From Thad Biggerstaff Sent Fri, Oct 15th 1999, 19:40
From Thad Biggerstaff Sent Fri, Oct 15th 1999, 19:40
----- Original Message ----- From: Scot G <xxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx> To: Idm List <xxx@xxxxxxxxx.xxx> Sent: Friday, October 15, 1999 10:43 AM Subject: RE: (idm) morally yours > hey you are way out of line on this one. besides the fact that you post > your trade list pretty much every week or so, show some fuckin respect to > Kumquat who gave his own CD away free to anyone who wanted one. > no class... > Ok first i will point out this: as far as I know, Kumquat is not offering free promos of this CD to folks any longer. Actually, I think it has been months now since he was doing so... Taking this in mind I will then ask this: how is it showing disrespect to attatch a monetary value to a cd an artist was nice enough (and perhaps promo savy enough?) to offer out originally for free? I would think *if anything* this is actually *showing* respect! Would not just turning around and offering to publically give it away be undermining Kumquat more so than selling it at a very reasonable price (or as i said before TRADING) his CD?!? To me this bitching is all just mere soap box moralism. I myself make music, and would be happy to see copies of my CDs (originally promos or not) being secondhand sold and traded reasonably. This sort of thing happens all the time, and from my understanding it actually helps the artist, helping him or her become better established/more widely heard... I for one certainly think the music on the Kumquat CD is worth *at least* $8! (or as i mentioned, a decent trade). Some very unique quirky techno tracks in a style all his own. Definately worth a listen, whether one might obtain it from me, from Kumquat, or from any where else you can reasonably procure it. I will ask AGAIN that if anyone else would like to further correspond about this "moral" topic, please simply email me privately, off the list. I (and you should) know that more list members than not would prefer such. Oh and finally, Scot, fyi I have not posted a trade/sale list for some time now (about three weeks or so). Anyhow, correct me if im wrong, but i thought once a week (at most) *was* the accepted standard on trade/sale list posting frequency. i guess anything to join the public bandwagon and bitch bitch bitch about, eh? Oh boy, i can already see the flames/controversy banter coming again. (show some "class" and send them privately please) cycling cyclically, -Thad > -----Original Message----- > From: xxx-xxxxx@xxxxxxxxx.xxx [mailto:xxx-xxxxx@xxxxxxxxx.xxx]On Behalf > Of dahtbig > Sent: Friday, October 15, 1999 10:12 AM > To: Irene McC; xxx@xxxxxxxxx.xxx > Subject: Re: (idm) morally yours > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Irene McC <xxxxxxx@xxxxxxx.xxx> > To: <xxx@xxxxxxxxx.xxx> > Sent: Friday, October 15, 1999 5:55 AM > Subject: (idm) morally yours > > > > re: (idm) music for trade/sale: > > > > > Kumquat: s/t $8 > > > > uh-oh. The Big K himself was sending these out free of charge to > > all who asked. It's a bit tacky "selling" it just a few months down > > the line. > > > > Or am I just too ethical? > > > > I > > * > > > > > > yawn.... > > I would obviously say you are "too ethical" in this case, as im the one > selling/trading it. > Yes, please note i am also offering to accept TRADE for it (something i > wrote *plain as day* in the header of the listing!). > > I myself got the CD as part of a trade recently, and while i like several of > the tracks a great deal, i thought id pass it on to a new home. $8 was just > an average/typical used CD price i picked out of the hat, one i thought and > still think quite reasonable. > This seems pretty obvious, but just because a cd was originally released > free or as a promo is no reason for it not to then or later not have market > or trade value! > > This has been said many a time (TOO many a time) before- if you dont wish to > buy something (whatever your reasons), then trade for it, or go on your > merry way. Theres really no reason at all to whine publically in this > situation, accept to gratify yourself and annoy others. > > Oh and next time you start criticizing someone for being _unethical_, it > might be more _ethical_ to approach that person with your comments/questions > at least initially in private, giving an opportunity for positions to be > clairfied, before blacklisting to the general public and all. > > ! > > -Thad > >