A Message to Our Readers

[Elvis]

you actually thought that i would suggest that you call them without knowing exactly what would happen if you did?

wow.

once again, you underestimate interferencers.

So, you expected me to ASSUME you had? I dont know you, I dont know youd dial up some stranger. I sure as hell wouldnt... so why should I have assumed you would? lol

 

[Salome]

yeah, you wouldn't no

 

[beegee]

but why WOULDN'T you?

you told us that you were doing everything you could to clear up this matter.

if she spoke to me, she would certainly speak to the owner of the site. and then there you would have it. you would clear up all the rumors that it was you or your staff who tried to pull this off. your credibility would have been restored, and things could have gone back to normal.

i was actually very surprised that you didn't want to speak to her.

 

[Elvis]

but why WOULDN'T you?

you told us that you were doing everything you could to clear up this matter.

if she spoke to me, she would certainly speak to the owner of the site. and then there you would have it. you would clear up all the rumors that it was you or your staff who tried to pull this off. your credibility would have been restored, and things could have gone back to normal.

i was actually very surprised that you didn't want to speak to her.

I had actually emailed, and PMd, whomever it was, and asked them politely if I could call them, or they would call me --- as did Kate. We never got any response, but the emails and PMs were read.

 

[beegee]

I had actually emailed, and PMd, whomever it was, and asked them politely if I could call them, or they would call me --- as did Kate. We never got any response, but the emails and PMs were read.

well, that's understandable.

if it was the smith daughter that you PM'd, do you really think she's going to say, yeah sure, go ahead and call my house?

'twas the mother you needed to contact, not the daughter.

 

[Salome]

wow, I hope the proof you thought you once had that this indeed was The Edge wasn't based on the same kind of decisive measures

bg might actually be a great third party to get to the bottom what has happened (which I'm sure you want as much as we do)
it will at least speed up the process with about a year

 

[LuminousTimes]

Elvis, I have a simple question for you...Who did you THINK you were speaking with when you did the "Exclusive Interview with U2"?

a. U2 member(s) - (which one(s)?)

b. Paul McGuinness

c. A PM representative

 

[Angela Harlem]

oi you, get off the comp. your phone is ringing

 

[Angela Harlem]

haha that was to johan/salome, not you LT

um, im going now....

 

[beegee]

i think i'm done with this for now as well.

i'm hungover, and all of these circles are making me nauseous.

 

[LuminousTimes]

it was also the exact moment that i realized that this place will never, ever be the same again. i don't think for one minute that this site will die, not by a long shot. hell, there seem to be more members on during the day now than ever. but they are new, and it will take them a long time to learn. it's kind of like being forced into selling the beautiful home in which you watched your family grow to a bunch of young fraternity fucks who plop a battered sofa onto your rose garden before you have even have a chance to pull the truck away.

and that just sucks.

I used to come to this site daily for U2 news and read the articles religiously...now I don't even look at the news on Interference...I simply don't trust it...

 

[ThatGuy]

Wow, an e-mail and a PM. Glad to see "getting to the bottom of the matter" wasn't just tough talk. Way to follow through.

At least it gives us some insight about the authentication process for "The Edge."

Elvis: So can I call you, or will you call me, so I know that you're really "The Edge?"

"The Edge" : No.

Elvis: Okay then! Welcome aboard, Edge! You're obviously "officially the real thing."

 

[Elvis]

ThatGuy, you're taking it out of context. The PM and Email was once we had more evidence/suspicion of who it may have been.

 

[U2SavesTheWorld]

The PM and Email was once we had more evidence/suspicion of who it may have been.

Care to elaborate?

 

[Elvis]

Care to elaborate?

Like I said, we've had IPs and various names, postings on other sites, various emails, etc. The collection of that stuff, once we realized we'd been hoaxed we tried contacting (as I said) this person via email and PM to talk on the phone about it. We did not have their phone #, and personally.. I'm not one to just look up telephone #s and call people out of the blue like bonosgirl apparently is.

That said, I spent a good deal of time chatting with Angela this morning, and she recently found evidence that this person posted on u2 sites as far back as 2002 with the same email address. Again, this is something she only recently found - had we found this earlier (much), I'm sure none of this would have escalated to this point.

We were hoaxed, we look like fools for it, it won't happen again, tempers flared along the way, slanderous and false things have been said about myself as well as others, there was no conspiracy on our part, no ploy to mislead people, and it's time to move on with more positive things. Personally, I dont have the energy to deal with this BS anymore. It's run me dry, I'm done with it. Of course, most of this we said in our opening message.

 

[Tip Top Prince]

Once again:

"In other words - fuck off, I don't care"

very poor Elvis - hiding behind the cloak of "privacy".

the word gutless comes to mind.

So does "pathetic".

