have been banned in the past but for extreme cases of spamming and/or profanity. If you think that your posts might have been lost or deleted you can contact Richard, this site's admin and talk to him, with no need to have another go at Barbara, which I personally (that means "in person", Greg) know and I don't think she'd do. That is MY opinion. You can have yours, of course, but it is better to be informed before making this kind of statements or you will just make a fool of yourself. Like now. Wiley P.S.: I don't hate you, not at all. Just cool it down, participate positively in a discussion (if your contractual confidendiality clauses allow it) and/or just get back to work. |
radio_what's_new 29.09.2006 21:14 |
Wiley wrote: Oh, come on Greg. Is your job so stressing or lame that you have to come here and make that kind of statement? It is precisely freedom of speech that allowed you to attack YV directly in the first place, as it allowed you to post your "what were Queen's number ones" type of questions and it also allowed many users to call you names and everything else. If there were no freedom of speech over here you would have been banned from this forum the first time you came, when you were just "GB" and enjoyed to randomly pick on people just to prove your silly point about the use of nicknames and being anonymous and not to be taken seriously. I believe users have been banned in the past but for extreme cases of spamming and/or profanity. If you think that your posts might have been lost or deleted you can contact Richard, this site's admin and talk to him, with no need to have another go at Barbara, which I personally (that means "in person", Greg) know and I don't think she'd do. That is MY opinion. You can have yours, of course, but it is better to be informed before making this kind of statements or you will just make a fool of yourself. Like now. Wiley P.S.: I don't hate you, not at all. Just cool it down, participate positively in a discussion (if your contractual confidendiality clauses allow it) and/or just get back to work.I agree |
Queen Archivist 29.09.2006 21:42 |
Wiley. I am calm. I really am. But you haven't satisfied me with your good and considered words. I wrote a thread yesterday, 2 in fact, which obviously will not appeal greatly to some QZ-ers, and they were REMOVED. One of them, though I do say so myself, was blody good. I was really intrigued to see what YV would make of it... all she could do, ultimately, was insist it be deleted. That was her intelligent clever responce. Says a lot about her, aye! What do YOU think of that. Don't be afraid to speak your mind. WILEY... WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THAT? That is by definition an abuse of my freedom of speech. You can see that. You will understand that, I'm sure. Why are YOU not bothered at such censorship? No one should have the right to DELETE the thoughts and opinions of you, Wiley, should they? Nor those of me or John Stuart or YV or Togg. This is a simple concept. This is not China circa 1935. I have RE-POSTED one of the two threads, just out of principal. We'll see if your beloved QZ Overseers delete it again. I'm re=pasting the other one tomorrow because I am not letting YV and her cowering cronies who pander to everything she says, get away with it. It's bloody Dickensian!!!!!!! Those people are a century behind the times, Wiley. Wiley... WHY ARE YOU NOT ALARMED AT THIS? Are you simply worried about being seen to say something anti-YV, or anti-QZ? Where is your outrage? Integrity too? Come on. Don't be calm and nice, ask questions of those who delete threads written for and intended for YOU, but which OTHERS dictate you cannot ever see. |
Queen Archivist 29.09.2006 21:46 |
Wiley. Do you happen to know who has the capability to delete threads? Is it just Richard? Can YV? Are YV and Richard friends, do you know? Because i feel certain that though YV did not remove the threads directly herself, she must have insisted they go... and indeed THEY WENT! I put this to her, I asked that she be honest, but she's gone all quiet, as you can see. YV has NOT yet confirmed she had NO PART in the deletion. We will discover the extent of her integrity soon I hope. Come on YV, where is your reply? |
Smitty 29.09.2006 21:48 |
What were the names of the threads? |
john bodega 29.09.2006 22:05 |
I deleted them. I wished and I wished and I wished, and they were gone. Just like in Harry Potter. Nah look - I don't see the fuss. It's not as though you wrote anything revolutionary - we KNOW how you feel already. It'd be like me posting another thread begging for Face it Alone. It's an old, old joke. I think Freedom of Speech is fine, this thread is testament to you having it. I wish more people would exercise a Freedom of Thought before opening their big yaps. |
Wiley 29.09.2006 22:16 |
