A group of narrow minded barely 18 year olds circlejerking over

>>69661810
t. pretentious Wire reader

Worse. Many are much, much older.

swans is good

>>69661810
t. RYM user

>>69661810
Fukkn saved dat image son

Screencapped, but I doubt anyone on /mu/ is any different

>>69661810
>18 year olds
I'd say the more enthusiastic ones are in their 30s and have folders of chart.jpg files.

And yeah, obviously none of them have a comprehensive knowledge of anything because they're making vanity posts made of adopted opinions they developed from lurking here and are hoping to get pats on the back.
Those threads are devoid of discussion, it's a weird egomania circlejerk and arguably worse than KPop threads (at least they have pictures of qt girls as an almost redeemable quality).

>Kanye
>Drake
>Beyonce

Even my little sister won't listen to them anymore

>>69662471
30 yr old here

I know more about music than you, and you people are listening/promoting music from my era (Radiohead, NMH, MBV, etc). if anything I am wondering why you are making vanity posts about my opinions you've adopted.

>>69662580
Wow a triggered loser. Thanks for posting more egomania and random projections. I can't imagine someone who wrote that being able to even supply criteria for music analysis and the fact you appeared and defended yourself means you were insulted which means you are an example of my random, baseless claim. You proved my argument, thanks.

>>69662642
>. I can't imagine someone who wrote that being able to even supply criteria for music analysis
You should always examine the melody (specifically voice leading), harmony, chord sequence, lyrics, production, arrangement, performance, context and intent.

Any other questions?
>and the fact you appeared and defended yourself means you were insulted which means you are an example of my random, baseless claim. You proved my argument, thanks.
Don't forget you appeared and defended yourself when OP mentioned ignorant 18 year olds

>>69662692
>You should always
No, you shouldn't. When analysing something you have to take what that something is and what its goal is and it's quality is measured by how successful the attempt is. You can't criticise something for having a poor level of something if it needs that poor level to communicate the concepts it intends to. Obviously. Thanks for proving yet another of my arguments.

>Don't forget you appeared and defended yourself when OP mentioned ignorant 18 year olds
Nah, I'm 26 and I came in because I saw a bunch of bullshit chart threads and decided to vent. I actually have a friend who bases his entire person on 4chan charts and he has no idea how to explain anything but takes those random things as supposed validity of his forced sense of superiority. It's really toxic.

You're a sad little man, feel free to keep responding as I'd really enjoying massacring your fragile, forced identity as "fan of these albums I was told are good that I can't properly discuss because I'm completely clueless".

>>69662642
>>69662692
>>69662795
>I'm better than you
lol

>>69662795
>No, you shouldn't. When analysing something you have to take what that something is and what its goal is and it's quality is measured by how successful the attempt is. You can't criticise something for having a poor level of something if it needs that poor level to communicate the concepts it intends to. Obviously. Thanks for proving yet another of my arguments.
Ooops looks like you missed the part where I said "intent".

Sorry about that
>Nah, I'm 26
Then why do you post like an 18 year old?
>I actually have a friend who bases his entire person on 4chan charts and he has no idea how to explain anything but takes those random things as supposed validity of his forced sense of superiority.
I am not him. Why are you projecting?
>You're a sad little man, feel free to keep responding as I'd really enjoying massacring your fragile, forced identity as "fan of these albums I was told are good that I can't properly discuss because I'm completely clueless".
Quote me where I posted my chart.

File: ohshit.png (84KB, 243x248px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 243x248px

>>69662471
>I'd say the more enthusiastic ones are in their 30s and have folders of chart.jpg files.

>>69662820
>implying
I'm better than that guy for sure and I'm better at specific things than some other people are while other people are better at things than me.
Example: you are better than me at being a sad tripfag and a shitposter.

