"I'm asking you nicely: stop running away from Irvine and engage him in a discussion without taking it personally. Please."
Ok. I'll reply to YOU.
I stated that I didn't believe ATYCLB was U2's third masterpiece.
I disputed the suggestion that ZOOTV was the only stadium tour in which the band believed in the new album enough to play most of it live by pointing out that they did the same thing on both TJT and POPMART. The ridiculous counter argument was offered that U2 obviously didn't believe in POP because, even though they were playing 10 songs off of it, they also interspersed some of their other work.
The argument was made that "the consensus" outside of this board is that ATYCLB is U2's third masterpiece. I reported that whenever I personally speak to non-U2 fanatics they never have anything good to say about anything U2 has done in the last decade. I find myself having to defend the work. Some people tried to twist my words to mean that I thought anyone who liked the album was less than normal. I quickly made it clear that, by my own definition, I was not normal. Of course, no one who posts to this board is - we're the fanatics. I even joked that I do my best to avoid "normal people."
When it became clear that one poster and I had wildly different tastes, I didn't suggest there was anything wrong with his taste, I simply said that I doubted we would find much in common we agreed on - because our tastes seem to be so dramatically different. He then responded by suggesting that I had claimed all normal people agree with me on all issues. GAH!
I then responded by saying he had "poor reading comprehension skills" because he was dramatically transforming what I had said into something I had never said.
Then he made a post saying that MOFO couldn't stand alone. I'm not sure what performance of U2's was only one song long..... I decided I had wasted enough time talking to someone who was either making no effort to understand me or was intentionally pretending not to know what I was saying. or for all I know, stoned off of his mind! Sometimes, on the internet, you can waste a lot of energy on some people.
He THEN brought up a conversation he and I had had a few years ago... one I still remember very well. One wherein he accused me of being homophobic because I didn't agree that BOY was a gay themed album - and I had dared to say that I had no interest in "queer theory" (As he had put it then.) Realizing that this was the very unpleasant and bigoted individual I had dealt with then, I was certain I didn't want to continue trying to discuss or debate anything with him.
So, what is it that you think I should discuss with him? I enjoy a good debate, but I haven't seen anything enjoyable about this.