skilletnomicrowave said:

Militant said:

It is NOT nonsense.

1) Prince also flew this same person to his SXSW show.

2) Prince then went on to employ this person as a tour guide at Paisley Park when he was alive.

So with all due respect, if you think that person doesn't know what emails came from Paisley when he literally fucking worked there, then there's nothing else I can say about that.

By the way - it's not unprecedented. Do you know how Prince decided he wanted to release "Live Out Loud"? Go look it up.

TROLL - SNIP ~OF4S

unique said:

SquirrelMeat said:

I did receive an unreleased track from 'NPG2000' in 2003. I don't know sor sure it was P, but 'they' certainly implied they were (or seriously connected).

I remember just before the start of the London hitn run shows you told me the press were given the dates of the upcoming shows, yet about 24 hours later whilst talking to his manager face to face I found that not to be true and they arranged gigs at last minute including kings place being booked the day of the shows. Clearly some people have been telling others things that aren't true and Chinese whispers start

I don't remember our specific conversation, but I remember an early list doing the rounds. I think Royal Albert Hall was one on it. Weren't we just sharing what we were hearing? It had Ronnie Scott's on it, that I rememeber. I've always taken anything from P's management with a pinch of salt, as they were proved wrong on many occasions (e.g. 1986, 1987, 1988, 1990, 1991, 1998, 2007).

Kiran stated at the press launch that they were playing 'iconic venues' and Ronnie Scott's was mentioned up front. But the venue said it would not happen. Of course it did, which means P's management did have a list but were either flying by the seat of their pants, or the venue was happy to lie.

Kings Place was clearly a last minute, and its hardly an 'iconic venue'.

I'm not sure what this has in regard to the context of outtakes?

unique said:

Militant said:

It is NOT nonsense.

1) Prince also flew this same person to his SXSW show.

2) Prince then went on to employ this person as a tour guide at Paisley Park when he was alive.

So with all due respect, if you think that person doesn't know what emails came from Paisley when he literally fucking worked there, then there's nothing else I can say about that.

By the way - it's not unprecedented. Do you know how Prince decided he wanted to release "Live Out Loud"? Go look it up.

I know the person you refer to told people he got things from prince when he really got them from someone I know was not prince. He would tell various things to girls to try and press them. Just for clarification, he literally lied to people intentionally. He knew what he was given did not come from prince. It wasn't given by email either. He could have got something genuinely from prince but similar to him working at pp I would imagine another employee actually did the recruitment. I think it was only for a very short period of a few days at most. So whilst it's possibly he got something from prince, the fact is he claimed to have got things from prince that definitely did not and he knew that. I wouldn't say someone lied unless I was certain. Otherwise I'd word things differently. I know he told someone a free boot release was something he got from prince for example. They may have lied to you too.

That's interesting.

I struggle to see why he'd lie to me though - there's no motive. I've always gotten along well with him and I am not sure why he would lie to me directly when there's nothing to gain by doing so.


And given that we know he was given "Live Out Loud" directly from P (whether that was via Trevor or Joshua) then you can see how it's not a stretch - plus the fact he was working at Paisley etc etc.


I mean, I don't particularly care either way - it doesn't affect my life at all. Truth is out there, I guess.........

skilletnomicrowave said:

Militant said:

It is NOT nonsense.

1) Prince also flew this same person to his SXSW show.

2) Prince then went on to employ this person as a tour guide at Paisley Park when he was alive.

So with all due respect, if you think that person doesn't know what emails came from Paisley when he literally fucking worked there, then there's nothing else I can say about that.

By the way - it's not unprecedented. Do you know how Prince decided he wanted to release "Live Out Loud"? Go look it up.

TROLL - SNIP ~OF4S

Why would I get embarrased? I swear all the time. You make no sense. Sorry - you make no god damn motherfucking sense

Militant said:

skilletnomicrowave said:

Militant said:

Why would I get embarrased? I swear all the time. You make no sense. Sorry - you make no god damn motherfucking sense

TROLL
-SNIP -Of4S

Not here to defend Militant (he's more than capable of doing that), but your message seems to carry baggage.

Militant did respond directly to Oracle.

What 'respect' do you think is due and why?

SquirrelMeat said:

skilletnomicrowave said:

SquirrelMeat said:

Not here to defend Militant (he's more than capable of doing that), but your message seems to carry baggage.

Militant did respond directly to Oracle.

What 'respect' do you think is due and why?

SNIP TROLL POST

-OF4$

I'm only interested in the fact that this is a discussional thead and your posts seem very confrontational and I'm not sure why.

I'm not defending anyone, I only 'piped up' because that how forums work. Comment..cause and effect.

Of course, I don't know you, and you don't know me, so context can be misplaced, but by saying banning you would 'do you a favour', I have to ask, why are you here in the first place?

Yeah, I know what's going on here, and it doesn't take Einstein to figure out why you popped up out of nowhere to take immature pot-shots. And I'm the child. Ha. Grab yourself an iron and draw a letter Y on it. The idea that I'd be concerned about what an anonymous person on the internet thinks, you might want to listen to Quincy and check your ego at the door.

If you want to close your account so badly, why don't you go ahead and do it yourself? Nobody forced you to post.