Hehehe, I don't think I've ever seen my lastname (which is also my nickname) written that many times in the same post :). To tell you the truth, Greg, I don't know who has the capability to delete posts apart from Richard... but in about 7 years that I've been visiting this forum this never was an issue - at all. Spammers came and spammers went away, they posted inanities and vulgarities for weeks before being banned. I just don't remember ONE SINGLE CASE of someone feeling outraged because their posts were deleted. So this is not, by any means, normal in this forum. I really don't know what kind of personal issue you might have with YV. I know you started it, that's for sure. You were very rude to her, joking or not, as a silly experiment or whatever. She has never publicly slagged you and she hasn't talked about you as much as you have talked about her without aparent reason. You kept on pushing her buttons, almost like if you wanted something like this to happen. IF she had anything to do with this (which I HIGHLY DOUBT), well, maybe you had it coming. Not for your recent behaviour or what you posted on those particular two threads, but for your past actions. I invite you to please re-post your thoughts in the forum (if you still think they are worth the space) and we'll read them. It's just that you can't keep on bringing up the same "he/she started it" arguments to the table. You are free to do so, but I know that I expected a lot more from you. I have to confess I was very excited when I knew that the Official Queen Archivist posted on Queenzone. Then I read your posts and I was very disappointed. Come on, man... I know you have A LOT to offer to the discussions regarding Queen's material, their recordings, their gigs, without actually having to reveal confidential information. Please do so and stop bitching around, hehe :). Wiley |
ok.computer 29.09.2006 22:26 |
Oh me, oh my... Are you contracted by Queen in some shape or form to work on their material? If so, I would assume that their contract or letter of offer might have some achievable targets or outputs attached to them? If I have assumed incorrectly and you have an open-ended contract to recommend product for release on an as-and-when basis, then I commend you, Sir. If on the other hand, such a contract exists, can I suggest that you get back to work and get the material that the fans and general public want to see out BEFORE my retirement in 2038? If you put as much effort into working on the material as you do into these posts, we might actually have had a greater Queen presence on the shelves this Christmas...and last Christmas...and the Christmas before that, etc ad nauseum. Just a thought... Paul |
Queen Archivist 29.09.2006 22:26 |
Wiley... you are an ok chap. You make sense to me. I wonder what you are doing here, quite frankly, putting up with what is apparently regarded as normal on QZ? That's not a dig. You are correct that I 'started it' with YV. I had a meaningless jibe at her expence one day (it could have been anyone, it was random) and she had a sense of humour bypass and it esculated from there. So yes I suppose I brought that one on myself - whatever 'that' is. I'm afraid i'm way passed caring. I cannot imagine YV is still smarting over that minor thing. But... having ones threads deleted just pisses me off out of principal, Wiley. You are an intelligent person, and logical, so I can't understand why you and others aen't outraged at being treated that way. My threads were for YOU and others to read, like everyone else's. YV making decisions that YOU cannot ever see them, should annoy you. Anyway... I like the way you approach things. I wish others on QZ were likeminded. It is not possible for me to do the things you outline - sensible as it seems, because too many Qz-ers have other plans and agendas, and I don't have much time these days anyway. Anyway... good talking with you Wiley. Regards |
Richard Orchard 29.09.2006 22:36 |
Hi Everyone, Just to clarify the posts haven't been deleted by any moderator (YV or me) on Queenzone.com. I am trying to track down if there is an issue. The board operates as per normal. Richard |
Queen Archivist 29.09.2006 22:37 |
Hello Paul, Paul is much more human and 'NORMAL' than ok.computer. You over estimate my influence on Queen product. For example, Justin Shirley-Smith, Richard Gray, Josh M, Kris F, Simon L, and I all worked on Queen Singles. We all do our respective bits, thinking it's gonna emerge for such and such a date. Then the band members tell us, and EMI, not the other way around, when THEY want the product to emerge. This can differ to what we think, and it usually does. RT, BM and JD are not short of experience on how this industry works. Queen is THEIR band, not ours, not EMI's. Queen is RT, JD, BM. Anyone who thinks that an Archivist has any say over precisely what gets issued and when, is living in a dream world. I only put stuff in the proposal. We only offer up the ingredients. It is the band who discard or keep stuff. You guys should direct your pops at the upper part of the ladder, not at those of us who are not in the Queen band. Picture the scene: Band meetings with band Manager. THEY make the decisions. NO ONE else. |
