Pet Shop Boys Community

The Killers are known as PSB fans, and some of their songs sound PSB influenced. I thought this of "Read My Mind", way before the news about the PSB remix was announced.

yea especially the start of the song (read my mind), it sounds like Flamboyant ( for me anyway) and look at the video its in Japan (?) Helloooo! Flamboyant!!!

Did Keane say they were influenced by the Pet Shop Boys? I like them even more now.

Tim Rice Pudding Smith Oxley (Keane's songwriter) cites Being Boring as the kind of song that other songwriters (like him) aspire to write something as good as.
Have you not seen A Life in Pop?

kimphilby wrote:

Did Keane say they were influenced by the Pet Shop Boys? I like them even more now.

Tim Rice Pudding Smith Oxley (Keane's songwriter) cites Being Boring as the kind of song that other songwriters (like him) aspire to write something as good as.
Have you not seen A Life in Pop?

Seen it on TV and have the DVD. I must have been distracted by something shiney....

(How can you expect to be taken) Seriously, dVTB, has your sense of humour gone completely AWOL? Was it ever there to begin with? Some of those pranks were downright hilarious, especially given that they ridicule a lame US rap group, who unbeknownst to themselves have taken a name reminiscent of a gay synth pop duo. I'm sure they'd be horrified if they knew. I was looking forward to interviews with them where the journalists had done their "research" on Wikipedia (which one should never do, of course!). "So "Fat", what exactly happened in that hifi shop?".

BTW, shouldn't a lack of a sense of humour be a banning offense?

BlueSwan wrote:(How can you expect to be taken) Seriously, dVTB, has your sense of humour gone completely AWOL? Was it ever there to begin with? Some of those pranks were downright hilarious, especially given that they ridicule a lame US rap group, who unbeknownst to themselves have taken a name reminiscent of a gay synth pop duo. I'm sure they'd be horrified if they knew. I was looking forward to interviews with them where the journalists had done their "research" on Wikipedia (which one should never do, of course!). "So "Fat", what exactly happened in that hifi shop?".

BTW, shouldn't a lack of a sense of humour be a banning offense?

In my world, Pet Shop Boys aren't a gay synth pop duo, but a pop duo.

I don't mind at all that you want to experiment with the Shop Boyz wikipedia page and add nonsense. I wouldn't have edited one single word of that Shop Boyz story, if only you hadn't posted insults and ridiculous comments about several PSB forum members, including to a level where somebody is said to have the Down syndrome.

I refuse to believe it's you who wrote that, but apparently you know all about it. I'd rather have NO taste of humour than YOUR taste, that's for sure.

dVTB wrote:In my world, Pet Shop Boys aren't a gay synth pop duo, but a pop duo.

The US rap scene is notoriously homophobic - hence the point of my comment.

I refuse to believe it's you who wrote that

I didn't, but if I had been able to figure out how to do it, I would have put something in about a musical or a ballet in the works.

I'd rather have NO taste of humour than YOUR taste, that's for sure.

Each to his own. Only problem is that your lack of humour seems to prevent others from having their fun. So maybe it's not each to his own afterall.

BlueSwan wrote:

dVTB wrote:In my world, Pet Shop Boys aren't a gay synth pop duo, but a pop duo.

The US rap scene is notoriously homophobic - hence the point of my comment.

So what? If you really want to do something about homophobia, take a stand, rather than polluting a webpage about a hiphop-band who just released their first single and haven't said anything homophobic.

BlueSwan wrote:

dVTB wrote:I'd rather have NO taste of humour than YOUR taste, that's for sure.

Each to his own. Only problem is that your lack of humour seems to prevent others from having their fun. So maybe it's not each to his own afterall.

I don't have a lack of humour. I have a completely different IDEA of humour. The fact that you're still commenting that I have a 'lack of humour' makes clear that you didn't understand one word of my previous post. Start using your brains while reading.

In fact your assumption is exactly the other way around: in order to have fun, other people are being ridiculized in something they haven't asked to be involved in. If you're trying to make me feel sorry for 'spoiling the fun', I can only say: you and your humouristic forum friends, should have kept people like me, Undertaker, DJ Veryrelentless and others out of it. Your freedoms stop where you affect those of others.

The more I come to think of it: knowing that I spoilt your fun (I didn't even occur to me while editing that page, I was just embarrassed about the behaviour of some PSB fans) actually fills me with satisfaction now. It serves you well. I will be keeping a close eye on the Shop Boyz page. I managed to get one person banned for a day (he repeatedly vandalized Wikipedia pages, by the way). I will not hesitate to act again, if necessary.

dVTB wrote:So what? If you really want to do something about homophobia, take a stand

I do. Quite often infact. I don't think there are many straight people that advocate gay rights more vigorously than I do.

