MJ was and still is the greatest performer/entertainer of all time

Ashlee Simpson was pretty popular for about a year, where is she now? Can you name one of her songs?Nuck81

[QUOTE="kingkong0124"]Funky_Llama

It does. If nobody listens to MJ's music, it won't be remember. That's my entire point. Iron Maiden will be remembered and enjoyed for much longer than MJ. SF_KiLLaMaN

You don't think your perspective is a little skewed here? Now I'm not gonna talk down on Iron Maiden because I know next to nothing about them, and I'm sure plenty of people like their stuff. But do you REALLY think more people listen to this band's music than Michael Jackson's music? You REALLY think they will be remembered and enjoyed MUCH longer than MJ? You really think they have a larger influence than Michael Jackson?

If you truly believe that-and if you beleive it from a global, not personal perspective- then you are beyond reasonable discussion.

[QUOTE="Nuck81"]This thread is about MJ being the greatest performer/entertainer of all time. Historical significance is one of the most important factors.Funky_Llama

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="kingkong0124"]kingkong0124

i remember when i was in kingkongs sig oh the FUN WE'VE HADMrPraline

[QUOTE="SF_KiLLaMaN"]It does. If nobody listens to MJ's music, it won't be remember. That's my entire point. Iron Maiden will be remembered and enjoyed for much longer than MJ. sayyy-gaa

You don't think your perspective is a little skewed here? Now I'm not gonna talk down on Iron Maiden because I know next to nothing about them, and I'm sure plenty of people like their stuff. But do you REALLY think more people listen to this band's music than Michael Jackson's music? You REALLY think they will be remembered and enjoyed MUCH longer than MJ? You really think they have a larger influence than Michael Jackson?

If you truly believe that-and if you beleive it from a global, not personal perspective- then you are beyond reasonable discussion.

[QUOTE="Nuck81"]Ashlee Simpson was pretty popular for about a year, where is she now? Can you name one of her songs?MrPraline

So someone who has a historical legacy of being a great entertainer and performer, who was cited by most artists today as a huge source of inspiration, doesn't have any relevance to being the Greatest Performer OF ALL TIME?Nuck81

[QUOTE="sayyy-gaa"]

[QUOTE="SF_KiLLaMaN"]It does. If nobody listens to MJ's music, it won't be remember. That's my entire point. Iron Maiden will be remembered and enjoyed for much longer than MJ. SF_KiLLaMaN

You don't think your perspective is a little skewed here? Now I'm not gonna talk down on Iron Maiden because I know next to nothing about them, and I'm sure plenty of people like their stuff. But do you REALLY think more people listen to this band's music than Michael Jackson's music? You REALLY think they will be remembered and enjoyed MUCH longer than MJ? You really think they have a larger influence than Michael Jackson?

If you truly believe that-and if you beleive it from a global, not personal perspective- then you are beyond reasonable discussion.

That's not what this thread is about. This thread is about Michael Jackson being the greatest performer OF ALL TIME. Which would include historical impact and significance.Nuck81

You seem to be confusedNuck81

[QUOTE="SF_KiLLaMaN"]

[QUOTE="sayyy-gaa"]

You don't think your perspective is a little skewed here? Now I'm not gonna talk down on Iron Maiden because I know next to nothing about them, and I'm sure plenty of people like their stuff. But do you REALLY think more people listen to this band's music than Michael Jackson's music? You REALLY think they will be remembered and enjoyed MUCH longer than MJ? You really think they have a larger influence than Michael Jackson?

If you truly believe that-and if you beleive it from a global, not personal perspective- then you are beyond reasonable discussion.

Nuck81

[QUOTE="Nuck81"]So someone who has a historical legacy of being a great entertainer and performer, who was cited by most artists today as a huge source of inspiration, doesn't have any relevance to being the Greatest Performer OF ALL TIME?Funky_Llama

[QUOTE="SF_KiLLaMaN"]

[QUOTE="sayyy-gaa"]

You don't think your perspective is a little skewed here? Now I'm not gonna talk down on Iron Maiden because I know next to nothing about them, and I'm sure plenty of people like their stuff. But do you REALLY think more people listen to this band's music than Michael Jackson's music? You REALLY think they will be remembered and enjoyed MUCH longer than MJ? You really think they have a larger influence than Michael Jackson?