Queen Archivist 29.09.2006 22:40 |
Hi Richard, They WERE there lunchtime friday, yesterday. One QZ-er had time to reply, and then they were gone. I have emailed you RO. Will you keep me updated on this please? I would appreciate it. Do you regard the removal of content (large or small, significant or trivial) from your site, as signficant? Does this alarm you? |
Wiley 29.09.2006 22:47 |
Hey man.. Well, I like to read this forum (I don't post a lot but I read it on a daily basis) because this is the place were the actual discussions takes place and where people can learn a LOT about Queen. I also read Queenonline's forum but I prefer Queenzone. It's just a matter of taste, really. It has become like a tradition for me. In the last couple of years maybe there hasn't been that much of good discussion and more bitching and all that but I still like it. I just skip the crappy topics and concentrate on the good, which usually turns out to be VERY good. I sincerely hope that you can find the time to start a really interesting and cool discussion that is Queen related. Maybe you could be the first one to give us a scoop at new material or products when the powers that be allow you to do so? You could call it a Greg Brooks exclusive or something, hehe :). When you do, I'll be more than happy to participate. Until then, chill out, it's about having a good time. It was also nice to talk to you, btw. I didn't expect a direct response at all, haha :). Over and out. JCW |
Wilki Amieva 29.09.2006 22:55 |
Quosque tandem abutere, Mr. Brooks, patientia nostra? Look, Greg, I generally appreciate your work and I really wish you luck and happiness in your life, but it seems to me that 99% of your input HERE (and I want to make that last word count) is indeed PURE CRAP. You have been keeping a very SAD behaviour here - not to mention that you are supposed to be the QUEEN Archivist. Why do not you just leave QUEENZone alone and forget about it? You have indeed proven several times that you just do not fit here. Of course, that does not make you a bad or useless person, not at all. Perhaps it is just that you cannot understand this community (with all its highs and lows) and/or what it is expected from a person in your position. This is supposed to be fun, remember? Sometimes, it seems that you have lost the joy of being a fan/collector. If that is the case, I pity you, Greg, I really do. If not, well, I suppose there is still a lot of frustration in you anyway. I would LOVE to see that you have a pleasant visit everytime you are in this site, but I think that that is not going to happen - at least not anytime soon. So why do not you show some of self-respect and just let this place be? You do not need this place, don't you? |
Crezchi 30.09.2006 00:15 |
Greg quit coming here and crying everytime someone says something about you! Grow up man. I have never said anything out of the way towards you, but damn dude, this shit is getting very boring and retarded! You talk about Freedom of Speech? HAHAHAHAHA right, everytime someone expresses their views on you or something else, you come on QZ and MOAN and Cry like a little baby! Try taking your own advise, and drop the 'Queen Archivist' shit. HAIL TO THE KING, KING MOANZONER! |
Victorvil 30.09.2006 01:05 |
I can't believe that our relationships with a guy that works directly with the guys from the band we respect love and admire reached this level. I don't know why, Mr. Brooks, but it seems that all think that the things we believe that aren't right with Queen (like releasing some shit compilations) are your fault. And your attitude is not 100% friendly with some of the great members of Queenzone (or moanzone like you call this great place). Seriously, this paranoia isn't good also. The thing is, we will never be completely satisfied with all the Queen releases, cause we always want some more, and you never will be satisfied with us, as fans. Try to understand us, and don't easily blame us. From Chile, South America Victor, a Queen fan |
YourValentine 30.09.2006 02:19 |