I don't have a lack of humour.

Do you have any evidence to back that preposterous claim?

The fact that you're still commenting that I have a 'lack of humour' makes clear that you didn't understand one word of my previous post. Start using your brains while reading.

Yeah, I'm not too bright, I guess.

in order to have fun, other people are being ridiculized in something they haven't asked to be involved in.

The funniest parts of that Wiki entry did not involve forum members. The ones that I saw on Satanas, Undertaker and Technotranceremix weren't malicious in the slightest (and I'd be surprised if someone like Undertaker took offense). I didn't think the one involving you was malicious either. I'm 100% positive that I would not personally have taken offense if it had been my name involved. But maybe that's because I have a sense of humour. Or maybe it's because I didn't use my brain while reading the entry. Who knows? Well, I'm sure you do, so why don't you enlighten me?

If you're trying to make me feel sorry for 'spoiling the fun'

I'm not. I'm just pointing out that you're acting like a humourless prefect. I'm sure it hasn't escaped your attention that I don't care much for adults (or so it would seem) trying to control other adults' behaviour in virtual space. Which calls for the philosophical question of whether or not I'm trying to control your actions via these posts. Hmmm....difficult one. I need to start using my brains more.

The more I come to think of it: knowing that I spoilt your fun (I didn't even occur to me while editing that page, I was just embarrassed about the behaviour of some PSB fans) actually fills me with satisfaction now. It serves you well. I will be keeping a close eye on the Shop Boyz page. I managed to get one person banned for a day (he repeatedly vandalized Wikipedia pages, by the way). I will not hesitate to act again, if necessary.

Congratulations! You do the PSB community proud!

I'm totally with Blue Swan here. I didn't take part in the "vandalizing", but that is neither here or there, because I had a good laugh about the evil false information and would have added something myself if I hadn't been busy elsewhere.

Just how sour and humourless can somebody get? It's not like you even like Shop Boyz or hip hop in general. Based on your post history, you seem to detest it. Isn't there a Dutch radio presenter somewhere spreading minutely false info about PSB that you could pester instead of trying to take over the internet?

BlueSwan wrote:I didn't think the one involving you was malicious either.

I made a different judgement about that. In fact there were two comments involving me.

BlueSwan wrote:I'm 100% positive that I would not personally have taken offense if it had been my name involved.

Good for you. I am not you (fortunately).

BlueSwan wrote:I'm just pointing out that you're acting like a humourless prefect. I'm sure it hasn't escaped your attention that I don't care much for adults trying to control other adults' behaviour in virtual space.

So, let me get this straight: I corrected some false information on a Wikipedia page, that you weren't even involved with. Why are you, as an adult, busy to stick your nose into other adults' online behaviour then?

BlueSwan wrote:Congratulations! You do the PSB community proud!

Thank you.

Eldritch wrote:I'm totally with Blue Swan here. I didn't take part in the "vandalizing", but that is neither here or there, because I had a good laugh about the evil false information and would have added something myself if I hadn't been busy elsewhere.

A music journalist who likes to post false information about a music band online. Don't know what that says about your professionality.

It's not like you even like Shop Boyz or hip hop in general. Based on your post history, you seem to detest it.

Don't browse people's post history. It will cause people to suggest you suffer from serious mental problems or accuse you of doing 'shady things'. But you're right: I dislike hiphop a lot and I haven't even heard one single note of music by Shop Boyz. If it hadn't been for this topic, I probably wouldn't have known about them at all.

Just how sour and humourless can somebody get?

I better ask that question to BlueSwan and you, who are apparently very pissed and bitter, about me deleting some crap from a hiphop band website; stuff you weren't even involved with in the first place.

Knowing that it bothers you so much, and that two of you come here to whine about it, is very funny. I'm just having one big laugh, discussing this issue with you. For someone with an alledged 'lack of humour' the current grin on my face is remarkably big, I can assure you.

Eldritch wrote:Isn't there a Dutch radio presenter somewhere spreading minutely false info about PSB that you could pester instead of trying to take over the internet?

If I come accross false information, I will try to get it corrected. When PSB did a concert in the Netherlands, the tour promotor sent out a press release stating that PSB nowadays spend most of their time producing songs for other artists, which is of course untrue. The biggest radio station copied this press release. I made them aware of the fact that PSB still release lots of music theirselves. The error was corrected.

The organisation who compiles the Dutch Top 40, credited "She's Madonna" only to Robbie Williams. I e-mailed them to point out that the release is in fact by Robbie Williams with Pet Shop Boys. It was corrected.

