Violet

I love you, Kelsie.

Oh, joy, ANOTHER Coldplay vs. Radiohead thread. You'd think we'd have enough of these by now. :|

I've decided that my current Team Oracle streak shall end now. Why, you ask? As it's the same question as one previously mentioned, I don't think it's fair for me to comment on it twice. It's also clear from this question being featured that the person in question wanted a second opinion. I eagerly await tomorrow for the new question. Hopefully, it's a new one so I can get back to helping out Coldplay nation.

You have made the Muse community very proud. :D

Why do I even try? This is clearly hopeless.

Ohhhhh. Never mind then. Carry on.

No, it didn't. Just because your comment was sarcastic doesn't mean it's satire. I didn't find it remotely amusing, and it certainly wasn't witty in any sense of the word. Yeah, it does happen with you frequently. It's not like people are aiming to attack your comments. I don't think that's the case at all, given it happens with so many people here. Oh, and the thread isn't necessarily just about the "annoying" female singers. Really, I think it has turned into a discussion about the function and likeability of female singers in music in general. Yep, basically. :nod: Not at all. I think it was perfectly reasonable. If you're not interested, then why do you still keep talking about it? Just leave it alone if it's that big of a problem for you. Yeah, it's off-topic. That happens in The Lounge all the time. It's not a big deal.

We're human beings. We're flawed. Some people never learn. :nod:

Carrie, he's a guy.

It's not really the music that bothers me, so much as the abundance of screaming. I'd much rather hear singing. :shrug: Also, I agree with your reference to The Weeknd. It's nice.

-gasp- CUUUUUUUTE. Is this enough motivation for me to start watching that show? Maybe. Juuuuust maybe. I don't really like guys with piercings, either. I can tolerate the ears, depending on case-by-case circumstances, but anywhere else...ehhhhh, no. I'm more tolerant with tattoos. A few are fine. I'm not a fan of guys who have a whole lot of them, though. I especially don't like sleeves. All that body art is hiding the arms. :sad: I do have a few exceptions as far as that goes. (Adam Levine from Maroon 5. OMIGAWD. :sweatdrop: He'd look better without them, but I'm not gonna complain. :charming:)

While I understand some of the criticisms about clothing choices that were made, I think there are much nicer ways to say it than that, and I find this person to be quite rude.

"Satire is primarily a literary genre or form, although in practice it can also be found in the graphic and performing arts. In satire, vices, follies, abuses, and shortcomings are held up to ridicule, ideally with the intent of shaming individuals, and society itself, into improvement.[1] Although satire is usually meant to be funny, its greater purpose is often constructive social criticism, using wit as a weapon. A common feature of satire is strong irony or sarcasm—"in satire, irony is militant"[2]—but parody, burlesque, exaggeration, juxtaposition, comparison, analogy, and double entendre are all frequently used in satirical speech and writing. This "militant" irony or sarcasm often professes to approve (or at least accept as natural) the very things the satirist wishes to attack. Satire is nowadays found in many artistic forms of expression, including literature, plays, commentary, and media such as lyrics." ...Yeah, not so much.

Well, they're called "claims" because they're not "facts." That stuff was never substantiated. On a completely different topic, I found it interesting how only the prosecution has "burden of proof." While I understand why that is (as the prosecution is the one pressing charges), I don't think that should excuse the defense from making up whatever story they want about how things really happened without proving it. That story about the drowning and the abuse is a load of crap. The defense couldn't even bring up the sex allegations in their closing statement because there was no substantial evidence to back up the claims he made.

Johnny Depp is just too...grungy? I don't know. That's the best way I can think of describing him. I'm not into that sort of image.

Tampered? How so?

Smiling Chris? DO WANT.

You know, Caroline, you've sparked something in my head. I think a lot of people think she's a murderer because she's a liar. She has lied about everything pertaining to this case. Therefore, people have this mentality of, "Well, since she's lied about everything else, surely she's lying about this, too." While that makes perfect logical sense, the thing is, you can't convict someone of murder just because of that. This is what the defense has said the whole time, and I think I understand for the first time what people who are on the other side of this case were trying to convey to all of us who were (and still are, some of us) convinced that she was (is) guilty as sin. As much sense as it seems to make to us to convict someone based on something like that, it's not enough, and honestly, it skews a person's view on things. I'm sure at least some of the jury FELT like she did something, but they couldn't prove it because there wasn't enough hard evidence to substantiate it. I've probably repeated way too many things that have already been stated in this thread, but I thought I'd share. No matter how much we feel that she's guilty, it's not enough. Does the verdict mean she's not guilty? Not necessarily; it merely means she can't be convicted of it. Like Carrie mentioned earlier in this thread, being "not guilty" doesn't make you "innocent." At any rate, I think she's already been convicted in the minds of most people, which still affects her life greatly. She's being pretty much shunned from society because of all this. I think that despite the lack of a jail sentence, she's still being punished. At the end of the day, it doesn't change that the world lost a little girl way too soon.

I had never heard of Fucked Up until this thread. I wish someone would have mentioned beforehand they were hardcore. I wouldn't have spent time on that if I had known. That sounds slightly mean, but I've just never been into that kind of music at all.

We are, but you know, there are things that are out of our parents' control. If I were completely influenced by my parents, then I'd be as narrowminded and intolerant as they are. I think at some point, a person has to make their own decisions. Casey's parents aren't to blame for something that she did on her own will. PSH. No kidding, man. George got the brunt of it all. There was one point towards the end of the trial when his suicide attempt was brought up, and as he talked about it, he got emotional and cried on the stand. He tearfully explained how he felt like he needed to be with Caylee. It was so genuine, and I felt nothing but sorrow for him. What did Casey do while this was going on? Nothing. She sat stone-faced as she stared at her father. This man is pouring out his soul to people he doesn't know and crying over his dead granddaughter, and all she can do is sit blankly? -shakes head-

Too true. What happens, though, is that certain cases are handpicked based on what seems to be a better news story. It's sad, but true. Also, there are only so many cases that can be covered. On an episode of "The First 48" I watched once, they mentioned that the number of murders that take place annually in this country are in the tens of thousands. (I can't remember specifically what the number was, but I think it was something around 17,000.) I guess it's just how the cookie crumbles. This is another example of how unfair and cruel our world can really be. Casey's parents (George and Cindy) have already received a substantial amount of death threats, and they weren't even on trial for it. Casey might want to be careful. Speaking of which, I can't help but feel sorry for Casey's family. They've had to go through so much (and still are). :sad: That makes me wonder, did that juror even mention that to the others? I was actually not nearly as surprised about the verdict itself as I was at how quickly they decided on it. It took a little less than 11 hours for them to decide that she wasn't guilty. I thought they would at least take a few days to deliberate. That guy needs to get punched in the face.

:nod: Yeah, man, your thread idea isn't original. Every other thread on here is a random conversation thread. Too much randomness, though, can come off as excessive. Telling Reilly to do anything is pretty much pointless. He's going to post what he wants, whether you like it or not. Frankly, he has every right to post in this thread as you do. Way to answer your own question and correct yourself. :tongue: Basically. It's called Raegkip. Amirite, Emma?

:|

Oh, OK. Thanks for the info! At least you have three good choices. It's still a shame you didn't like TKoL or BaRB, though. :\ Have you listened to anything other than those five? Same here. :D Awww, don't. :hug:

EDIT: My computer goof'd.