"YourValentine, Can you categorically confirm you said nothing and did nothing that resulted in my threads being removed? Come on YV it is perfectly simple and reasonable for you to tell the whole truth. I accepy you did not actually delete them, but you have not said you were not at all involved in them being deleted. Did you say anything to anyone about my threads that was contributary to them being removed? Be honest." The truth is I did not even see any threads you posted and which are gone now. Nobody else seems to have seen them. And I do not have any issues with you. I am an adult, I work, I have a family and I post here as a hobby, so I do not get wound up over a couple of threads on a notice board. For Queenzone I would hope that the official archivist would contribute something more than just rants and I thought we had a start last time. But if it does not happen, my blood pressure won't raise. |
deleted user 30.09.2006 10:03 |
Mr. Brooks, You are going on about how EVERYONE else is spending WAY TOO MUCH time posting here, but may I ask, How much time have YOU spent here, let alone on this thread? I really don't think that those posts were deleted, but why don't you tell us what they were, or recreate them? If they were so important that you took action to attempt to start a fight, maybe you should repost them. I'm all for free speech, but I really don't think that that policy (or whatever you'd like to call it) was abused here. |
Queen Archivist 30.09.2006 11:26 |
To Singing Forever.... who said: Mr. Brooks, I really don't think that those posts were deleted, BOTH THE THREADS WERE DELETED, HONESTLY SING-FORV, THEY WERE. I THINK THIS MUST BE SIMPLE TO PROVE AND PROBABLY CAN BE. RICHARD ORCHARD HAS KINDLY WRITTEN TO ME SAYING THAT HE HAS FOUND THE ROUTE OF ONE OF THEM, BUT HE CANNOT ESTABLISH, YET, HOW IT GOT DELETED. I DID AS YOU SUGGESTED, I RE-WROTE ONE OF THEM... ABOUT THE SUGGESTION I WRITE UNDER A SECOND IDENTITY (WHICH I DON'T), AND I MIGHT RE DO THE SECOND ONE IF I HAVE TIME. but why don't you tell us what they were, or recreate them? ONE IS RE-CREATED, AS JUST MENTIONED, THE OTHER RICHARD MAY WELL FIND AND RE-PASTE UP. WE'LL SEE. If they were so important that you took action to attempt to start a fight, maybe you should repost them. THEY WEREN'T THAT IMPORTANT SING-FORV, IT WAS JUST THE PRINCIPAL OF A FACELESS QZ-ER NOT LIKING WHAT I SAID, SO DELETING IT. DON'T YOU THINK THAT SUCH CENSORSHIP REALLY STINKS???? YOU ARE A FAN OF EVA CASSIDY AND NICK DRAKE, I SEE. YOU ARE OBVIOUSLY EXTREMELY BRIGHT. GREAT TASTE. SO I'M SURE YOU TOO WILL BE OUTRAGED WHEN MY, OR YOURS, OR ANYONE'S FREEDOM OF SPEECH IS DENIED. RIGHT? BE IT IN ENGLAND OR UGANDA OR CHINA OR ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD WHERE PEOPLE CANNOT SAY OPENLY WHAT THEY BELIEVE. I'm all for free speech, but I really don't think that that policy (or whatever you'd like to call it) was abused here. IT WAS. RICHARD IS LOOKING INTO IT. THE OTHER PIECE THAT I WROTE MADE MENTION OF YV. I CAME BACK AT HER IN THE SAME WAY THAT SHE CAME AFTER ME IN ANOTHER THREAD... IN AN UNBALANCED AND CLEARLY IMPARTITIAL AND BIASSED WAY. RICHARD TELLS ME THAT HE AND YV ARE THE ONLY PEOPLE ABLE TO DELETE THREADS. I PERSONALLY THINK IT A BIT OF A COINCODENCE THAT A THREAD HAVING A POP AT YV, WHICH WAS RATHER NEAR THE TRUTH, WAS SUDDENLY DELETED BY SOMEONE WHO HAS ACCESS TO DELETE. BUT RICHARD SAYS HE FEELS SURE IT WASN'T YV, AND YV HAS SAID IT WASN'T HER. IT SEEMS TO HAVE BEEN MAGICALLY DELETED BY PERSONS WHO DO NOT HAVE ACCESS TO DELETE QZ THREADS. MOREOVER, THE COMPUTER SOFTWARE AND MAIN SYSTEM BEHIND QZ APPARENTLY IS UNABLE TO ASCERTAIN WHO WAS USING THE SYSTEM AT THAT TIME, WHO WAS EDITING OR WRITING OR DELETING. NONE OF THE HIDDEN PROGRAMMING OR OPERATING SYSTEN CAN INFORM AS TO THE 'USER' WHO DELETED THOSE TWO THREADS. THE DATABASES WE USE TO LOG QUEEN ITEMS WILL IMPART PRECISELY WHO USES THE SYSTEM, AT WHAT TIME THEY USED IT, WHETHER THEY EDITED OR CREATED OR DELETED, OR JUST VIEWED, AND IT WILL PROVIDE A PRINT OUT OF THE TAPES OR FILES 'EFFECTED' ON ANY DATE OR AT ANY TIME. BUT, IT SEEMS TO BE THE CASE THAT QZ DOES NONE OF THESE THINGS, SO THE 'DELETER' WILL REMAIN HIDDEN AND FACELESS. NEVER MIND THOUGH, AYE. |
YourValentine 30.09.2006 11:35 |
You posted on the old board link Threads which are started on the old board do not appear on the new board. Nothing was deleted. If you don't believe me, you can all try yourselves Here is the other one link I am waiting for your apology to Richard and myself. |
k-m 30.09.2006 11:47 |
Well, I don't know about the posts being deleted but recently there was a thread "Who HATES Paul Rodgers?". It was changed to "Who DISLIKES Paul Rodgers?". Political correctness on a Queen forum? WTF!?? |
YourValentine 30.09.2006 11:51 |
k-m - most likely the author of that thread edited the subject, why don't you ask him/her? |
Raf 30.09.2006 11:53 |
YourValentine wrote: I am waiting for your apology to Richard and myself.That's gonna be fun. Greg, where are you now? XD |
QUEENROCKS_1991 30.09.2006 12:15 |
Erm.... QA would you like some wd40 spray or maybe a new keyboard your CAP button seem to be stuck ? lol |
Queen Archivist 30.09.2006 12:28 |
Yes please QUEENROCKS, can you you send me a tin please. How kind of you. |
