>...who are you? <BR>>Yella, you didn't address any of quest's <BR>>issues. you didn't even answer his <BR>>question regarding your identity. now, if <BR>>he took 3 years to record <BR>>Voodoo, I think it's only polite <BR>>that you take 3 minutes to <BR>>type out your name and explain <BR>>exactly what you do in the <BR>>industry, since you mentioned that you <BR>>are in the field. Quest has <BR>>explained that it took 3 years <BR>>to make "Voodoo". You say Columbia <BR>>says one thing and you were <BR>>in the room...Quest knows Lauryn. Now, <BR>>that to me sounds like conflicting <BR>>stories and the only thing that <BR>>gives weight to your side is <BR>>if we know who you are, <BR>>then we can decide whether you <BR>>are in a position of knowledge. <P>For whose benefit does that serve? I can appreciate your introduction to me, and you have every right to do so, but I enjoy having the luxury of posting in boards with some level of anonymity. It's up to others to make decisions for themselves what constitutes fact or fiction, or whose opinions they can appreciate. "Proving" such things in what amounts to a fan-based message board, IMHO, serves very little purpose.<P>>Because basically, you're saying that Quest <BR>>is wrong and you're almost calling <BR>>the man a liar. He says <BR>>it went down one way, you <BR>>say it went down another way. <BR>>There's only one way it actually <BR>>happened. <P>No I never called him wrong and I never called him a liar. Actually HE responded to MY post. I'm sure he heard what he did, and I know I heard what I did. That's enough for me, and if not's enough for you, I'm sorry.<P>>Last industry person I remember on here <BR>>was the brother who produced "Mic <BR>>Check" for aceyalone (good track, by <BR>>the way). He did the courtesy <BR>>of actually revealing who he is. <BR>>Could you do the same? thanks. <P>I'm sure there are far more "industry people" (whatever that term means) that post in here than you realize. I know of at least three..that's how I learned about this place. I enjoy being able to post with some degree of anonymity, and whether you can respect that or not, that's your issue. <P>I will disclose that there are many different positions in the "industry", and depending on where you come from, your perspective on a matter could be markedly different from the next guy. For example, a musician in a studio would have a far different viewpoint on a matter then, say, a business and legal affairs attorney trying to close a deal or an A&R administrator trying to enforce studio or release timelines. My point of view comes from one of the latter.<P>Now, a quick comment (and this is the last time I'm going to post this here). I like "Voodoo", but I'm not doing cartwheels about it. But art is meant to be appreciated, criticized, dissected, adored, hated, whatever. If an artist cannot take constructive criticism about a project without responding in the vein of "you don't know what you are talking about" or "defend your statements", then perhaps that musician should just make music in a vaccum, in his garage and never release it to the general public. It's clear that a musician who worked very closely on a project has a vested interest in seeing it do well and in hearing it praised, and might be a little too close to his baby to hear what that it might not be the prettiest one on the block.<P>Keep making good music. <P>Peace.