Rethinking Invincible

[barbee0715]

Suddenly having a different opinion is bias, okay :smilerolleyes: It honestly is impossible for people here to have debates without being labelled isn't it?

Not to be rude, but haven't read anything here that says "my opinion is...". For example, Buxer's newest version of the creation of SIM is taken as fact and "corroborated by Buxer". You can't corroborate your own story.

 

[Ms. BlueGangsta]

Or a swan.

Nah, they make more of a honking/hissing sound. :rofl:

 

[SmoothGangsta]

^^^^
If it walks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it's a duck, and you have indeed shown that you have a bias against MJ on an MJ fan forum no less.
All things considered if I were you I really wouldn't be suprised if others told me I had a bias against Michael. :/

Just my $0.02, y'all can go ahead and continue the debate.

You have an extreme bias for MJ, so do a lot of people on here, If I say something like that I bet you'd disagree? Just because someone sees something differently or has different opinons on how things happened doesn't make them somehow bias.

 

[SmoothGangsta]

Not to be rude, but haven't read anything here that says "my opinion is...". For example, Buxer's newest version of the creation of SIM is taken as fact and "corroborated by Buxer". You can't corroborate your own story.

This is a discussion board. Surely it should be assumed by default that everything posted is opinion, even if said person believes their opinion to be fact, which, in cases like this, where it's whether or not something happened, or how something happened, is often the case

 

[BadTour87]

You have an extreme bias for MJ, so do a lot of people on here, If I say something like that I bet you'd disagree? Just because someone sees something differently or has different opinons on how things happened doesn't make them somehow bias.

don't bother arguing against biased stan, they'll never admit defeat ;D

 

[Ms. BlueGangsta]

You have an extreme bias for MJ, so do a lot of people on here, If I say something like that I bet you'd disagree? Just because someone sees something differently or has different opinons on how things happened doesn't make them somehow bias.

This is an MJ fan forum though, so unless they show (like you have done) or state otherwise then it's pretty much a given that the people you encounter on here are biased in MJ's favor to some extent. :rofl:

IMO, you seem to be one of those MJ fans that feels like they're better then or not as "crazy" as the rest of the fanbase because they're overly critical of Michael, and have a "realistic" view of him when in reality their views don't come across as realistic, and instead comes across as being biased against MJ or anti-MJ. :/

 

[SmoothGangsta]

This is an MJ fan forum though, so unless they show (like you have done) or state otherwise then it's pretty much a given that the people you encounter on here are biased in MJ's favor to some extent. :rofl:

IMO, you seem to be one of those MJ fans that feels like they're better then or not as "crazy" as the rest of the fanbase because they're overly critical of Michael, and have a "realistic" view of him when in reality their views don't come across as realistic, and instead comes across as being biased against MJ or anti-MJ. :/

It's not a good thing to be biased towards MJ, so I don't know why you're presenting it as such. I'm not overly critical I'm simply being realistic, I treat MJ like I would any other person when discussing them, he's not some Angel that I need to positive about all the time or I'm "Biased" You're acting like differing opinons are bias again. Just because I say something you don't like, or don't want to hear, doesn't make me bias.

 

[BadTour87]

, and have a "realistic" view of him when in reality their views don't come across as realistic, and instead comes across as being biased against MJ or anti-MJ. :/

but it shouldn't come across like that lol
it only DOES come across like that if the reader is biased themselves

 

[xosweetseducingsighsxo]

I'm not sure what's going on, but in my opinion, Invincible was pretty solid, except he could've kept those unknown rappers (minus Biggie) on the songs and replaced one of em with Tupac. That would've been so dope.

 

[AlwaysThere]

Given your bias against MJ, even if he revealed (at that time) names of certain November submitted tracks (that eventually made the album), you still would not have believed him.

Yes, I am biased against Michael and actively take part in a forum dedicated to him and frequently discuss how he is my favorite entertainer of all time. No, I simply don't view things through rose-tinted glasses and accept everything said or done by Michael as gospel, and will openly acknowledge if he did or said something that was either unfair or unjust.

Apart from his addition of the final choir, MJ started to make some changes/improvements to the melodic structure of the song from the very first moment he received the demo version from R. Kelly. According to past reports (that were also confirmed by several authors, like Adrian Grant) the two versions, R Kelly’s demo & MJ’s official version, reveal rhythmical/melodic changes on the part of MJ.

I suggest you stop sounding so dogmatic as if you had been in the studio during the sessions.

This has to be a joke. You and I are both attempting to discredit the insistence of the other by providing quotes and comments from those involved, and yet you speak as if I'm the unreasonable one? Where you hear the slightest bit of negativity towards Michael and suddenly jump to the defensive as if whomever is responsible is completely overreacting and cannot possibly be correct?