Raf 30.09.2006 12:50 |
Queen Archivist wrote: Yes please QUEENROCKS, can you you send me a tin please. How kind of you.Hey, you owe the QZ team an apology. It was very easy for you to attack them when you thought you were wrong - now why don't you fix it, as it's been proved YOU're wrong and THEY're right? |
Wilki Amieva 30.09.2006 12:59 |
Hmmm. So all this fuss ended (and started) in a Greg Brooks mistake. Maybe Queen Productions should sell re-prints of this thread? ...After all, is the kind of product we are used to. ;-) |
deleted user 30.09.2006 13:18 |
Greg, I'm sorry that something has happened to make you think that two of your threads got deleted. However, you should've contacted the management of QZ in private before you made accusations (whether or not you were correct). I'm sorry that this occured. Next time, please keep the rest of QZ out of this, as I'm only trying to be polite by responding. The way you phrased it, it sounded like something completely different. Once again, everyone is sorry for this and hope that we can all move on. |
Wilki Amieva 30.09.2006 13:21 |
Those threads were NOT deleted. |
deleted user 30.09.2006 13:31 |
Wilki Amieva wrote: Those threads were NOT deleted.I just read those threads and Greg, you knew they were going to be moved. Thank you, Wilki! |
Rick 30.09.2006 13:37 |
The most funny thing about this is, Greggieboy, is that you built up this reputation YOURSELF. What do you expect from us? Kissing your hairy butt? Sorry dude, no can do. I'm not gay. Go headbutt a train or something. You're further below then our sealevel here in The Netherlands. |
deleted user 30.09.2006 13:40 |
^ Nice. Tell it to him like it is! |
ok.computer 30.09.2006 13:43 |
Queen Archivist wrote: Hello Paul, Paul is much more human and 'NORMAL' than ok.computer. **I'm glad you think so. "Paul" was already taken. Ok Computer was on my desk at the time. It seemed handy. Strangely though, I doubt "Greg Brooks" was taken as a handle. Hmm.*** You over estimate my influence on Queen product. **I really don't. Not after the number of errors in your work that have been pointed out by other members of this forum. But I do feel you could be using your time and position a little more constructively than you seem to with rapid-fire (or should that be vapid...?) postings in here.*** For example, Justin Shirley-Smith, Richard Gray, Josh M, Kris F, Simon L, and I all worked on Queen Singles. We all do our respective bits, thinking it's gonna emerge for such and such a date. Then the band members tell us, and EMI, not the other way around, when THEY want the product to emerge. This can differ to what we think, and it usually does. RT, BM and JD are not short of experience on how this industry works. ***Then you should be able to list, unequivocally, what "bits" have been done, what product remains to be released, etc etc. To be able to say "I have worked on X number of concerts for DVD release purpose....we have completed master tapes for X number of CD releases which may contain Y and Z as material" is not going to be breaking any trade secrets, now, is it...?*** Queen is THEIR band, not ours, not EMI's. Queen is RT, JD, BM. Anyone who thinks that an Archivist has any say over precisely what gets issued and when, is living in a dream world. ***Again, I put it to you that there should be no issue in discussing in clear terms (and with no infusion of the usual malice and vitriol which seems to pervade your posts), just what will be available when the Queen machine decides. You don't expect us to believe "oh, Roger and Brian don't want anyone to know what's available in case its not a surprise and everyone gets very disappointed".*** ***Just what DOES your job description entail, Sir? I put it to you, that if you ARE Greg Brooks, you will have no trouble in imparting what you're up to. If you AREN'T Greg Brooks, then I have wasted about 4 minutes replying to a bogus post...but no matter. It is only marginally more fun than trimming my nails. And that only takes about 4 minutes too.*** I only put stuff in the proposal. We only offer up the ingredients. It is the band who discard or keep stuff. ***I put it to you again. What is your role? What are you actually doing under a contract with Queen? Why do we see very little emerging after...what...six years of waiting?*** You guys should direct your pops at the upper part of the ladder, not at those of us who are not in the Queen band. Picture the scene: Band meetings with band Manager. THEY make the decisions. NO ONE else. ***I fear that your endless malicious little pops that deliver very little in the way of information for fans pretty much sums up your attitude, both to the error-littered work you produce, and to the people that ultimately provide Queen with the finance that keeps you in employment.*** |
k-m 30.09.2006 13:53 |
