Jack White bans phones at gigs for “100% human experience”

Post by flycaliguy » Thu, Jan 25, 2018, 11:00 PM UTC

bonesss wrote: post #156

donretag wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many of us old enough remember that cameras were often banned from venues, even non professional ones. It wasn't until camera enabled phones became popular that this rule was dropped. I have no idea why someone would want to watch a performance from behind a screen.

Why do people drop buttloads of money getting to the Grand Canyon and then spend their time behind a viewfinder taking landscape pictures that are infinitely worse than you'll find online or purchased from pros, ensuring they spend less (and sometimes no), time enjoying the scenery and environment?

Post by ballenf » Thu, Jan 25, 2018, 11:03 PM UTC

gknoy wrote: post #268

icebraining wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

needs to call you to escape a dangerous situation Can you describe a scenario for me? Because I'm having a very hard time imagining one where the teenager is immediate peril (otherwise they could just unlock the phone in the next room) yet the best person to help them is not in the building. Maybe it's unfair, but it just sounds like helicopter parenting to me.

Let's imagine that my child is at a party or other social engagement and they want deniable reason to escape. [0] There may be excessive peer pressure, illegal activity, or any other pre-arranged reason they may need to bail on something without incurring the loss of face that could be socially devastating. If I have my phone, they can text me with some pre-arranged message ("x"), and I will feign an emergency and ge…

Post by mike741 » Thu, Jan 25, 2018, 11:04 PM UTC

nxsynonym wrote: post #8

monksy wrote: post #6

That's great for them. But I won't be buying a ticket for any of his shows. After seeing what happened at the bataclan that makes this a stupid and dangerous idea.

how exactly would having your cell phone handy prevent another bataclan?

Post by microtherion » Thu, Jan 25, 2018, 11:05 PM UTC

maxehmookau wrote: post #108

davb wrote: post #87

I experienced the Yondr phone prison last night for the first time (at a Chris Rock show). While I detest people being disruptive with their phones, I don’t think this is the right solution. From a practical standpoint, it took a lot longer to get into and out of the venue when phones had to be locked up. Checking your phone when you pop out to the toilet meant waiting in a queue to have your phone unlocked, and bein…

I agree, the safety aspects of this are shocking and the 'be free of phones' puritanism is a bit dull. A _very_ strict code of conduct for attendees is something that can (and does) work. Jazz pianist, Keith Jarrett has been known to stop his 4-hour long improvisation sessions in some of the world's most prestigous venues mid-flow to dress down an attendee trying to film him. People don't make that mistake twice. htt…

Post by blattimwind » Thu, Jan 25, 2018, 11:08 PM UTC

ccallebs wrote: post #333

whatyoucantsay wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's interesting they didn't have confidence in the babysitter's ability to take care of you for an evening but still chose to hire them and then monitored them via payphone. Most times when babysitters are hired, now or a generation ago, they're trusted to make reasonable decisions so the parents don't have to worry.

> It's interesting they didn't have confidence in the babysitter's ability to take care of you for an evening but still chose to hire them and then monitored them via payphone. No one questioned the babysitter's competence. They're your children -- you're going to want to call and check to see how things are going.