[Dogstar]

Quote:

Is there a certain number of posts that I have to do before I can make a point that you don't agree with? Did you limit yourself to certain posts until you felt you had been here long enough?  

I have a three month old son that I like to spend most of time with. Is my point less valid because I've only posted to the board a few times? I think you have to say things like this because if you stick to the facts, you 'll see that I'm thinking with my brain and you're thinking with your heart.

My, my, you are just a tad condescending. So, your life is more important because you are a parent and don't have the time to post anything besides your whiny rants. Numbers have nothing to do with it. You say you have been reading posts and checking in regularly, and that you recently joined. It says you joined in December, nearly five months ago. If you had time to supposedly check in, you had time to post a comment or two on subjects OTHER than Chicago. There are plenty of other parents here who post regularly. Maybe you just need to manage your time better.

If you and Robaustin bothered to read any of the previous threads on this board regarding Chicago, you would see that many of us did feel the Chicago people were wronged and that not everyone made excuses for the band. You would see that many of us called for Scott to apologize and for a free show at some future date or a refund at the very least. But the show did go on. It's not that we were insensitive to those whose concert experience was awful. Many of us wrote to JHMP to express our displeasure and concern for the band because of what happened. We called for an apology as well. I know I did. I also expressed my concern for the man's well-being. You and Rob want people to empathize with Chicago fans; well, how about empathizing with someone who might have been going through a bad time? Because he might have chosen a poor way of handling a bad situation, he is to be judged more harshly and is not worthy of your empathy? Seems to be a double standard here.

And not for nothing, but experiencing a bad concert is not high on the list of world crises, especially in light of what has been going on in Iraq. It is hardly worth suing over. But then again, we live in a litigious society that jumps at that chance to cash in when it thinks it can. I, like Jen, have been to many a concert over the years in which the show was just as bad as Creed's in Chicago. At many of the shows, the performances were cut short because of a drunk singer or a wasted guitarist who stumbled all over the stage. I did not feel it necessary to sue. Yeah, I was annoyed, disappointed, angry, whatever, but as I have said many times before: You take a chance when you go to any live performance, from music to theater to comedy. You have imperfect humans performing. They aren't going to be 100 percent on all the time. No one is perfect.