YourValentine wrote: k-m - most likely the author of that thread edited the subject, why don't you ask him/her?Sorry, I didn't know you can edit threads by yourself |
Wilki Amieva 30.09.2006 14:05 |
<font color=Maroon>Singing Forever wrote:The threads Greg was referring to were not moved. He just posted them on the old forums and expected to see them on the new ones. That per se was not a big mistake...Wilki Amieva wrote: Those threads were NOT deleted.I just read those threads and Greg, you knew they were going to be moved. Thank you, Wilki! |
magicalfreddiemercury 30.09.2006 14:16 |
Wilki Amieva wrote:His new threads, however, are going to be moved to the proper forums.<font color=Maroon>Singing Forever wrote:The threads Greg was referring to were not moved. He just posted them on the old forums and expected to see them on the new ones. That per se was not a big mistake...Wilki Amieva wrote: Those threads were NOT deleted.I just read those threads and Greg, you knew they were going to be moved. Thank you, Wilki! |
Mr Faron Hyte 30.09.2006 14:29 |
Queenzone presents "Much Ado About Nothing: The Greg Brooks Story", a Desperate Attention Seekers Production I think we should throw Greg a surprise party. He seems so lonely and sad. |
deleted user 30.09.2006 14:31 |
magicalfreddiemercury wrote:*Lightbulb goes off* Ohhh! I get it now. Thanks guys! To edit or not to edit? I wish we could move on and everyone could be happy with one another... *Come together, right now.*Wilki Amieva wrote:His new threads, however, are going to be moved to the proper forums.<font color=Maroon>Singing Forever wrote:The threads Greg was referring to were not moved. He just posted them on the old forums and expected to see them on the new ones. That per se was not a big mistake...Wilki Amieva wrote: Those threads were NOT deleted.I just read those threads and Greg, you knew they were going to be moved. Thank you, Wilki! |
wstüssyb 30.09.2006 14:35 |
Honestly Greg, You need to get laid, I heard sexual frustation is bad, but you need to stop taking it out on us. |
Sergei. 30.09.2006 15:06 |
I went to go see Jackass 2 last night... Greg, was that you mooning Steve-O in the background? The fat hairy ass with a tattoo of John Stamos on the left cheek kind of gave it away... |
Queen Archivist 30.09.2006 15:32 |
Singing Forever. I just read those threads and Greg, you knew they were going to be moved. Thank you, Wilki! YOU ARE CONFUSED. THE THREADS TO BE MOVED ARE THE ONES I'VE WRITTEN TODAY; THOSE ARE WHAT YV IS REFERRING TO. KEEP UP WOMAN, THIS ISN'T NUCLEAR PHYSICS. YV WROTE TO TELL ME THAT SHE;'S MOVING THOSE THREADS BECAUSE I POSTED THEM IN THE WRONG PLACE. I WAS REFERRING TO TWO POSTS WHICH DISAPPEARED YESTERDAY... NOT THE ONES YOU ARE REFERRING TO. CONSIDER YOURSELF FORMERLY TOLD OFF BY 'THE ARCHIVIST' AND PUT BACK IN YOUR BOX. XXXXX |
Queen Archivist 30.09.2006 15:33 |
YOU TOO WILKI, YOU SILLY GIRL! BLESS YOU BOTH THOUGH! |
Saint Jiub 30.09.2006 15:42 |
Where is your apology greg? YourValentine Posted: 9/30/2006 11:34:51 AM -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- You posted on the old board link Threads which are started on the old board do not appear on the new board. Nothing was deleted. If you don't believe me, you can all try yourselves Here is the other one link I am waiting for your apology to Richard and myself. |
Wilki Amieva 30.09.2006 15:44 |
Before replying to my comments, Greg, DO check them, instead of just reading others' comments about mines. I will now repeat what I have stated above: "The threads Greg was referring to were not moved. He just posted them on the old forums and expected to see them on the new ones. That per se was not a big mistake..." Part of it is pretty much what you too have posted now. It seems that I am at 'your' side, see? That said, I just refuse to answer to a 'silly' remark from you. Anyway, no offence taken whatsoever. And, by the way, I am a 'he', not a 'she'. I hope you DO check THAT regularly in 'real life', at least before... Well, you know what I mean. ;-) |
Bobby_brown 30.09.2006 16:07 |
Can someone says to me, how can someone post in the old forum? I know you can guive me the links, but if you follow the normal link how on earth you get to post in the old forum? I know that if you search through the search button, sometimes and for some reason, you´re redirected to the old forum (even if it is a new post). But how can anyone that´s looking for Queenzone forum be redirected to the old forum? I get the feeling that something is wrong in this story, but i´ll wait and see... Take care |
Raf 30.09.2006 16:17 |
Mike Van wrote: Where is your apology greg? YourValentine Posted: 9/30/2006 11:34:51 AM -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- You posted on the old board link Threads which are started on the old board do not appear on the new board. Nothing was deleted. If you don't believe me, you can all try yourselves Here is the other one link I am waiting for your apology to Richard and myself.He's way too low to admit he's wrong. |
