Karaoke Forums

Ignored???????????????

Who's ignoring whom here? How about you answer what I posted (of which Lonnie expressed something similar)?











I'd love to hear from you on how you think we should check this out for ourselves.

Huh? Geez calm down Clint Eastwood.

What on earth are you blathering about? Where exactly did I "rip" on your freakin' Messiah, unless you are talking about the part where I (and Lon, and Cueball above...and others) simply asked for proof of his claims.

Silly thing that proof. Perhaps you believe everything you read on the internet. I do not. There is a saying I believe 100% in. "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof". Be they Aliens, Gods, Chupacabra or mystery CEO's.

Of course Chip NEVER "rips" on anyone or anything now does he. I don't remember being censored multiple times then banned.

Uhh, I never asked for proof of Chip's claims. My post was addressed at Joe C., who stated that we should Since this whole topic thread was based around the OP, I simply stated that, based on that, how was one supposed contact the publisher when there was no publisher stated.

My apologies.

Please note for the record that Cueball did not ask for proof of the mystery song/company/person from Chip.

He asked for a way to verify the existence of said song/company/person from Joe.

Two very different things entirely.

No, I'm suggesting that one checks with the publishers of songs that may be in doubt due to previous procedings.

FOR EXAMPLE ONLY: the 150+ songs that were listed on the permanent injuction against CB. Match some of those tracks to SC's, and check with the publishers in regard to those tracks.

That's just a "for instance", but you get the idea. Another way is to check particular artists- The Doors, for instance, or other artists that may be unusually hard to find on name labels now. Again, just an example.

All one has to do is verify a certain type of practice- not necessarily specifics.

PLEASE NOTE: The names above are just examples picked at random. I make no claims of any type in regard to those named. The examples were given merely to clearly aid any who wish to do their own research.

Of course, if one doesn't wish to take the time, that's fine. But if one is depending on others' research for information, posts here show that it leads to doubt and debate instead of certain knowledge.

_________________
"No Contests, No Divas, Just A Good Time!"

" Disc based and loving it..."

Yes you do.... you believe HarringtonLaw don't you?

Defense rests...


Now you're just fishing for brownie points you little rascal....

Chip, the difference is, and you know it, that you can say or twist anything with a slim chance of repercussions. Harrington, on the other hand, should he break and of the cardinal rules set down by the bar can be suspended and/or lose his licence to practice.

_________________
You can be strange but not a stranger

HarringtonLaw is free to say whatever he wants as well and has the exact same constraints that I have. (can't commit libel, etc...)

The only difference is that he can't commit malpractice with his client(s).

Please don't act like he's somehow restricted in his creative versions of "twisted tales" because he's not.

so only some are required to give proof, just those that are not Kurt Slep or Jim Harrington.
they can say whatever they want and anyone questioning them is a wrong pirate.

_________________
Paradigm Karaoke, The New Standard.......Shift Happens

.

Now THAT'S a keeper- and I did! Printed and on the bulletin board ( Yup, a bulletin board- and right above my Rolodex..... )

_________________
"No Contests, No Divas, Just A Good Time!"

" Disc based and loving it..."