An Open Response Regarding The Current Vertigo Tour Setlist

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

U2@NYC

Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
Joined
Nov 6, 2000
Messages
4,281
Location
Back in Buenos Aires
This is a modified, and expanded, version of what I have earlier posted on a different thread, but I think I need to relay my opinion on this topic in a more 'open' way.

There have been arguments going on back and forth on whether it makes sense to complain about the current setlist and whether we are not grateful enough to the band to be on tour. I sensed that I need to explain my views of what are, in my opinion, two different things.

Discussing, not necessarily complaining about what U2 decides to play on a specific night, is the whole point of the setlist parties, which are there to hype up the current setlist and discuss about it.

A setlist party would become rather dull if we do not even pretend to look forward to something new. The fact that I'm saying that I would love a suprise or two does not mean that I hate the stuff they are currently playing or that I want U2 to call it quits. Has anyone seen/heard of many people returning their tickets to incoming shows after they found out they are playing Vertigo x 2? Has anyone seen/heard the band being booed off-stage because they had a bad rendition of Elevation? And, more generally, has anyone seen the energy and stamina of the audience go down from previous tours? (remember the "Hi Bob" sign in Milan, the balloons in Munich, or the girl coming onstage to play Party Girl in the U.S.).

Hell, if I had the money and the time, I would follow the band all over the world and would not give a damn if they played Vertigo 10 times in a row.

Throughout my life I have very much enjoyed every single U2 concert I have been to, regardless of the setlist. Furthermore, I have yet to see an 'unhappy' or 'frustrated' face leaving any of these U2 concerts I was able to attend. And I also think that these same fans were genuinely concerned when Edge's daughter was reported ill or when the tour was about to be cancelled.

Therefore, I ask that we do not jump on top of every post thinking that many of us here are implying that we are not enjoying U2 concerts.

There is a clear difference between enjoying a show and asking for another song to be played. U2 Die-hards like many of us in Interference will challenge the current setlist, complain about it and suggest changes, but that does not mean, in any way, that the U2 experience is not the best experience of them all.
 
:up: I couldn't agree more - and I think this thread could very well be the best in this discussion area in a very long time. It should be quite clear to everyone that a lot of tension has been building up here between rather well-defined groups of people during this current tour and it seems to me that things are going round in circles here. People know how other people are going to respond to their posts before they post it (and no, I don't pretend to be innocent myself). If we could agree on a few things in this thread we may be able to avoid a lot of the tiresome misunderstandings that occur all the time.
 
Last edited:
U2DMfan said:
what is the deal about the "Hi Bob" sign?
havent heard about it.

i think it was during SYCMIOYO people were holding a sign that said "hi bob" in honor of his father. there, thats the best i could do:wink: .
 
well said U2@NYC! :applaud:

And if you win the lottery and follow them around the world, will you take me with you? :wink:
 
Hi everybody :wave:
Nice to see so many familiar names.

To U2@NYC: I like what you wrote.
Very well said.

Not that it means anything, 'cause I would even :heart: the setlist party without anything being said about the setlist!
 
great post, and fair point

but i like how i get threatend with being blocked for sticking with my opinions, and a mr shaun vox gets away with posting crap (see his post about bono's voice and others" without even being told to stop

great stuff
 
U2@NYC said:
This is a modified, and expanded, version of what I have earlier posted on a different thread, but I think I need to relay my opinion on this topic in a more 'open' way.

There have been arguments going on back and forth on whether it makes sense to complain about the current setlist and whether we are not grateful enough to the band to be on tour. I sensed that I need to explain my views of what are, in my opinion, two different things.

Discussing, not necessarily complaining about what U2 decides to play on a specific night, is the whole point of the setlist parties, which are there to hype up the current setlist and discuss about it.

A setlist party would become rather dull if we do not even pretend to look forward to something new. The fact that I'm saying that I would love a suprise or two does not mean that I hate the stuff they are currently playing or that I want U2 to call it quits. Has anyone seen/heard of many people returning their tickets to incoming shows after they found out they are playing Vertigo x 2? Has anyone seen/heard the band being booed off-stage because they had a bad rendition of Elevation? And, more generally, has anyone seen the energy and stamina of the audience go down from previous tours? (remember the "Hi Bob" sign in Milan, the balloons in Munich, or the girl coming onstage to play Party Girl in the U.S.).