>>69662827
>Ooops looks like you missed the part where I said "intent"
No. You wrote 'should always' and included elements not required for music as pillars of criticism. It's also nice that your response to an argument is to resort to random name-calling
>uh-uh-uh you're... 18!
I'm not, but it wouldn't make you any less of a retard anyway
>why are you projecting? Your explanation after my juvenile claim because you can post more than half a sentence is projecting because I don't know what my buzzwords mean
That's pretty sad, mate
>I was triggered and posted defensively, please prove something unrelated
(you)

>>69662902
One of them is here sperging out

>>69662931
>No. You wrote 'should always' and included elements not required for music as pillars of criticism
Intent isn't required as a pillar of criticism? You just said it was.

Make up you mind.
>I'm not
You mean "Grrr I hate other total strangers on the internet they are so stupid!!" isn't acting like an eighteen year old?
>Your explanation after my juvenile claim because you can post more than half a sentence is projecting because I don't know what my buzzwords mean
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

>>69662931
kek, this guy fucks

>>69662993
Apparently you literally can't read.
>and included elements
does not mean 'everything you wrote is wrong'. How do you function day to day with such a poor grasp of language? And how do you consider yourself such an excellent critic and expert on music is a simple sentence is too hard for you to comprehend?
Anyway 'intent' is too ambiguous a buzzword for use in regards to your ass-pull theory. Of course, you're far too ignorant to understand why.

There's something seriously wrong with you if you take an observation as some sort of character trait. Something worse again when your response to another observation is to react completely obliviously and continue missing the point.

This level or illogical self-righteousness interwoven with a complete lack of self-awareness is a result of the poor standards of education in the developed world further amplified by the convenience of contemporary society and the foundation of the internet as a platform for idiots to unjustly proclaim assumptions as facts while waving philosophical terminology they don't understand, like 'subjectivity' and other buzzwords, to ignorantly defend their inability to properly discuss things. This board is for discussions, though. You might prefer reddit where you can downvote people correcting you to help consolidate your insurmountable idiocy.

>>69663008
I go hard, all day all night.
I like to put on a show.

File: projection.png (45KB, 810x387px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 810x387px

>>69663238
>There's something seriously wrong with you if you take an observation as some sort of character trait.
You mean like:
>How do you function day to day with such a poor grasp of ...
>...is [sic] a simple sentence is too hard for you to comprehend?
>...your ass-pull theory
>you're far too ignorant to...
Should I go on? I don't know why you are so upset. Maybe you can type an inane block of text throwing in as many buzzwords as you can think of to further try to define my character, since you know me so well..
>This level or illogical self-righteousness interwoven with a complete lack of self-awareness is a result of the poor standards of education in the developed world further amplified by the convenience of contemporary society and the foundation of the internet as a platform for idiots to unjustly proclaim assumptions as facts while waving philosophical terminology they don't understand, like 'subjectivity' and other buzzwords, to ignorantly defend their inability to properly discuss things. This board is for discussions, though. You might prefer reddit where you can downvote people correcting you to help consolidate your insurmountable idiocy.
Pic related. Nice projection

>>69663340
Lol nice, you finished the projector off

>>69663340
>asking questions and responding appropriately to someone is projecting
So your argument for you being a mature, intellectual savant and my being '18 years old' (which is somehow a comment on knowledge in your warped mind) is that your inability to articulate yourself and subsequent inability to comprehend a sentence makes everything I wrote a projection? Everything I wrote was in relation to the nonsense you wrote. It's scary that you're actually this stupid.

>I'll keep using my one buzzword, I don't have enough brain-power to actually make a point.
So... Let me get this straight. In response to my making light of lame chart posting anons you show up and sperg out. I respond amicably and you call me 18 years old for disagreing with you and then spam the word 'projecting'.
What are you trying to accomplish? I understand that you've had a hard day working your minimum wage sales job and there were not free seats on the bus home because of the shitty weather and now that you're finally back you find out that posting charts isn't universally praised and it breaks your fragile little 30 ear old manchild virgin heart... But that's not really a topic for discussion.
There's a projection for you, I hope you enjoy it since you asked for it so many times.

