Regarding the FSM brouhahah BK addressed earlier:
YEs, I was having a go-round with the poster known as "altamese". The center of debate is a poster who, for the second time in recent months, decided to assign "credit" for a score to additional personages other than the one credited. While this may or may not be the case, this individual could not offer anything other than his word for it. And as fine a producer of film score recreations as he is, he is not an infallible font of information about whether someone's contributions to a score merit "credit" alongside the credited composer's. At any rate, in a series of posts, he worked himself up to a multi-pragraphed ode to himself. In this, his 7th post to the thread, he made a bid for martyrdom, lit a self-built pyre and seemingly self-immolated, all the while proclaiming that the subject was about the "music" at hand, not himself who was so wrongly being attacked. It was in this thread that he distinctly declared that a second composer OUGHT to have been credited alongside the credited composer. In film music, this is a HUGE statement. It is, in effect, the same thing as saying that the uncredited composer was robbed of his due.
After a couple of other responses, I entered the fray, commenting I was bemused and referred to him as "Saint David" (first name of this individual is David). I suggested that his post was Saint David's way of sticking his tongue out at us. I then added some cogent suggestions for how he should proceed if he wanted folks to believe his assertions that an uncredited composer should have received credit.
Yesterday, altamese began chiding me for my nasty comments ("Saint David" is the ONLY name-calling, if one wants to call it that, I indulged in), expressed displeasure with my "tongue sticking out" comment, and said I was putting words in this man's mouth...that he never said anything like what I said he said.
Turns out, altamese declared that "Saint David" (she did not use that term) NEVER said anything like that in his initial post. Further, altamese declared that BK and I had been cutting down Saint David from his first post.
I took serious issue with altamese over this. Of course, that degenerated the discussion into a pissing contest. My entry into the thread was on page 2 (50-plus posts into the thread, if I'm not mistaken). And I had to point out that the comments I objected to were in the 7th post Saint David made, not the preceding ones which, as BK pointed out, spoke for themselves in view of previous threads.
Now I can truly see how someone stumbling across this thread might react to seeing one poster being the recipient of many negative responses. I can truly understand how they might be motivated to enter the fray and stand up to what he or she perceives to be an unusual amount of negativism toward that one person. But, when not only several forum members BUT ALSO the forum's owner and moderator indicate their own scepticism toward this one poster, it would seem to me logical that the newcomer should reassess taking any stance until he or she learns more about what is going on.
At any rate, I regret NOT ONE WORD I posted to that thread. Other than the snarky "Saint David" reference, which was an honest reaction to that self-serving seventh post but something I should probably have refrained from saying, I stand by my every reaction to his posts and responses to same.