Hell, if I had the money and the time, I would follow the band all over the world and would not give a damn if they played Vertigo 10 times in a row.

Throughout my life I have very much enjoyed every single U2 concert I have been to, regardless of the setlist. Furthermore, I have yet to see an 'unhappy' or 'frustrated' face leaving any of these U2 concerts I was able to attend. And I also think that these same fans were genuinely concerned when Edge's daughter was reported ill or when the tour was about to be cancelled.

Therefore, I ask that we do not jump on top of every post thinking that many of us here are implying that we are not enjoying U2 concerts.

There is a clear difference between enjoying a show and asking for another song to be played. U2 Die-hards like many of us in Interference will challenge the current setlist, complain about it and suggest changes, but that does not mean, in any way, that the U2 experience is not the best experience of them all.

I think that's a very smart way to look at things. My only real problem is with the posters who say "Pathetic", or "Lame", etc and simply deconstruct a show without having been there.

Having posted a comment upon my return form the Glasgow show in its setlist party thread, one member rubbished the show as "lame" despite being on the other side of the planet. When I rebuked him and was backed up by someone else, I was also labelled as "lame" by that same member. Opinions are one thing, but I take great exception to that kind of shit.

On paper, or on a setlist party thread, perhaps a show can be seen to be boring for lack of a setlist change. The flipside of course, is that being there in that atmosphere, 30 feet from my heroes, singing along with every song - is going to knock the socks off any negative opinion I see in here.

Discussion is great and I would always encourage it, but when anyone's opinon is held up as fact and used to put someone else down, it ultimately defeats the purpose of why we are here.
 
KUEFC09U2 said:

a mr shaun vox gets away with posting crap (see his post about bono's voice and others" without even being told to stop

I don't think we should debate other problems/annoyances in this thread that haven't got much to do with the subject.....and I wouldn't like to make more enemies in here....but I guess I have to agree with KUEFC09U2 here (happens occassionally :wink:). I wonder if anyone would be accused of trying to ruin a thread like that?

As far as I can understand, shaun vox, (don't know if he is being sarcastic) doesn't think that Bono's voice is as good now at it was on ZOO but does one have to use words like "wanker" and "shit" to express that?
 
U2Man said:


I don't think we should debate other problems/annoyances in this thread that haven't got much to do with the subject.....and I wouldn't like to make more enemies in here....but I guess I have to agree with KUEFC09U2 here (happens occassionally :wink:). I wonder if anyone would be accused of trying to ruin a thread like that?

As far as I can understand, shaun vox, (don't know if he is being sarcastic) doesn't think that Bono's voice is as good now at it was on ZOO but does one have to use words like "wanker" and "shit" to express that?
amen, the 2 enemies come together as one for a change :wink:

i just think mr vox goes around looking for arguments, he is well known for that in the "where the album has a name" section

and heres me and you getting told off for having a heated but proper debate about what we both belive etc
 
KUEFC09U2 said:
amen, the 2 enemies come together as one for a change :wink:

i just think mr vox goes around looking for arguments, he is well known for that in the "where the album has a name" section

and heres me and you getting told off for having a heated but proper debate about what we both belive etc

Well, to be fair, some of our debates deal with the way we behave etc (like the one yesterday and this one! :wink:)...and therefore often haven't got much to do with the subject, but I don't like this kind of rubbish-posting either, whose sole purpose seem to be to provoke people. I'm sure a good discussion about the subject could be started without all the swearing and vulgarities.
 
U2Man said:


Well, to be fair, some of our debates deal with the way we behave etc (like the one yesterday and this one! :wink:)...and therefore often haven't got much to do with the subject, but I don't like this kind of rubbish-posting either, whose sole purpose seem to be to provoke people. I'm sure a good discussion about the subject could be started without all the swearing and vulgarities.
thats the thing i dont think he is in it for a discussion, i think he just likes to try and wind people up
 
KUEFC09U2 said:
great post, and fair point

but i like how i get threatend with being blocked for sticking with my opinions, and a mr shaun vox gets away with posting crap (see his post about bono's voice and others" without even being told to stop

great stuff

I'm not sure why you are giving us such a hard time about this, I'm really not. I don't think anyone is asking a lot here. Is has nothing to do with "sticking with your opinions", it has to do with taking other people's threads off-topic over and over and over to have the same argument with the same person, until the thread starter has to ask for his own thread to get back on topic. If that's too much to ask then I really don't know what to say because that's not acceptable in this forum. I don't know any other way I can explain it.
 
neutral said:


I'm not sure why you are giving us such a hard time about this, I'm really not. I don't think anyone is asking a lot here. Is has nothing to do with "sticking with your opinions", it has to do with taking other people's threads off-topic over and over and over to have the same argument with the same person, until the thread starter has to ask for his own thread to get back on topic. If that's too much to ask then I really don't know what to say because that's not acceptable in this forum. I don't know any other way I can explain it.
well ok let me ask one question, why is nothing ever said to shaun? considering he is making thread after thread JUST to start arguments?
 