If you truly believe that-and if you beleive it from a global, not personal perspective- then you are beyond reasonable discussion.

Nuck81

I'd guess you are around 14-15. Nuck81

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"] smh thriller man, thrillerMrPraline

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]

[QUOTE="Nuck81"]So someone who has a historical legacy of being a great entertainer and performer, who was cited by most artists today as a huge source of inspiration, doesn't have any relevance to being the Greatest Performer OF ALL TIME?Nuck81

[QUOTE="Nuck81"][QUOTE="SF_KiLLaMaN"] Now you putting words into my mouth. Yes, I do believe they will be remembered longer than MJ. I never said anything about impact nor did I ever say more people listtened to them than MJ, I said more young people do, and that's all that matter when it comes to how long someone will be remembered. If nobody listens to it in the future, it won't be remembered.MrPraline

[QUOTE="Nuck81"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]Your sentence is rather ungrammatical, but if you were trying to ask me if I'm saying that whether someone has a historical legacy of being considered a great entertainer and performer and is cited by most artists today as a huge source of inspiration is irrelevant to whether they are the (drumroll) Greatest Performer OF ALL TIME, the answer is yes.

Funky_Llama

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]

[QUOTE="Nuck81"] Than you're rather ignorant. Honest question. How old are you? I'd guess you are around 14-15. Which would make a lot of sense as to why you don't understand the point of the thread.Nuck81

[QUOTE="Nuck81"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]>responds to counterargument to his central thesis with 'then you're rather ignorant' and a rhetorical question about poster's age
>thinks he's atop some kind of intellectual high ground
oh deary deary me look what you've gone and done nowFunky_Llama

[QUOTE="Nuck81"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]lol I know why you asked my age, and it wasn't that. I wasn't born yesterday (and no, that wasn't my answer). Do you actually have any kind of response to my counterargument to your claim that historical legacy is relevant?Funky_Llama

You said History doesn't matter, because when you count Historical impact and legacy it proves your opinion wrong.

This thread is about history, his historical impact matters.

Everyone else has figured this out but you. So instead of contributing to the topic you keep getting mad, throwing strawmen, and calling people names.

Are you LJ's alternate account? You act just like him.

So, what does that have to do with quality? Popular opinion is a joke anyway.MrPraline

ok, here is my problem with your point. First off, the thread is about MJ being the greatest performer/entertainer of all time.

Now, people that are arguing against this statement are arguing with moving targets and using no data outside of their own opinions to back their argument.

Some points made by people in the dissenting opinion include:

1. Popularity doesn't count - in a world where opinions vary widely and everyone is entitled to them, surely general consensus counts for something.

2. Critical acclaim means nothing - when it has been argued that several widely recognized and accomplished musicians/performers cite MJ as the greatest performer of all time, dissenters say that their respected opinion means nothing.

3. Influence doesn't matter - when it has been argued that Michael Jackson has had an undeniable and great influence on music, that has also been disregarded.

4. Objective data doesn't matter - when sales numbers, awards, and tangible cultural impact are presented that is also said not to matter (similar to point one).

--------------------------------

My question to those who have a dissenting opinion in this thread is this: Besides your own highly exalted opinion, what DOES matter when discussing who is the greatest performer/entertainer of all time?

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="Nuck81"] That's exactly why I asked your age. And yes I have, read the thread.Nuck81

[QUOTE="Nuck81"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]Your - ahem - 'response' was: 'That's not what this thread is about. This thread is about Michael Jackson being the greatest performer OF ALL TIME. Which would include historical impact and significance.' So you think that flatly contradicting someone is a counterargument, do you? Daft f*ck.Funky_Llama

Someone being the greatest performer is completely subjective though. SF_KiLLaMaN

EUREKA...we are making progress. One person's opinion is subjective I will grant you. But how do you argue in a forum FULL of differing opinions who is or isn't the greatest performer of all time?

I was going to type my opinion on that question but it I don't want to taint your response. Again, I honestly ask, how can you intelligently debate among [fairly] reasonable people who is the greatest performer of all time, trying to leave biases out of it?