Besides that, I contribute to the Dutch Pet Shop Boys Wikipedia page, created Dutch pages about Neil Tennant and Chris Lowe, and added PSB references / mentioned PSB involved on other artist pages on Wikipedia.

... rather than spreading false information and ridiculizing forum members behind their back.

dVTB wrote:I made a different judgement about that.

Which surely comes to a surprise to absolutely noone.

In fact there were two comments involving me.

I didn't see that. What was the other one?

So, let me get this straight: I corrected some false information on a Wikipedia page, that you weren't even involved with. Why are you, as an adult, busy to stick your nose into other adults' online behaviour then?

I already addressed this right after the segment you quoted. Wasn't it you who told me to use my brain while I read?

This is equivalent to the endless debate on tolerance. Does a tolerant person have to be tolerant of intolerance? Or does an adherence to tolerance demand that you fight intolerance whenever it rears its ugly face?

You were the one who started policing other adult peoples actions. Should someone who is against this speak up, and thereby indirectly "policing" the actions of the police, or stay silent?

I'm just having one big laugh, discussing this issue with you. For someone with an alledged 'lack of humour' the current grin on my face is remarkably big, I can assure you.

No, you're pissed. It doesn't take a psychologist to deduce that from your posts.

BlueSwan wrote:This is equivalent to the endless debate on tolerance. Does a tolerant person have to be tolerant of intolerance? Or does an adherence to tolerance demand that you fight intolerance whenever it rears its ugly face?

BTW, in case you're interested (in that our views on this tend to differ wildly), my solution to this have always been to fight the intolerance by the use of superior arguments (or what you'd call by using one's brain), NOT by rules and regulations. I've always felt this this was the only solution that didn't compromise the democratic ideals of the tolerant.

And for the record, I obviously do NOT believe that those who are intolerant of the intolerant are themselves intolerant, as long as the intolerant are combatted with arguments, instead of laws. The former argument is made by right wing racists in desperate need of some kind of rational counter.

BlueSwan wrote:

dVTB wrote:In fact there were two comments involving me.

I didn't see that. What was the other one?

I won't repeat. Do some research if you really want to.

BlueSwan wrote:This is equivalent to the endless debate on tolerance.

Is it? I wish you all the best with it. Meanwhile, I simply respect Wikipedia (and forum) rules when I post somewhere.

BlueSwan wrote:You were the one who started policing other adult peoples actions. Should someone who is against this speak up, and thereby indirectly "policing" the actions of the police, or stay silent?

Just read the bloody Wikipedia contribution rules and stop boring me with your hypothetical police theories.

No, you're pissed. It doesn't take a psychologist to deduce that from your posts.

Ah, another amateur psychologist stood up, it seems. You don't know me at all, yet you seem to know my current mood. Hilarious. Perhaps you can start an online psychology service, together with Kirck_Mack and Glennridge, who are apparently gifted with the same talent. In the meanwhile: happy now?

BlueSwan wrote:

BlueSwan wrote:This is equivalent to the endless debate on tolerance. Does a tolerant person have to be tolerant of intolerance? Or does an adherence to tolerance demand that you fight intolerance whenever it rears its ugly face?

BTW, in case you're interested (in that our views on this tend to differ wildly), my solution to this have always been to fight the intolerance by the use of superior arguments (or what you'd call by using one's brain), NOT by rules and regulations. I've always felt this this was the only solution that didn't compromise the democratic ideals of the tolerant.

And for the record, I obviously do NOT believe that those who are intolerant of the intolerant are themselves intolerant, as long as the intolerant are combatted with arguments, instead of laws. The former argument is made by right wing racists in desperate need of some kind of rational counter.

You can debate with yourself about intolerance, if you want. I see you already started. The fact that you shouldn't pollute a hiphop band Wikipedia-page with statements about PSB forum members sounds like a superior argument to me.

If you can't deal with rules and regulations, stop contributing on websites that DO have rules and regulations. Stop boring me with your intolerance theories and stop confronting me about my edits on Wikipedia. I handled according to Wikipedia contrubution rules, something which cannot be said about those who polluted the Shop Boyz topic.

Wikipedia's a crock of shit. Whenever I've tried to mention the rumours about Disco 4 on there, some tosspot deletes it and says that no speculation is allowed. Why exactly? If I say that there is speculation about Disco 4, then surely I am flagging it as, erm, speculation. It's just a site for anal fascists who are too thick to get a job working for a proper encylopedia and so spend their time fine-tuning their own conception of reality on there.