 

[LuminousTimes]

We were hoaxed, we look like fools for it, it won't happen again, tempers flared along the way, slanderous and false things have been said about myself as well as others, there was no conspiracy on our part, no ploy to mislead people, and it's time to move on with more positive things. Personally, I dont have the energy to deal with this BS anymore. It's run me dry, I'm done with it. Of course, most of this we said in our opening message.

Answer my one question and I will not post again on this thread.

Elvis, I have a simple question for you...Who did you THINK you were speaking with when you did the "Exclusive Interview with U2"?

a. U2 member(s) - (which one(s)?)

b. Paul McGuinness

c. A PM representative

 

[Elvis]

Once again:

"In other words - fuck off, I don't care"

very poor Elvis - hiding behind the cloak of "privacy".

the word gutless comes to mind.

So does "pathetic".

You know, it's really pathetic that you're putting words in my mouth. STOP. That is not what I said. Geez. I said what I mean, I dont need you to tell me what I mean.

 

[Elvis]

Answer my one question and I will not post again on this thread.

Elvis, I have a simple question for you...Who did you THINK you were speaking with when you did the "Exclusive Interview with U2"?

a. U2 member(s) - (which one(s)?)

b. Paul McGuinness

c. A PM representative

First thing, I was not in contact with this person personally at that point, however... we were (mis)lead to believe that it was someone whom worked for/with the band, Don Smith. We were then (mis)lead to believe that Don wasnt Don and was actually The Edge.

 

[U2Rob]

First thing, I was not in contact with this person personally at that point, however... we were (mis)lead to believe that it was someone whom worked for/with the band, Don Smith. We were then (mis)lead to believe that Don wasnt Done and was actually The Edge.

Hey hey! Now we're getting somewhere. It's like pulling teeth.

So basically, you just admitted that the interview was posted while not knowing anything for sure. Journalism at its finest.

Correct me if I'm wrong (and I'm sure you will), but this is how I see it:

You posted an "exclusive interview with U2", even when you:

1) Thought you were dealing with the Edge, but
2) Had already believed it to be someone else previously, AND
3) Had NOTHING concrete to base either of these beliefs on.

If you did have something legitimate to base these beliefs on, I'm sure we would have heard about it by now.

I can't wait to see this refuted.

One more time, if people come away with anything from this thread (because it sure isn't going to be clear answers), it should be that they really shouldn't count on Interference to be anything but a forum where they can discuss U2 and talk with their friends. Again, with the glut of U2 news sources out there, why anyone would choose to use this as their main site for news is beyond me.

 

[beegee]

and personally.. I'm not one to just look up telephone #s and call people out of the blue like bonosgirl apparently is.

oh come on now, look at how you say that, like my character is seriously flawed or something. it was a simple phone call, the woman was quite pleasant, if not a bit apprehensive, but overall, it was pretty normal.

 

[indra]

Crap! I wanted post #800. Guess I'll have to wait for 1000.....

 

[indra]

Hey hey! Now we're getting somewhere. It's like pulling teeth.

So basically, you just admitted that the interview was posted while not knowing anything for sure. Journalism at its finest.

Correct me if I'm wrong (and I'm sure you will), but this is how I see it:

You posted an "exclusive interview with U2", even when you:

1) Thought you were dealing with the Edge, but
2) Had already believed it to be someone else previously, AND
3) Had NOTHING concrete to base either of these beliefs on.

If you did have something legitimate to base these beliefs on, I'm sure we would have heard about it by now.

I can't wait to see this refuted.

One more time, if people come away with anything from this thread (because it sure isn't going to be clear answers), it should be that they really shouldn't count on Interference to be anything but a forum where they can discuss U2 and talk with their friends. Again, with the glut of U2 news sources out there, why anyone would choose to use this as their main site for news is beyond me.

Excuse me if I'm being dense, but you didn't know this already? Of course, you don't use a fan-based website as a news source, no matter what the site puports to be! Honestly, anyone who feels that a fan based site is an honest to god news source is extremely gullible.

 

[EPandAmerica]

Excuse me if I'm being dense, but you didn't know this already? Of course, you don't use a fan-based website as a news source, no matter what the site puports to be! Honestly, anyone who feels that a fan based site is an honest to god news source is extremely gullible.

At least other fan sites report items to be RUMORS until they get something official.

 

[U2Rob]

Excuse me if I'm being dense, but you didn't know this already? Of course, you don't use a fan-based website as a news source, no matter what the site puports to be! Honestly, anyone who feels that a fan based site is an honest to god news source is extremely gullible.

You're excused. There are plenty who do just what you describe. This has nothing to do with me and what I do; this has to do with people who see something posted here and take it as fact. It happens. A lot. Not everyone is as skeptical as me (and you, too, apparently). Like my local radio station, for example. I was horrified to hear news of this interview (and even worse, news of "The Edge" posting) go out over the airwaves.