Perhaps this is news to you, but Michael Jackson made mistakes. And unless you're willing and open to acknowledging them and being honest in your criticisms of him, then you simply cannot win any argument. Which is why this one ends here. Good talk.

you have indeed shown that you have a bias against MJ on an MJ fan forum no less.
All things considered if I were you I really wouldn't be suprised if others told me I had a bias against Michael. :/.

Again, no bias against. Just not willing to praise the man if he doesn't deserve to be praised.

For example, being the greatest entertainer of all time? Praise. Arguably having one of the most divine voices in pop? Praise. Having the strongest catalog in the pop category? Praise. Having an immensely incredible set of short films? Praise. Being the creative mastermind behind the majority of his songs? Some praise, some criticism.

It's not bias, it's fair.

Not to be rude, but haven't read anything here that says "my opinion is...". For example, Buxer's newest version of the creation of SIM is taken as fact and "corroborated by Buxer". You can't corroborate your own story.

The SIM situation is not my opinion as this is what Buxer had told Mike Smallcombe, who had reprinted it in his book with direct quotes from Buxer himself. Same with Whatever Happens - I believe it was Gil Cang who admitted that Michael took songwriting credits despite never writing a word of the song.

If it has been said by a reliable source that it happened, then I say it as fact. That's how we all work (and certainly how mj_frenzy has worked in our several page debate).

IMO, you seem to be one of those MJ fans that feels like they're better then or not as "crazy" as the rest of the fanbase because they're overly critical of Michael, and have a "realistic" view of him when in reality their views don't come across as realistic, and instead comes across as being biased against MJ or anti-MJ. :/

Whereas you seem to be a Stan - someone who simply refuses to say absolutely anything negative about Michael because, in your view, he is at some sort of God-like figure that is incapable of doing wrong and should be praised by all, which simply is not the case.

This is exactly why this forum cannot be taken seriously sometimes. There is a mob mentality towards the first person to even vaguely suggest that Michael was not a flawless individual. That's why people like SmoothGangsta and BadTour87 and others are needed - they cut up the unnecessary praise and offer some legitimate criticism. But of course it will be shut down immediately, because MICHAEL JACKSON IS PERFECT.

Ha.

 

[BadTour87]

That's why people like SmoothGangsta and BadTour87 and others are needed - they cut up the unnecessary praise and offer some legitimate criticism.

fun fact: one of the only reasons I created this account initially was to respond to stans but I got sidetracked by the gold mine that is the 2000 Watts sub forum for like a month

of course that's changed now and I like posting other things too

 

[HIStoric]

 

[KOPV]

I'm so lost... What is the argument now? I wanna join lol

 

[Ms. BlueGangsta]

I created this account initially was to respond to stans

So, hold up.
You joined an MJ fan forum pretty much only to antagonize fans just because they are fans.

Honestly, people like yourself along with AlwaysThere and SmoothGangsta are rather annoying and seem very pretentious at best, so personally I hardly believe you are needed here when you all are only here to cast aspersions on the rest of the fanbase and Michael himself because of a preconceived notion you have about the forum being full of stans, and because you are biased against Michael or better yet are a Michael hater (see the same way you call MJJC members Stans I can call you a hater, nice isn't it?)

All three of you need to get off of your high horses because they are made of straw.

 

[Ms. BlueGangsta]

Again, no bias against. Just not willing to praise the man if he doesn't deserve to be praised.

For example, being the greatest entertainer of all time? Praise. Arguably having one of the most divine voices in pop? Praise. Having the strongest catalog in the pop category? Praise. Having an immensely incredible set of short films? Praise. Being the creative mastermind behind the majority of his songs? Some praise, some criticism.

It's not bias, it's fair.

I've seen people that believe the allegations praise Michael's body of work and talent, so your point is?

Whereas you seem to be a Stan - someone who simply refuses to say absolutely anything negative about Michael because, in your view, he is at some sort of God-like figure that is incapable of doing wrong and should be praised by all, which simply is not the case.

This is exactly why this forum cannot be taken seriously sometimes. There is a mob mentality towards the first person to even vaguely suggest that Michael was not a flawless individual. That's why people like SmoothGangsta and BadTour87 and others are needed - they cut up the unnecessary praise and offer some legitimate criticism. But of course it will be shut down immediately, because MICHAEL JACKSON IS PERFECT.

Ha.

That is all opinion and not factual in any way.

 

[SarahJ]

Black & White: Did that not bother you that Michael did not include it in the song credits as co-composer?

