Personally, none of son_ov_hades' posts have seemed even remotely ugly to me - and I love The Beatles. Sure, he did say 'those albums suck' pretty dismissively, but only in response to someone implying that he should love those albums and that not loving them must be an April Fools joke. I would say he had every right to be a bit flippant in that context. And outside of that, I think he's done a pretty fair job elaborating on his opinion.
Then again, maybe I'm biased. I'm kind of fed up with the internet's focus on semantics. Even if he did just say that 'The Beatles are shit', so what? This is a thread dedicated to people expressing their disagreement with majority opinions. To me, it kind of goes without saying that everything expressed here is going to be an opinion. I don't know why anyone would jump to the conclusion that any post here is meant to express objective truth.
Wow it seems I caused quite a stir. 
But Jaffa seems to be the only one who made any sense with my posts at all. I'm perfectly happy to justify what is clearly my opinion, and getting hung up on the fact that I expressed an opinion in an opinion thread is pretty silly IMO. 
But when someone simply says "April Fools?" and then "These albums would like a word with you" my response if always going to be dismissive and flippant. That's the equivalent of saying "no you".
That's sort of fair - I really hate the thing on the internet, where if someone expresses an unpopular opinion, someone always goes, "Oh, they're trolling, don't feed the troll." Like the only people who'd disagree with them are lying for a reaction. I think it does a bit more credit to rise above, but nobody does that
all the time, I completely get the reaction of, "Oh, sod off."
It's actually the "IMO" thing that touched a nerve - that's such a piss poor fallacy! "Ugh come on guys I have to put IMO on the end of everything now??" It's such a leaky argument. Like the entire spectrum is "Doctor Who is amazing" and "Doctor Who is amazing IMO." That's less than lazy, it's nonsense, but there's a caste of keyboard warriors who think they're wonderful geniuses cutting through the bullshit of polite society, when they're actually just revealing they're a bit rubbish at expressing a coherent thought in a way that doesn't make them look a bit of a dick. Cos Jaffa's absolutely right, it's usually fine, and most cheeky posts, as yours, are made in relatively good faith. But you're writing your own history! Flatter yourself! Don't lump yourself together with
those guys!Tom Bombadil gets it - if you're writing about yourself, write about yourself! If you're writing about the band - "Queen wrote an album called Sheer Heart Attack," they're the protagonist, they're the subject of that sentence. "Queen wrote a shit album called Sheer Heart Attack" is placing it on Queen, like it's their fault for writing a terrible album, so it gets fans' backs up - "Queen wrote an album called Sheer Heart Attack which I fucking hate" is much harsher, so it's not like I'm saying "mince words and be nice about everything," but it's less abrasive. And not an IMO in sight. Writing what you mean is piss easy, more accurate, and I think it ends up doing you more credit in the long run. I think badly written opinions are often the difference between a discussion and an argument. Absolutes beget absolutes, and before long everyone's telling each other they're a twat and they're wrong for believing what they do. As you, by your own admission, discovered!
But there we go. Robwebster: internet policeman. Nee-nerr-nee-nerr. Sirens off.
Topic: Opinions that are held by the majority you don't agree with.. . (Read 8433 times)