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]

[QUOTE="Nuck81"] This thread is about Michael Jackson being the greatest performer of all time, or phrased differently the greatest performer in HISTORY You said History doesn't matter, because when you count Historical impact and legacy it proves your opinion wrong. This thread is about history, his historical impact matters. Everyone else has figured this out but you. So instead of contributing to the topic keep getting mad, throwing strawmen, and calling people names. Are you LJ's alternate account? You act just like him.Nuck81

[QUOTE="Nuck81"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]lmao
YOU SEE THE THREAD TITLE HAS THE WORD 'HISTORY' IN IT AND I ALSO USED THE WORD 'HISTORY', THEREFORE WHAT I SAID WAS- no, f*ckwad.
By analogy - the tallest man in history was Robert Wadlow. Perhaps some other guy who wasn't quite as tall had a larger historical impact. That doesn't make any difference whatsoever.

Funky_Llama

Your opinion of MJ is irrelevant to his status of being the greatest performer of all time. His historical legacy is great enough, and he is regarded by enough people to be the greatest performer of all time, that he IS consdered the greatest performer of all time. Not only by general consensus opinion. But also by the vast majority of objective facts and statistics when you count awards, sales, and influence on the music industry itself.

Here is an analogy for you, since they seem to help you understand. If your first grade class is voting on which cookie is best, and chocolate chip receives the most votes than Chocolate Chip is regarded as the best Cookie. You may have voted for Pink Sprinkles cookie, but you can't simply disregard the results of the vote because you like pink sprinkles better than chocolate chip.

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]

[QUOTE="Nuck81"] I've already answered that argument. Read the thread.Nuck81

Your opinion of MJ is irrelevant to his status of being the greatest performer of all time. His historical legacy is great enough, and he is regarded by enough people to be the greatest performer of all time, that he IS consdered the greatest performer of all time. Not only by general consensus opinion. But also by the vast majority of objective facts and statistics when you count awards, sales, and influence on the music industry itself.

Here is an analogy for you, since they seem to help you understand. If your first grade class is voting on which cookie is best, and chocolate chip receives the most votes than Chocolate Chip is regarded as the best Cookie. You may have voted for Pink Sprinkles cookie, but you can't simply disregard the results of the vote because you like pink sprinkles better than chocolate chip.

[QUOTE="Nuck81"]

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]Er, no you haven't because I hadn't even made that argument until then? You're just pulling sh*t out of your arse now. More so than before, I mean.

Funky_Llama

Your opinion of MJ is irrelevant to his status of being the greatest performer of all time. His historical legacy is great enough, and he is regarded by enough people to be the greatest performer of all time, that he IS consdered the greatest performer of all time. Not only by general consensus opinion. But also by the vast majority of objective facts and statistics when you count awards, sales, and influence on the music industry itself.

Here is an analogy for you, since they seem to help you understand. If your first grade class is voting on which cookie is best, and chocolate chip receives the most votes than Chocolate Chip is regarded as the best Cookie. You may have voted for Pink Sprinkles cookie, but you can't simply disregard the results of the vote because you like pink sprinkles better than chocolate chip.

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="Nuck81"] ugh, one last time.

Your opinion of MJ is irrelevant to his status of being the greatest performer of all time. His historical legacy is great enough, and he is regarded by enough people to be the greatest performer of all time, that he IS consdered the greatest performer of all time. Not only by general consensus opinion. But also by the vast majority of objective facts and statistics when you count awards, sales, and influence on the music industry itself.

Here is an analogy for you, since they seem to help you understand. If your first grade class is voting on which cookie is best, and chocolate chip receives the most votes than Chocolate Chip is regarded as the best Cookie. You may have voted for Pink Sprinkles cookie, but you can't simply disregard the results of the vote because you like pink sprinkles better than chocolate chip.

Nuck81

[QUOTE="Nuck81"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]no, still the same old argument from 2 pages back that you're trying really hard to avoid actually responding to for some reason ;DFunky_Llama

You're done.

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="Nuck81"] The one that was shown to be irrelevant by not only me but other posters as well? Which is why the other posters on your side have moved on, but you are still clinging desperately to save face. I ask you again to read the thread over. Maybe you'll figure it out.Nuck81

You're done.