Brad Buxer: No. I did not ask to be. When you have the opportunity to work with such a musical genius, be credited or not, it does not really matter. I had a great opportunity to working with Michael all these years. I'm probably the musician with whom he worked most of his career. I was a musician and arranger from 1989 until 2006. It shows how we were on stage, him and me ...
http://info.sonicretro.org/Brad_Buxer_Interview_(Black_%26_White,_November/December_2009)

Just my two cents for whatever its worth, so far everything I've seem of Brad Buxer shows how much he valued his time with MJ and valued the man himself, continuing to work with him for years afterwards. If he wasn't that pressed about it than I don't see how we should be, especially since none of us were involved. As far as I'm concerned the end result, resulted in a hauntingly beautiful piece of music that will stand the test of time.

No-one has said that MJ was perfect and I do think it's overreaching to say that. Respect for others opinion works both ways as well as for the man himself.

 

[barbee0715]

For example, being the greatest entertainer of all time? Praise. Arguably having one of the most divine voices in pop? Praise. Having the strongest catalog in the pop category? Praise. Having an immensely incredible set of short films? Praise. Being the creative mastermind behind the majority of his songs? Some praise, some criticism.

It's not bias, it's fair.



The SIM situation is not my opinion as this is what Buxer had told Mike Smallcombe, who had reprinted it in his book with direct quotes from Buxer himself. Same with Whatever Happens - I believe it was Gil Cang who admitted that Michael took songwriting credits despite never writing a word of the song.

If it has been said by a reliable source that it happened, then I say it as fact. That's how we all work (and certainly how mj_frenzy has worked in our several page debate).

I'm not a fanatical Michael Jackson "stan" and I'm more than willing to read how songs evolved and the collaborations and changes to songs as we know them today. I love reading about the subtle changes Quincy would make to a song's arrangement that would change the mood and tone completely. I didn't have an issue with the R. Kelly story (even if he was the only one telling it) because if it was a choral arrangement that Michael added, then I would consider that an arrangement and that would fall under producing, not under songwriting. And Michael must have agreed. Even earlier in this thread Michael gave songwriting credit to somebody for simply FINDING "Heaven Can Wait." He didn't write it, he just found it, and gave it to Teddy Riley. But Michael gave him credit anyway.

I agree about your story on Whatever Happens because I've heard their version and I hear little if any difference between the 2 songs. Maybe there are subtle differences that I don't hear that made Michael feel like he had made a songwriting contribution. But if he didn't, I'm not bothered by that. I'm not going to get irate. You can't be an artist of that caliber without an oversized ego.

I do have an issue when somebody says "Michael ALWAYS" did this and that and implies that he took credit for songs from the beginning, because that makes it sound like he was doing it all the way back to "Blues Away"-I don't think that's true, not after hearing his demos and his collaborators and producers talking about his work all these years.



I do take exception of using Buxer's last story of SIM to Smallcombe as evidence only because I have heard and read at least 3 different Buxer interviews and the story has CHANGED. And as Sarah pointed out as I was writing this, he did say that they worked together and Michael was always generous with him. If he had really solely written SIM, why didn't he protest or take him to court, like most people would? There's more to that story, then.

I'm not one to say Michael was perfect, could do no wrong, how dare you, but I am going to question certain things that are stated as fact with no evidence except the person saying so.

 

[SmoothGangsta]

So, hold up.
You joined an MJ fan forum pretty much only to antagonize fans just because they are fans.

Honestly, people like yourself along with AlwaysThere and SmoothGangsta are rather annoying and seem very pretentious at best, so personally I hardly believe you are needed here when you all are only here to cast aspersions on the rest of the fanbase and Michael himself because of a preconceived notion you have about the forum being full of stans, and because you are biased against Michael or better yet are a Michael hater (see the same way you call MJJC members Stans I can call you a hater, nice isn't it?)

All three of you need to get off of your high horses because they are made of straw.

So we're not needed here because you don't like the stuff we say? That is what I just read. I'm here to discuss MJ. Just because you don't like the things I have to say doesn't mean I'm not allowed to say them. The way you're acting is exactly what we're talking about. You prove our point repeatedly with your posts on here. You've said repeatedly on here you hate Stan culture yet all you do is contribute to it.

 

[Ms. BlueGangsta]

No-one has said that MJ was perfect and I do think it's overreaching to say that. Respect for others opinion works both ways as well as for the man himself

^^^^
Exactly!
No one here has claimed to be a Stan.
In fact, I personally loathe stan culture.
However, what I'm not okay with is people obviously being biased against or having an axe to grind with Michael then acting as if they're merely stating an unbiased opinion.

