More respect for Tapers wishes

Originally posted by loftarasa:[..]

But if there are already 2 sources for a concert, would there really be a need to break taper's wishes by uploading their (then 3rd source) as MP3, too?

Originally posted by loftarasa:[..]

But if there are already 2 sources for a concert, would there really be a need to break taper's wishes by uploading their (then 3rd source) as MP3, too?

Originally posted by djrlewis:[..]

It's absolutely his right, but it doesn't endear you to folk when you brag about having something they can't have; smacks of being back in the school playground.

Originally posted by djrlewis:[..]

I see your point. I think on the most recent occasion that reignited this debate, it was felt the source offered an entirely different listening experience to those previously shared and therefore was worthy of addition. Had it been a third (or fourth) etc 3-star audience recording, we probably wouldn't have bothered had such a request been made.

Originally posted by djrlewis:We should get Vanquish here to post his definition of opinion just to make everyone clear.

At the end of the day we're debating the sharing of a recording of a u2 concert. It's not like we're reforming child tax benefits or something...

Originally posted by zooTV4all:[..]

Relax man, I was joking.

Originally posted by yeah:[..]

http://www.u2start.com/shows/1562/#audio

1st source (no mp3 clause): 3 stars
2nd source (no mp3 clause) added a day later: 2,5 stars.

Originally posted by djrlewis:[..]

Chris is right, I meant to quote the post he made ref JulienLossless; the mobile site only quotes the last post made and I was too slow as Chris had posted again before I got mine online.