Militant said:

unique said:

Militant said:

I know the person you refer to told people he got things from prince when he really got them from someone I know was not prince. He would tell various things to girls to try and press them. Just for clarification, he literally lied to people intentionally. He knew what he was given did not come from prince. It wasn't given by email either. He could have got something genuinely from prince but similar to him working at pp I would imagine another employee actually did the recruitment. I think it was only for a very short period of a few days at most. So whilst it's possibly he got something from prince, the fact is he claimed to have got things from prince that definitely did not and he knew that. I wouldn't say someone lied unless I was certain. Otherwise I'd word things differently. I know he told someone a free boot release was something he got from prince for example. They may have lied to you too.

That's interesting.

I struggle to see why he'd lie to me though - there's no motive. I've always gotten along well with him and I am not sure why he would lie to me directly when there's nothing to gain by doing so.


And given that we know he was given "Live Out Loud" directly from P (whether that was via Trevor or Joshua) then you can see how it's not a stretch - plus the fact he was working at Paisley etc etc.


I mean, I don't particularly care either way - it doesn't affect my life at all. Truth is out there, I guess.........

he's just a young guy and caught up in the excitement of youth and the fringes of being close to a famous person, and clearly an attention seeking showoff (see the youtube videos he made after his PP visits for example), and clearly seeking female attention. as to why he would do that with other guys, i'm no psychologist, but you can see from other individuals who post here that they post things that simply aren't true, as is discovered later. in some cases it may be trolling or a wind up, but i wouldn't say that was the reason here. the problem is people believing the lies and then retelling it in such a way that the information comes out of the mouth of someone who others may believe, and they start accepting second hand lies as fact

there's a small amount of other peopple who may have geniunely got someone once or twice and then went on to allude they have a continuing relationship and/or got much more. typically they will make long winded or frequent posts and youtube videos about it, which would suggest attention seeking as the reasons

SquirrelMeat said:

unique said:

SquirrelMeat said: I remember just before the start of the London hitn run shows you told me the press were given the dates of the upcoming shows, yet about 24 hours later whilst talking to his manager face to face I found that not to be true and they arranged gigs at last minute including kings place being booked the day of the shows. Clearly some people have been telling others things that aren't true and Chinese whispers start

I don't remember our specific conversation, but I remember an early list doing the rounds. I think Royal Albert Hall was one on it. Weren't we just sharing what we were hearing? It had Ronnie Scott's on it, that I rememeber. I've always taken anything from P's management with a pinch of salt, as they were proved wrong on many occasions (e.g. 1986, 1987, 1988, 1990, 1991, 1998, 2007).

Kiran stated at the press launch that they were playing 'iconic venues' and Ronnie Scott's was mentioned up front. But the venue said it would not happen. Of course it did, which means P's management did have a list but were either flying by the seat of their pants, or the venue was happy to lie.

Kings Place was clearly a last minute, and its hardly an 'iconic venue'.

I'm not sure what this has in regard to the context of outtakes?

the point being that someone can lie to another, and that lie is passed to someone else, and they can be convinced it's the truth, yet simply regurgitating lies, and backing up such lies because they had an element of trust from the person who told them

so in this case the person being referred to as having received something, is someone who has clearly lied before, so any other claims should be taken with a pinch of salt. if someone has lied about something before and i knew about it, i wouldn't trust what they say to be true afterwards

Jesus...some P fans never change!

Anyway..back in the day P I think used to share recordings with Controversey fan club members. I heard this directly from Eileen Murton herself..wayyyyyyyy back when.

Well censorship is alive and well in this forum, what with the various snips and the deleted thread about ex-Org members.

Anyway, Prince was always very protective of his music, which makes the likelihood of him purposely putting unreleased music out there extremely unlikely, let's face it.

meh it was kind of not necessary

[Edited 8/5/17 17:29pm]

unique said:

SquirrelMeat said:

I don't remember our specific conversation, but I remember an early list doing the rounds. I think Royal Albert Hall was one on it. Weren't we just sharing what we were hearing? It had Ronnie Scott's on it, that I rememeber. I've always taken anything from P's management with a pinch of salt, as they were proved wrong on many occasions (e.g. 1986, 1987, 1988, 1990, 1991, 1998, 2007).

Kiran stated at the press launch that they were playing 'iconic venues' and Ronnie Scott's was mentioned up front. But the venue said it would not happen. Of course it did, which means P's management did have a list but were either flying by the seat of their pants, or the venue was happy to lie.

Kings Place was clearly a last minute, and its hardly an 'iconic venue'.

I'm not sure what this has in regard to the context of outtakes?

the point being that someone can lie to another, and that lie is passed to someone else, and they can be convinced it's the truth, yet simply regurgitating lies, and backing up such lies because they had an element of trust from the person who told them

so in this case the person being referred to as having received something, is someone who has clearly lied before, so any other claims should be taken with a pinch of salt. if someone has lied about something before and i knew about it, i wouldn't trust what they say to be true afterwards

I think I get what you mean. Problem is (or was back in the day), that hearsay, at least in the Prince universal, was sometimes useful. The lack of official information always led to some form of speculation, some later proving more factual than others.

For me personally, 'gossip' led to me attending some excellent aftershows, but also led me to dead ends in equal measure.