 

[Ms. BlueGangsta]

So we're not needed here because you don't like the stuff we say? That is what I just read. I'm here to discuss MJ. Just because you don't like the things I have to say doesn't mean I'm not allowed to say them. The way you're acting is exactly what we're talking about. You prove our point repeatedly with your posts on here. You've said repeatedly on here you hate Stan culture yet all you do is contribute to it.

No, you're not needed here.
Many people are not NEEDED here, but everyone IS here out their love for Michael, which is something that you seem to be lacking in.
Also, nowhere did I say you couldn't state your opinion, but what I did do was give my opinion of you and your opinion.
If you feel as though I contribute to stan culture despite knowing I hate it then so be it, I have nothing to prove to you nor anyone else.
Your opinion of myself doesn't matter to me, but your opinion of Michael does.



A three person faction made out of yourself, AlwaysThere, and BadTour87 will get you all nowhere, and achieve nothing.

 

[z21]

IMO Invincible have very good material but also have few weak songs, its should be shorter. 12 song would be fine. I would cut fom the album Privacy, You Are My Life, Cry and Dont' Walk Away,

In Heartbraker and Invicnible , unknown raper should be replaced.

 

[SmoothGangsta]

No, you're not needed here.
Many people are not NEEDED here, but everyone IS here out their love for Michael, which is something that you seem to be lacking in.
Also, nowhere did I say you couldn't state your opinion, but what I did do was give my opinion of you and your opinion.
If you feel as though I contribute to stan culture despite knowing I hate it then so be it, I have nothing to prove to you nor anyone else.
Your opinion of myself doesn't matter to me, but your opinion of Michael does.



A three person faction made out of yourself, AlwaysThere, and BadTour87 will get you all nowhere, and achieve nothing.

The last part is what I'm talking about, why do you care if I have some opinons about MJ that are different from yours? And no I don't love Michael, he's not some idol. I respect him and enjoy his music. I think he was an amazing showman, lyricist, and singer, but he wasn't perfect and shouldn't be treated as such. Lol I'm not part of any faction I'm just stating how I feel. The fact that three other people on here agree with me doesn't mean we're in some gang or something. I see you're trying to make it that way though. It's not a discussion to you, it's just "everyone on here versus". I'm allowed to state how I feel and discuss it with people who might not feel the same way without being relegated to some sort of "gang", you're acting like me having different thoughts is me being an outcast or something. As if I must think like you or I'm somehow not allowed here? Or am I to be separated as you so desire into some sort of gang? You've said you think I should be free to express my opinion but am I only allowed if it means I'm somehow treated differently by some people around here? That shouldn't be the way it is.

 

[Ms. BlueGangsta]

The last part is what I'm talking about, why do you care if I have some opinons about MJ that are different from yours? And no I don't love Michael, he's not some idol. I respect him and enjoy his music. I think he was an amazing showman, lyricist, and singer, but he wasn't perfect and shouldn't be treated as such. Lol I'm not part of any faction I'm just stating how I feel. The fact that three other people on here agree with me doesn't mean we're in some gang or something. I see you're trying to make it that way though. It's not a discussion to you, it's just "everyone on here versus". I'm allowed to state how I feel and discuss it with people who might not feel the same way without being relegated to some sort of "gang", you're acting like me having different thoughts is me being an outcast or something. As if I must think like you or I'm somehow not allowed here? Or am I to be separated as you so desire into some sort of gang? You've said you think I should be free to express my opinion but am I only allowed if it means I'm somehow treated differently by some people around here? That shouldn't be the way it is.

I am religious so ONLY God and Jesus are perfect in my eyes.
No one has to be like me, or think like me.
I am unique, and so are you.
I know that everyone has different levels of fan hood, and that some people may not love Michael as much as myself, which is something that I have zero problem with.
However, what I do have a problem with is someone being obviously biased against and overly critical of Michael at every turn on a Michael Jackson fan site.
I am not saying you can't be here (I'm not a mod and don't have that power), but I am expressing my displeasure about the opinions you've stated here.
At this point though I'm done with the discussion.


PS: A faction is not the same thing as a gang.

 

[SmoothGangsta]

I am religious so ONLY God and Jesus are perfect in my eyes.
No one has to be like me, or think like me.
I am unique, and so are you.
I know that everyone has different levels of fan hood, and that some people may not love Michael as much as myself, which is something that I have zero problem with.
However, what I do have a problem with is someone being obviously biased against and overly critical of Michael at every turn on a Michael Jackson fan site.
I am not saying you can't be here (I'm not a mod and don't have that power), but I am expressing my displeasure about the opinions you've stated here.
At this point though I'm done with the discussion.


