not logged in
| re: Yet again | |
Posted by:  |
Pudding 02:13 am UTC 03/03/07 |
| In reply to: | Yet again - rockfenris2005 01:56 am UTC 03/03/07 |
| YAWN! Pud > > You just can't STAND that I made the effort, can't you? > You can't stand that I got off my ass and expressed my > contributions to the community. That's all I've done and I > haven't been acknowledged for it once. The only person who > acknowledged me is Jacqueline who is always encouraging > me, and placed the link to my site on the links section of > this website. > > I wouldn't just do "The Confidence Man" as a favour toward > Steinman, which Smeghead so brilliantly did (and it must > be commended whatever the result. It also mustn't be > forgotten when he is attacked for certain views. I know it > has been in the past) > > I was doing it for Ray as well. I don't see him as anyone > important at all. I see him on the same level as anyone > else, a person who wrote a great piece of work that > deserved to be exposed in 1975 before Papp betrayed him. > It deserves to be exposed now, it's not my fault that > three theatre companies changed my mind AND YET fuckheads > like you and Tremorlor turn it back to me, making me out > to be some negative fuck who can't do anything right. > > Pudding, I acknowledged your blog and your efforts on your > site. I acknowledge everything you've done for the > Steinman community. And yet you sit up on your high horse > and refuse to acknowledge my contributions, or you turn > them around and frown at me as if I'm some meaningless > negative person. > > I gave the MP3 remaster to two people. It's not my fault > they betrayed my strict confidence in giving it to you. I > wanted them to hear the song to get a second opinion on > what it was like. I strictly said not to bring it into the > community until at least Jim and Ray were happy. I asked > Jim, he did not reply. I asked Ray, he did not reply. > > I appreciate what you've done, on the whole, but you were > not supposed to do it. > > And why the FUCK should I feel O.K. with what JD did that > time? She knows I'm over it and it was never even personal > anyway. > > If your contributions are absolutely fuck-all acknowledged > then you'd be thrilled too to get the letter I got from > Jim. It puts me in a position where my contributions can > be equally acknowledged as everyone else's are. > > It must be an adult thing. They must just think that only > mature-aged adults can successfully contribute to the > Steinman community and f!ck any youths when, really, they > should be commended in having such brilliant tastes at > this age. > > I confess myself disappointed. And you, of course, will > find anyway to paint me in a negative light. I don't know > why, I can't explain it. I never had bad intentions ONCE > > All I have tried to do is HELP > > R.L. > > > Just some musings. > > > > I'm a believer that everything and anything Jim Steinman > > related should be shared, that's why I started the blog in > > the first place. > > > > You've been bragging left right and centre about PoP for > > some time, making out your relationship with Ray is > > something more than what it clearly is not. Oneupmanship > > bollocks pisses me off. > > > > You sent me the file in exchange for the countless other > > files I sent you. Yes you did ask me not to mention the > > file, but how many others did you do the same with? One > > week after you sent me the file I was offered it by > > someone who I didn't really know. So it seems you've been > > spreading your Privates all over the place. > > > > No I didn't credit you as the source, but since you want > > credit, I've just edited the blog. > > > > I don't give a shit what Ray thinks. I don't know the > > bloke, been told he's a little nutty, but I'm sure by the > > mainly 'positive' response to the clip, he'll not be too > > pissed. Send him my email address nzpudding@gmail.com > > > > I'm looking forward to seeing what Jacqueline says or > > does. Wasn't it not long ago you went all spastic with her > > because she posted something Jim wrote but you didn't get > > any credit? Seems to be some running theme here with you. > > > > Like I said earlier, I'm not one for exclusivity and > > believe that everything and anything Jim Steinman related > > should be shared. > > > > Pud | |
| reply | | |
| Previous: | Yet again - rockfenris2005 01:56 am UTC 03/03/07 |
| Next: | re: Yet again - rockfenris2005 02:14 am UTC 03/03/07 |
| Thread: |
|