U2Man said:


I don't think we should debate other problems/annoyances in this thread that haven't got much to do with the subject.....and I wouldn't like to make more enemies in here....but I guess I have to agree with KUEFC09U2 here (happens occassionally :wink:). I wonder if anyone would be accused of trying to ruin a thread like that?


Again, don't know how else we can explain this. If Shaun Vox did the same thing then yes he would be accused of the same things. But he doesn't, so what he does and what "language" he uses isn't really relevant here. We'll worry about shaun vox, he has nothing to do with this issue or this thread so he's not on-topic here.
 
neutral said:


Again, don't know how else we can explain this. If Shaun Vox did the same thing then yes he would be accused of the same things. But he doesn't, so what he does and what "language" he uses isn't really relevant here. We'll worry about shaun vox, he has nothing to do with this issue or this thread so he's not on-topic here.
nice way to weave away from my question without answering it, i understand why i get told of, and i take that 100% and i will behave, but to just ignore someone who not only on this part of the forum, but also the album section, trys to start arguments ALL the time, well i dunno, upto you guys i guess

once again sorry for going of topic*
 
Last edited:
neutral said:


Again, don't know how else we can explain this. If Shaun Vox did the same thing then yes he would be accused of the same things. But he doesn't, so what he does and what "language" he uses isn't really relevant here. We'll worry about shaun vox, he has nothing to do with this issue or this thread so he's not on-topic here.

Ok, neutral, KUEFC09U2 and I had a tiny divergency from the topic here but at least we weren't arguing at all. If you read my post that was posted just after the one you quoted, you will see that I actually acknowledged that what KUEFC09U2 and I sometimes do isn't the same as what Shaun does. And if you look at the post I posted before the one you quoted you will see that I stated that Shaun's annoyances aren't the topic here. I did not try to excuse anything.
 
KUEFC09U2 said:
well ok let me ask one question, why is nothing ever said to shaun? considering he is making thread after thread JUST to start arguments?


How do you know it isn't or it never has been? :confused: Things have been said. You can also always report other posts or threads if you think they need a mod's attention. :)

Weave away from your question? The post of mine you just quoted was not in response to your post, and thus was not addressing your question.

Hopefully your question was answered now.
 
U2Man said:


Ok, neutral, KUEFC09U2 and I had a tiny divergency from the topic here but at least we weren't arguing at all. If you read my post that was posted just after the one you quoted, you will see that I actually acknowledged that what KUEFC09U2 and I sometimes do isn't the same as what Shaun does. And if you look at the post I posted before the one you quoted you will see that I stated that Shaun's annoyances aren't the topic here. I did not try to excuse anything.

Okay, got it, I read the post again and you're right....and thank you for explaining further. :)
 
neutral said:



How do you know it isn't or it never has been? :confused: Things have been said. You can also always report other posts or threads if you think they need a mod's attention. :)

Weave away from your question? The post of mine you just quoted was not in response to your post, and thus was not addressing your question.

Hopefully your question was answered now.
ok i have 100% respect for you, so am not going to take this any further
 
Lila64 said:
well said U2@NYC! :applaud:

And if you win the lottery and follow them around the world, will you take me with you? :wink:

It will be my pleasure, Lila. As a matter of fact, if I win the lottery I should take everyone that attends the setlist parties... :wink:
 
KUEFC09U2 said:
great post, and fair point

but i like how i get threatend with being blocked for sticking with my opinions, and a mr shaun vox gets away with posting crap (see his post about bono's voice and others" without even being told to stop

great stuff

First of all, get the story straight. You were not warned for sticking to your opinions, you and your pal were warned for your constant bickering in every thread. There's a big difference there.

Second of all, shaun has been warned many times in the past for his postings, and not always in public, so please dont assume things.
 
Back
Top Bottom