The sad fact is that STILL nothing is on the main page about all of this. So anyone who stopped by the main page and jumped to the interview, or linked to it, or what have you... they're not necessarily going to dig and dig (and yes, they'll have to - look at where this thread is buried) to learn that the interview was FAKE.

 

[indra]

You're excused. There are plenty who do just what you describe. This has nothing to do with me and what I do; this has to do with people who see something posted here and take it as fact. It happens. A lot. Not everyone is as skeptical as me (and you, too, apparently). Like my local radio station, for example. I was horrified to hear news of this interview (and even worse, news of "The Edge" posting) go out over the airwaves.

The sad fact is that STILL nothing is on the main page about all of this. So anyone who stopped by the main page and jumped to the interview, or linked to it, or what have you... they're not necessarily going to dig and dig (and yes, they'll have to - look at where this thread is buried) to learn that the interview was FAKE.

Well that is pitiful. Guess this is a good lesson for people then. Grow a brain and use it. Never believe something simply because you are told. And this applies to everyone. None of this would have happened if everyone here did that -- and I expect people to think about what they are told (not only the operator (s) of this site, although that would have helped too) and not just blindly swallow it.

 

[Jim]

The sad fact is that STILL nothing is on the main page about all of this. So anyone who stopped by the main page and jumped to the interview, or linked to it, or what have you... they're not necessarily going to dig and dig (and yes, they'll have to - look at where this thread is buried) to learn that the interview was FAKE.

I have no interest in character assassinations and don't believe that there could have been some sort of dirty strategy behind all of this, it's just too far fetched and there is no evidence. And I'm not particularly interested in conspiracy theories.

Nonetheless, I would agree with U2Rob here. I have a mate who comes here once every blue moon and who is a massive music/U2 fan. He isn't really interested in webpages and forums so wouldn't know how to even find this thread. He tapped into the U2 interview and Edge posts and, in his mind, is now adamant that U2 will be opening their tour with 'Vertigo', rehersals are underway for potential outings for 'Zoo Station' and 'Electric Co', and that his guitar hero feels it appropriate to use terrorist analogies to respond to forum members. And the rest etc etc.

U2 fans R E T A I N information about their band!

I'm sure there are MANY fans like him, and for their benefit, as this is a FAN forum, I hope that a message goes out on the front page about the false posts and false U2 interview . After all, that is where the U2 interview was originally posted, the biggest scoop in the history of interference.com.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Excuse me if I'm being dense, but you didn't know this already? Of course, you don't use a fan-based website as a news source, no matter what the site puports to be! Honestly, anyone who feels that a fan based site is an honest to god news source is extremely gullible.

i'll have to take issue with this one...99.9% of webpages dedicated to u2 news sources are fan run. and yes, with fan run sites that have spotty sources at best, there will be faulty or inaccurate information. hell... "real" news sources printed tons of track lists that involved the songs "tough" "full metal jacket" "native son" etc. etc., which are all NOT on the new album (although they morphed into other songs). so the "real" news sources get it wrong, too.

news/information is only as good as the sources behind the information. why do you believe news from the New York Times? because they said so? or because you just assume that they check their sources? yet a writer for the New York Times as caught making up news stories just a couple of years ago

Joel didn't make anything up here. he ran with something without properly verifying his sources. he was negligent in this matter, but there was no malicious intent on his behalf. and i fully expect that the sources behind any future interviews will be checked and double checked and triple checked to verify their authenticity.

the main problem is how it was handled after the fact... once people started comming up with proof to dispute the "official" status. if that had been handled better, we wouldn't be here still talking about it. and for this Joel has appologized... wether anyone wants to believe that appology is sincere or not, well, that's up for each and every person to decide.

i'm not going to tell anyone else how to respond or act to any of this... if you feel you need to know more, that's your right. but as long as joel wasn't the one who was actually pretending to be the edge, which i have enough info to be certain on, then, at least for me, it's simply time to move on and enjoy this Community for what it's worth... a place to escape the boredom of work and talk about stuff with fellow u2 nut-jobs... i mean, isn't that what this place is for? a little interference in your regularly scheduled day?

see ya on the other side

 

[Jim]

Well that is pitiful. Guess this is a good lesson for people then. Grow a brain and use it. Never believe something simply because you are told. And this applies to everyone. None of this would have happened if everyone here did that -- and I expect people to think about what they are told (not only the operator (s) of this site, although that would have helped too) and not just blindly swallow it.

What an inspiring mantra! DON'T TRUST ANYBODY OR ANYTHING!! ALL IS BAD!!

 

[indra]

What an inspiring mantra! DON'T TRUST ANYBODY OR ANYTHING!! ALL IS BAD!!

BLIND TRUST. Yes, BLIND TRUST is stupid. Grow a brain and use it.

You want to blindly trust anyone, Jim, well you go right ahead, but then don't whine that you were mislead. If you choose to be a fool, you have to expect to be fooled.