Quote:

James:
First, you'll pardon the email to two places. I've taken the liberty of assuming that the email you have listed with the clarinet board might not be a play on words and rather a typo. I could be entirely wrong.
==========

You posed a question that I tried to answer that the moderator erased.
Since I mentioned the moderator, by all means feel free to copy this letter to him if you'd like, in fact anyone else—not that the moderator wants to read this. Copy fuzzy, even though he doesn't want to hear from me, copy Blumberg, and nellsonic, and Silverstein, the extent of parties mentioned here.
“What's the deal, WPDave you write?”

Here's the deal James.

Poster fuzzy wrote:

“I've found the data provided by the others to be very helpful, and would prefer that they didn't "...stop this type of communication”


So the question becomes, what kind of communication is fuzzy referring to?


He's unquestionably referring to my immediately prior post where the "type of information" I refer to in a thread dealing with artist's compensation by Blumberg, who writes that he is at the highest level of endorsement for 3 of his 4 companies (bragging by the way that doesn't bother me, but does set the reader up for an expectation that Mr. Blumberg is an authority on the subject matter), claims to cite all forms of compensation artists get, only in a second post (which take a look, the moderator erased....can you or I erase??) contradicts his statement about not only there being Ultra artists that are above his initially claimed highest level, but that there is additional compensation he didn't mentioned, such as Ultra artists, who are paid for performances never mentioned in his initial post to so called “set the record straight” about all forms of compensation.

In fact there's much compensation that that. These Ultra performer contracts are confidential. Mr. Blumberg has no idea of their existence or terms, barring maybe one he mentions. He's trying to make himself (in the eyes of his endorsee and readers) and his endorsee look better that they are by downplaying endorsement of why stars play the Silverstein ligature and as a result up play the worth of the product beyond reality.

This thread was itself pursuant to a prior one where people who have not only drank the Silverstein poison of its marginal improvements above regular ligatures but are now doing inter-Silverstein ligature product comparisons. If you are read posts to know that I am not the only one incensed.

I remain that if fuzzy thinks that such contradictory type of information like that Blumberg put forth, that clouds the truth, should continue then he is stupid. Is it his right to feel this way, sure, just like it's his right to claim he finds the state of a traffic light 5,000 away from him useful—just stupid.

And why does fuzzy say this stuff? Me thinks he's got an axe to grind from the last time he attacked me with wrong (not my opinion) information and was made to look stupid simply by the process of my correcting him in an indisputable manner void of ridicule he deserved.

In this prior post, named “Juliana” Bliss, he comes to the defense of another moron claiming that I disrespected an artist by simply posting a link to her performance but not citing her name, despite it being right in the link, once clicked.


Do you have any idea how many people have posted here with links akin to “check this out,” and no information more than that? Has nellsonic commented on them in this way? Has anyone? So why does she do so here? My guess is that for some reason she has a bug up her ass about me too. Did nellsonic really think the performer's name wouldn't be known to anyone who clicked the link? Does she think my failure to name this unknown player reduced the number of hits her Youtube video got. Does she think I have it "out" for someone I chose to highlight?

But rather than my raising this cogent issue, of course because I am the “rabble rouser” (my words that I think fairly paraphrase other's feelings) you (and in fairness to you others) claim me to be, and despite others thinking I did nothing wrong in this Juliana Bliss post, rather than say nothing, or "screw you," I apologize, only for our “genius” fuzzy to claim:

“It appears that nellsonic's only “issue” was that credit for the performance was omitted in the original post, and credit was inferred to a different performer.

Sadly though for fuzzy it neither appeared that way or was/is that way.

Nellsonic wrote prior:

“The title of this post is too clever by half. It falls short of being respectful. The name of the accomplished young lady in the video is Katarina Marjanov”

Clearly nellsonic gets my play on words (“Juliana” Bliss) and that credit wasn't inferred to a different performer, just that the performer's name wasn't mentioned in the post. Sadly, fuzzy doesn't, at least at the time he comes to nellsonic's aid.

Of course for me to respond back to defend that attack against me, by not even the person who launched it, but 3rd party fuzzy, and tell him he got it wrong---I am the demon.

I'll live with the label because people don't like eating crow, especially after their attempt to make others eat it and get caught with their pants down. Its makes enemies even when you have simply stated fact.

And I have no issue putting others in their place after they've wrongly gone after me, nobody should.

With this said, you write:

“Fuzzy finds the information valuable.”

No James. He's too stupid to understand that it's a smoke screen, that in addition to his anger towards me, clouds his judgment. Assuming people want the truth so they can make informed decisions (call me crazy), smoke screens like Blumberg's are not desired, now or in the future.


….just like this following statement of yours is you acting stupid, and your anger towards me clouds your judgment.

To quote:

“I don't find any contradiction in David Blumberg's post, as Fuzzy pointed out.“


But please, rather than let it be my opinion that you acted stupid, let me prove it to you that you did conduct yourself this way. At least you have the option of hearing it privately while you attacked me in the open.


(I wish I could convey to you how much what I just immediately said is comment is void of hatred, just honest.)


The best way I know of how to do that is show you facts.


You write:


“David specifically said he belongs to one type of endorsement and used his own labels to describe the levels that a company may categorize.”


No James. Blumberg writes:


“the 'Star' level whatever that means”


If Blumberg was using his own label he would “know what that label means.” His words apply to a title that's be given to him by endorsees. And this is important because it's the basis of your thesis to the following:

Blumberg then writes, and a second post (which has been erased):

"Performances are a different story"

No they're not, as the “story” that *he* started, to set the so called record straight, was to name all forms of compensation---as of course he's at the self reported highest level of endorsing artists bar none....except for an admission later that there are higher performers than him.

What's that James, you can't find that second post of Blumberg's I refer to? That's because the moderator erased it and Blumberg put the Performer's compensation stuff into his first post, after the fact, to try to look less like a con man or misinformed—pick your poison.


And why James?


Here's why....and if you get nothing, get this. Because while you feel the original 2 posts (2nd now gone) didn't contradict themselves you were wrong enough that



*3 key people disagree with you: me, Blumberg and the moderator.*

This jury rigging of posts was done so Blumberg could seem like less of a shmuck in the so called historical record of the post, which was deliberately both edited and purged.

*I wouldn't have been done if the other 2 of the 3 didn't agree with me that Blumberg dilute himself and his brand by acting in a way the reasonable people would construe is contradiction."

Allow me to suggest to you that posters and bboards that accept sponsorship produce modified versions of the truth. Welcome to the real world.

I, on the other hand want truth, good or bad, to be known about vendors, everything, so rocket scientists like you and fuzzy are less apt to go out and buy yourselves a Silverstein ligature, thinking it will improve your play, let alone anywhere near what you pay for it.

All this said, in the future if you want to contradict or criticize me that's fine. Just get your facts right. Your anger, not mine, appears to have clouded your judgment and made you act stupid, like fuzzy did when he came to the aid of nellsonic with asinine and wrong logic and fact.

Rest assured, going forward, if I ever question or criticize things you say, unlike you, it will be because I disagree with the facts and have read carefully, not because I think you treated me or others unfairly.