Actually, I make my arguments pretty clear. Maybe a bit sarcastic at times, but everything is well reasoned. To rebut the claim that they played the songs you mentioned for a long time, yeah, they did play some of them for a long time. But after 10 years they retired most of them, or played them less.
When they made Unforgettable Fire, people wanted another War and U2 knew that, but they didn't want to be the new Who (Bono said that). When they made Achtung, they were very concerned that it wouldn't go over well because it was so different. The didn't want to give people another Joshua Tree. ZOO TV was not what people wanted or expected, either. A lot of U2 fans were pissed off at that and didn't get it. Same with Zooropa. After ZOO TV, people wanted U2 to go back to "normal." Instead of doing that, they made Passengers, and Pop, and did the Popmart tour which was definitely NOT what people expected or thought they wanted, though the crowd at the show I saw fucking loved it; they loved the 8 pop songs we got, they loved HMTMKMKM; they loved the mirror ball. The crowd there, where they were surprised, where u2 didn't play down to expectations, was much more into it than the 05 show I was at, and I was in the circle.
As for U2s relevance, they are the ones who want it, and it is a fact that this tour, with 6 exceptions, could have been put on in 2000. It is sad that they are relying on old songs at the expense of their new music, which they presumably believed it, and now think "Oh, people don't want it, let's play I Will Follow for the 14,542nd time!"
What does a high grossing tour mean, anyway? Fuck all, that's what! Neil Diamond, Miley Cyrus, and Bieber are all high grocers (doing too much of the ol' avocado skin, if you ask me). Big venues + high prices + brand name recognition = high gross. It has nothing to do with relevance or artistic merit.
U2 have a vast, immensely popular discography to draw from. REM switch up the set a lot. The 08 show I saw had 4 songs in common with the 99 gig, and they played all of Acclerate minus one song. There is no reason U2 can't do that. By trying to figure out what people want and give them that, they are not doing the best they can. I'm not saying it isn't good, but it's not great, and it's lazy and foolish. They don't seem to be trying. That's my problem with them now. If they were playing 8+ songs off No Line, even Stand Up Comedy, I'd be happy. And they really should drop a lot of the 80s songs, and it's way to heavy on ATYCLB.
Well, I've been one of the most vocal detractors here about the ATYCLB overload on this tour! So I agree with you there. I don't agree on the 80s stuff- the set could definitely use more 80s like 2 Hearts and Seconds and In God's Country. Or Gloria or I could go on........
As for I Will Follow, it's easily one of their most energetic songs and it gets everyone jumping like crazy. It also reassures the old school fans that they're still remembered and appreciated. Different strokes, I guess, but why the hell are you complaining about IWF with Boots and Elevation in the set list??????
I Will Follow has gone a very long way toward fixing the 2009 360 LACK OF ROCKERS. I saw 360 in 2009 and was underwhelmed, I would've given anything to have seen it in 2010. Much better, much more energy.
Again, with the 10 yrs argument, it's hard to say that as we were starting from their debut on the world stage. What are you trying to say? Songs like Until The World shouldn't be included just because they're over 10 years old?
I appreciate the U2 history lesson, but I know very well what expectations were and what U2's intentions were and how that influenced the set list. Particularly on Zoo TV and Popmart.
But you are missing the 2 main points here.
1.)Zoo TV and Popmart were much, much different than 360. You correctly pointed out the AB reinvention, chopping down the JT, etc. With Popmart and the 8 songs you mentioned, we had a stage set customized to the album so they were kind of stuck playing those songs, regardless of how well the album sold. Plus, it's not like they didn't drop a few Pop songs out as the tour went on. DYFL and Miami come immediately to mind.
360 could obviously promote anything. It's not tied to an album or a mood.
2.)Most importantly, you can't realistically make the argument that U2 is leaning on older/familiar material too much when half of the set(at least) is made up of songs from the 2000s. You also can't when you look at songs like MS, MLK, IALW, Scarlet and Ultraviolet, to name a few, being played on 360.
Plus, you need to check your math. There are a lot more than 6 songs that you wouldn't have heard in 2000 in the rotation on 360.
It doesn't mean, as you would say, fuck all, that REM played almost all of Accelerate on their 2008 tour. What's that have to do with U2? We are talking about U2's setlists, and you didn't address what I stated about them: they've pretty much always followed the same type of pattern each tour. They've never been Pearl Jam or Springsteen. But as we well know, they'll still shake things up a lot more and play many more rarities than say, Tom Petty or AC/DC. Or almost any other act with a U2 sized catalogue.
5-7 songs from a not well known NLOTH wasn't enough? For most people I heard from, it was too many! Most bands with a popular catalogue going as far back as U2's will play 2 or 3 songs max from the token new album.
You have it backwards with relevancy and REM. It's REM that doesn't mean shit.
And how does ticket sales not have anything to do with relevance? That's just crazy talk, sorry. It shows that there is demand for a particular artist, and since all the Miley's and Diamond's you mentioned come nowhere near U2 in terms of gross, it does indeed mean a lot to have the highest grossing tour in history. Especially when you consider that touring is where the money is made in music these days.
Besides, just because No Line sold poorly by U2 standards, doesn't mean it was a commercial failure. It sold very well, actually and notice how much media(non U2 created) was out there, magazines, newspapers, etc when it was being released?
Trust me, I know because I'm in the business, U2 is still looked at as the biggest trend setters out there.
U2 is still the most widely seen live act and is still easily the most copied in the touring industry. That's relevance. Bon Jovi's Circle Tour is a complete mix of Elevation, Vertigo and 360, it's blatantly obvious. And that's only 1 example.
As for artistic merit, define it for us. You can't without adding your own personal opinion into it.
I went ahead and wrote it off as someone trying to get someone's goat by saying something deliberately inflammatory.
Too bad it didn't work. Could've been great.
Notice how gvox likes to get into these personal exchanges, even to the point of regretting it when it doesn't happen!
Then when called on it, he's all "what, me, what did I do??!!!! No, it's U2387 and everyone else that make everything personal!"
Draw conclusions from there.........
Well, that didn't take long. Good for you big man good for you. 