>>69663381
What do you mean?
>>69663447
>So... Let me get this straight. In response to my making light of lame chart posting anons you show up and sperg out
Which one of us is posting walls of text?

>>69663469
>discussing something properly is autistic
>real intellectuals such as myself most half sentences and spam buzzwords they don't understand while inadvertently proving every argument made against them
If you haven't been diagnosed yet, you may want to go to whoever diagnoses mental disorders

>>69663526
>Bullying other people is proper
Is it?

>>69663447
>I understand that you've had a hard day working your minimum wage sales job and there were not free seats on the bus home because of the shitty weather and now that you're finally back you find out that posting charts isn't universally praised and it breaks your fragile little 30 ear old manchild virgin heart... But that's not really a topic for discussion.
>There's a projection for you
So you are admitting you are actually talking about yourself here?

File: ano1.jpg (158KB, 1600x1066px) Image search: [Google]

158KB, 1600x1066px

>>69663538
>someone disgreed with me. CYBERBULLYING REEEE
Are you serious?

>>69663565
Projecting doesn't require you to project yourself. You can project any character onto someone.

>>69663593
OK well I'm sure you are actually a nice person. I hope you are OK anon. Nice taking to, you had funny posts that made me laugh.

>>69663631
I'm not only the nicest, but also the best person in the world. Glad to have been of service.

>>69663661
Do you have a borderline personality disorder?

>>69663726
No.I'm just not a retard. I understand a lack of social integration has a large portion of the more avid posters here believe that proper discourse is made up of brief, contentless statements, but properly functioning people happen to be capable of articulating themselves properly. Crazy, I know.

Just because the majority here are equal parts retarded and socially challenged doesn't make their inability to communicate properly the standard of discussion. If you think a paragraph of text is an issue then you might be mentally ill - not intuitively vomiting paragraphs automatically means you don't know how to discuss the things you are trying to and is surely an admission of a lack of intelligence as well. I'd guess.
I also like writing. Loads of fun.
Much better than vanity chart threads.
I bet their avant-garde charts don't even have TENTENKO on them. Awful.

>>69663857
Not asking if you are a retard. I'm asking if you are aware you have a borderline personality disorder.

>>69663939
I answered you. Are you aware that you are intellectually challenged and cannot comprehend simple and straight forward responses to your questions?
Also, are you aware that mistaking your intellectual insecurities as someone else having a randomly generated disorder is a sign of remarkably low self-esteem and inadequacy issues?
Are you OK, anon? It's not that no one likes you, it's that you're cold and distant because you're too absorbed in your own delusions to involve yourself socially and people are creeped out by it. Please stop using this board to post your cries for help, you're supposed to discuss music here.

>>69664070
>I answered you
You didn't. Try again.
>Are you aware that you are intellectually challenged and cannot comprehend simple and straight forward responses to your questions?
Show me where you gave a straight answer "yes I have a BPD" or "No I do not have a BPD"
>are you aware that mistaking your intellectual insecurities as someone else having a randomly generated disorder is a sign of remarkably low self-esteem and inadequacy issues?
Talking about yourself here?
>it's that you're cold and distant because you're too absorbed in your own delusions
Like what?

Also I asked for you to quote me where I posted my chart. Are you going to do it?
>you're supposed to discuss music here.
Fair enough. How many bands do you play in?

>>69664169
Holy shit, this autism.
Mate, I answered you. You clearly have something very wrong with you. Seek help.

>Also I asked for you to quote me where I posted my chart
Holy shit, it's still you? Jesus.
Anyway, I actually responded to that already. If you speak English properly then you should be aware of this.

>how many bands do you play ins?
that's not a discussion of music, it's a discussion of me.

>>69664343
>Mate, I answered you
Show me where you gave a straight answer "yes I have a BPD" or "No I do not have a BPD"
>Anyway, I actually responded to that already
Show me where you quoted my chart
>that's not a discussion of music, it's a discussion of me.
Most of your posts are discussing yourself.