QUEENROCKS_1991 30.09.2006 16:27 |
QA your cap button is still on ? lmao |
deleted user 30.09.2006 17:05 |
I think when Greg wants to reply to me he gets mad and turns on caps lock... Hrmm. He must find me very agitating. :( I am having trouble keeping up because I have a brain capacity of about 2, so I'll just leave you merry folks and be on my way. Thank you for the interesting thread, and I hope that we can all soon move on from this and get along. Peace on Queenzone... |
Crezchi 30.09.2006 17:08 |
TURN OFF YOUR FUCKING CAPS LOCK! lol |
pow wow 30.09.2006 17:15 |
Greg, I remember what you said last time you were here. An idea you suggested to YV was you to introduce a filter system to weed out the posts that have no relevance or serve no purpose to anyone. I can safely say that your posts fall into that category and can only assume that Richard or whoever has taken you up on your word......... I know you like to come hear just for the windup - and I for one DID like some of you witticisms, but it's all getting a tad BORING and predictable now. You have a bitter of late though, what's happened, did the builders you had in brick or your fridge or bury your laptop in the footings or something? Steven |
QUEENROCKS_1991 30.09.2006 17:19 |
lol you think caplock button broken ? lol |
TRS-Romania 30.09.2006 17:28 |
Greg has a problem which is: Dissocial-Narcistic-Paranoid- Antisocial Personality Disorder Personality disorder, usually coming to attention because of a gross disparity between behaviour and the prevailing social norms, and characterized by - very low tolerance to frustration and a low threshold for discharge of aggression - callous unconcern for the feelings of others - gross and persistent attitude of irresponsi- bility and disregard for social norms, rules and obligations - persistently bears grudges, i.e., is unforgiving of insults, injuries, or slights - perceives attacks on his or her character and is quick to react angrily or to counterattack - displays rapidly shifting and shallow expression of emotions - shows self-dramatization, theatricality, and exaggerated _expression of emotion - shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes - markedly dysharmonious attitudes and behaviour, involving usually several areas of functioning, e.g. affectivity, arousal, impulse control, ways of perceiving and thinking, and style of relating to others |
Rick 30.09.2006 17:56 |
Greg, all the time you've spending here on Queenzone (or Moanzone, as you put it) you could easily get your ass into the archives, find something interesting and release something decent. |
TRS-Romania 30.09.2006 17:57 |
Rick, Greg is still trying to obtain medication for his illness! So please don't get too upset! |
YourValentine 30.09.2006 21:25 |
moved to Queenzone forum |
Fenderek 05.10.2006 19:28 |
And now Greg will pretend he hasn't noticed the threads pointed out and the fact that HE was wrong... Jesus, what an ass... And no- I'm not hiding under the "nick"- I'm Tomasz Wisznioewski nad I am in London- so we can meet eye to eye and THAN I can tell you what I think about you. Not about your work- but about you, something you are showing us through your posts here. It's an extremely sad picture, mate... BTW- you're posting here more often than I do recently (it's my first post in half a year), so don't even say anything about "having a life"... |
Togg 09.10.2006 12:12 |
You seem even more frustrated than usual Greg, things getting to you? Do learn to use the search function or just simply post in the correct place before screaming at the top of your head. I know research isn't your strong point but jeez, it's just a website surely youcan find your own threads! |
.Jony. 17.10.2006 02:43 |
I absoluetly think you are right greg it seems that there is freedom of speech for everyone, except for greg brooks (just because he happens to be the Queen archivist) laughable |
Togg 18.10.2006 06:57 |
.Jony. wrote: I absoluetly think you are right greg it seems that there is freedom of speech for everyone, except for greg brooks (just because he happens to be the Queen archivist) laughableOh good someone else that doesn't know how to use the website, Why is freedom of speech so difficult for Greg, simply because when he posts a rant it's often in the wrong forum, then when he returns it's been moved, hmmmm must have been deleted, or maybe just LOOK IN THE CORRECT FORUM... numpty. |
.Jony. 23.10.2006 14:22 |