PS: A faction is not the same thing as a gang.

Once again I'm not being biased, at all. You'd think you would understand that by now, I've only said it and explained it a million times. So if you were a mod you'd ban me? Okay :lol: That wouldn't be bias and hypocritical at all. Also, the last part is how a 12 year old writes online. You knew exactly what I meant yet you felt the need to correct me anyway, for what? Some compulsion to be right or prove me wrong? Very childish. Anyway I think I'm done with this as well. Whether or not you agree I am indeed being realistic. I'm level headed and I say how I feel. I'm not biased at all. The fact you're trying to dismiss my opinion as bias tells me all I need to know about how you operate and it's obvious you can't take other opinions and need to dismiss them as they're wrong to you. Anyway like I'm said I think I'm done with this. I'm sure the next time I say something you don't like you'll be right there to say I'm a hater or biased or whatever you need to make up to validate your over the top stanning of MJ.

 

[Ms. BlueGangsta]

I'm not sure what's going on, but in my opinion, Invincible was pretty solid, except he could've kept those unknown rappers (minus Biggie) on the songs and replaced one of em with Tupac. That would've been so dope.

Tupac had a nose ring.:bugeyed
I had no idea LOL, but now I do wonder what he would've sounded like on an MJ song. :yes:

 

[BadTour87]

So, hold up.
You joined an MJ fan forum pretty much only to antagonize fans just because they are fans.

Honestly, people like yourself along with AlwaysThere and SmoothGangsta are rather annoying and seem very pretentious at best, so personally I hardly believe you are needed here when you all are only here to cast aspersions on the rest of the fanbase and Michael himself because of a preconceived notion you have about the forum being full of stans, and because you are biased against Michael or better yet are a Michael hater (see the same way you call MJJC members Stans I can call you a hater, nice isn't it?)

All three of you need to get off of your high horses because they are made of straw.

I think you misunderstood what I said.
I said I initially joined to respond to some of the BS that stans post here, not to hate on them for the hell of it lol
and did you even read the part where I said "of course that's changed now"?

 

[BadTour87]

A three person faction made out of yourself, AlwaysThere, and BadTour87 will get you all nowhere, and achieve nothing.

lol do you think this is some "organised attack" or something? I am a huge MJ fan and I've adored him pretty much my whole life, but I'm not afraid to talk negatively about some of his actions or choices.

are you one of the people that tries to justify him dangling his baby over the balcony as "he just wanted to show the world his new baby!!!!"

 

[Ms. BlueGangsta]

Oh, and I just figured I'd let everyone in here know that a few people in here talk shit about MJJC and the members here on another MJ "fan" forum.
Won't say exactly what people or what forum though because AFAIK it's against the rules, but look at this thread and take a wild guess.

I simply wonder why they're here if they think so negatively of MJJC, and it's members.
Hell, why visit MJJC to criticize its members when the other forum you frequent has a thread in which you link to MJJC threads to make fun of the people on here.
This very thread has been linked to.

I just had to spill that tea, so sip it while it's hot y'all.

 

[BadTour87]

Oh, and I just figured I'd let everyone in here know that a few people in here talk shit about MJJC and the members here on another MJ fan forum.
Won't say exactly what people though because AFAIK it's against the rules, but look at this thread and take a wild guess.

I simply wonder why they're here if they think so negatively of MJJC, and it's members.

Most of the stuff I say on the other fan forum are jokes and exaggerations. There are only very few people who are stan-like here.

 

[SmoothGangsta]

Oh, and I just figured I'd let everyone in here know that a few people in here talk shit about MJJC and the members here on another MJ "fan" forum.
Won't say exactly what people or what forum though because AFAIK it's against the rules, but look at this thread and take a wild guess.

I simply wonder why they're here if they think so negatively of MJJC, and it's members.
Hell, why visit MJJC to criticize its members when the other forum you frequent has a thread in which you link to MJJC threads to make fun of the people on here.
This very thread has been linked to.

I just had to spill that tea, so sip it while it's hot y'all.

What is it with you and posting about me and other members here and not quoting us? I'm here because I like some of the discussion that goes on. Thank god you're not a mod, you clearly have no objective reasoning. Spilling tea, really? Are you 12? It's nice you visit that site you hate just to post about it here. And before you say no I don't hate this place. I wouldn't be here otherwise. I prefer other sites as more open discussion is allowed but I still like some of the discussion here as I've said. I don't visit here to criticise members. I don't see what your problem is. I don't want to be enemies with anyone here, I do want to have discussions that you're clearly incapable of having however.