>>69664407
>please repeat your post that I can easily scroll up and read myself
No.
>please, for the third time, show me a chart I made despite the fact that no one said I made any charts
Do you have a carer or something I should get in touch with? You really aren't mentally fit to have unsupervised internet access.
>observations and responses to what has been written are about yourself
No, again you're just very clearly incapable of comprehending simple language. Don't confuse your intellectual shortcomings with some sort of self-justified nonsense argument.

This thread was about music charts, you came in with your ass fully spergered and started shooting off random nonsense in every direction. Myself and several other silent anons have enjoyed your mentally unfit egomaniacal tirade, but t's come to a point where it's not so much hilarious as it is worrying. You derailed the thread and made it about yourself because you were offended that I wrote that some of the people posting charts are 30 years old and socially/culturally challenged and ever since you've scarily reimagined everything said to you as 'bullying' and interpenetrated every response made in your direction as something completely different, all the while claiming that the answers to your questions, that are clearly legible, have never been submitted. I'm honestly upset by the fact that human beings are capable of being this challenged, moreso by how oblivious you are to it.
However, you proved every single one of my points so I'm good regardless. You really are just like my previously mentioned friend. Pretty sure he has full-fledged aspergers, so I guess you do too - you've got tell-tale signs of it.

>>69661810
you are right

>>69664648
Do you act like this in real life?

>>69661810
>Spiderland is the pinnacle of rock composition

>>69664697
Like what? If someone argues at me I argue back, yeah. This is real life, by the way, not a dream or some shit.
If some absolute mong comes at me like Mr 30 years old here has then I'm verbally destroying him. I get paid to talk, so really it's a service.

>>69664749
Not him but you are acting like a total sperg. Who cares? It's just the internet. Calm down.

>>69664789
How are you coming to this conclusion? I'm just giving someone who is asking for me to respond a response. I'm nothing but calm, familia. If you think proper English means anger then that's on you.

>>69664858
>How are you coming to this conclusion?
You are riddling all your posts with personal insults when it's not needed.

Why do you act like this?

>>69664888
>personal insults
Where? I can't personally insult a stranger.
The guy argued at me, when I responded he tried to insult me. I'm responding in kind to his posts. That is acting appropriately. Nice trips.
Do you want to maybe stop telling me off for being shitposted at by someone who started an argument, lost and spammed nonsense now? Thanks.

>>69664957
lol

Just stop

>>69665023
Why are you shitposting at me, mate? What's wrong with you?
>I have supposed higher ground by entering a discussion without anything to say
Go back to plebbit, mate.

>>69665053
>if it's something I dont like, it's a shitpost!
What's the real reason you act like this?

>>69665150
>just stop is a proper point in regards to the discussion
>saying t's a shitpost is not true because I say so
if (you) aren't actually lobotomised and think you're an ebin shitposter you could atleast actually be good at shitposting. You're demonstrating universal incompetence, please go away.

>>69665221
>Oh boy an excuse to act like an internet tough guy!
What's the real reason you act like this?

>>69665235
Do you realise that you've resorted to "I was only pretending to be retarded"?
So you have no argument, great. So instead of conceding you try to be a totally rad troll. Very bodacious, truly fantastic. So wild.
Kind of sad to try to save face on an anonymous imageboard like that. Sadder in real life, though. You wouldn't know since you clearly have no ability to communicate properly. Whatever. Thanks for entertaining me with your hilarious lack of competence.

I mean I'm 18 but from what I've gathered most people here are older

I'll take "what is /mu/?" for $600

>>69665349
You're wrong. Half of /mu/ is underage.

>>69665349
Hi I'm 20 wanna be friends

>>69665290
>Do you realise that you've resorted to "I was only pretending to be retarded"?
I didn't. I pointed out you are unnecessarily acting tough for no reason other than posturing.
>So you have no argument
What makes you think we are in an argument?

What's the *real* reason you act like this?