Togg wrote:freedom of speech means I can say what I want, where I want. like saying I think you're talking bollox.Jony. wrote: I absoluetly think you are right greg it seems that there is freedom of speech for everyone, except for greg brooks (just because he happens to be the Queen archivist) laughableOh good someone else that doesn't know how to use the website, Why is freedom of speech so difficult for Greg, simply because when he posts a rant it's often in the wrong forum, then when he returns it's been moved, hmmmm must have been deleted, or maybe just LOOK IN THE CORRECT FORUM... numpty. what is the good forum anyway? who's to say? you? me? |
Togg 24.10.2006 10:14 |
You are missing the point, I am not saying he can say what he wants at all, of course he can, but he seems to think his posts get deleted, they don't just moved to the correct forum... so when he comes back they SEEM gone. If you READ my response you will see it has nothing to do with not allowing free speech. Greg loves to post in the wrong forum then claim it gets deleted when in reality it has just been moved, one of his little games that seems to amuse him. As for who's to say what forum, well the webmaster that's who, you seem to misunderstand freedom of speech, sure you can say what you want, but it has to be in the correct forum, just like in life. Freedom of speech doesn't mean you can shout your mouth off anywhere and everywhere, there are correct protocols of voicing your opinion, if you choose not to use them you are usually arrested or sued.... |
.Jony. 24.10.2006 15:16 |
Togg wrote: You are missing the point, I am not saying he can say what he wants at all, of course he can, but he seems to think his posts get deleted, they don't just moved to the correct forum... so when he comes back they SEEM gone. If you READ my response you will see it has nothing to do with not allowing free speech. Greg loves to post in the wrong forum then claim it gets deleted when in reality it has just been moved, one of his little games that seems to amuse him. As for who's to say what forum, well the webmaster that's who, you seem to misunderstand freedom of speech, sure you can say what you want, but it has to be in the correct forum, just like in life. Freedom of speech doesn't mean you can shout your mouth off anywhere and everywhere, there are correct protocols of voicing your opinion, if you choose not to use them you are usually arrested or sued....freedom of speech only stops where it damages the equal rights of the receiver of the message. it doesn't stop purely because it violates the futile little rules of Queenzone. you CAN post in the wrong forum, but it will get moved. you can ask: "why did my post get moved". still nothing wrong there. no law forbids you to ask why your post got moved. (in the opposite case, feel free to show me that law, which you can't) withing those limits, I can for example say that 1+1=3. you in return can call me stupid for that, and then I would call you a pedantic twat and that's what makes the world turning on a side note, when I look at this forum I see that 90% of the forums are about Queen, 10 % about other stuff. knowing that, I fail to see how anyone can post in the wrong forum |
Togg 25.10.2006 11:40 |
At the risk of repeating myself...This has nothing to do with freedom of speech... Greg and you it seems simply don't understand how this site works, simple as that. If Greg was to drive down the wrong side of the road and get arrested he would claim there was no freedom of speech, If he wants to be able to find his posts I suggest he posts in the correct forum, there is no freedom of speech issue here he just is not bright enough to find his own topics! |
.Jony. 25.10.2006 13:03 |
Togg wrote: At the risk of repeating myself...This has nothing to do with freedom of speech... Greg and you it seems simply don't understand how this site works, simple as that. If Greg was to drive down the wrong side of the road and get arrested he would claim there was no freedom of speech, If he wants to be able to find his posts I suggest he posts in the correct forum, there is no freedom of speech issue here he just is not bright enough to find his own topics!since when do you get arrested for posting in the wrong forum?? no really, how you can even begin to compare the two is going beyond the realm of my intellectual capacity |
Togg 26.10.2006 09:35 |
It's an analogy.... you seem either to be exhibiting a very dim side, or you are deliberatly being thick? Too close to call at this point. |
Queen Archivist 08.11.2006 13:23 |
Hey Togg... It's an analogy.... you seem either to be exhibiting a very dim side, or you are deliberatly being thick? Too close to call at this point. ISN'T THIS TRUE OF 8 OUT 10 QZ OWNERS? |
Togg 17.11.2006 04:22 |
Hmmm, you may have a point... |
The Fairy King 22.11.2006 04:10 |
<font color=blue>Rick wrote: Greg, all the time you've spending here on Queenzone (or Moanzone, as you put it) you could easily get your ass into the archives, find something interesting and release something decent.I second that. |