bword Posted October 26, 2009 Share Posted October 26, 2009 Looks like my post got deleted. Not surprizing at all. Gibson obviously promotes censorship as well. What they obviously don't promote is keeping their hand out of the cookie jar and leaving Jimi's legacy be. Sorry, but Jimi preferred Fender Strats. There's not much you can do. The whole world recognizes this fact and could not be fooled by your ridiculous stunt. No matter how many post or product release pages you delete you cannot erase history and I find it very disturbing that you are trying to do so. For any of those unaware...gibson announced a low-end "hendrix" strat copy. After all the backlash received from the community they deleted all sources mentioning the guitar as well as user comments and forum posts - including the one I wrote last week. This goes to show that there are still many of those in the world with one care - money. They will even delete history in order to keep their money and avoid embarassment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted October 26, 2009 Share Posted October 26, 2009 Looks like my post got deleted. Not surprizing at all. Gibson obviously promotes censorship as well. What they obviously don't promote is keeping their hand out of the cookie jar and leaving Jimi's legacy be. Sorry' date=' but Jimi preferred Fender Strats. There's not much you can do. The whole world recognizes this fact and could not be fooled by your ridi****us stunt. No matter how many post or product release pages you delete you cannot erase history and I find it very disturbing that you are trying to do so. For any of those unaware...gibson announced a low-end "hendrix" strat copy. After all the backlash received from the community they deleted all sources mentioning the guitar as well as user comments and forum posts - including the one I wrote last week. This goes to show that there are still many of those in the world with one care - money. They will even delete history in order to keep their money and avoid embarassment.[/quote'] ..A signature SG Custom would have been better,IMHO :- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bword Posted October 26, 2009 Author Share Posted October 26, 2009 lol. of course it would've. Jimi actually played gibson guitars...this is why I find it so puzzling as to why they thought it would be a good idea to make a strat copy. What if Fender made a Les Paul copy? I'll tell you - Gibson would try to sue them. It is completely obvious that this was nothing more than an effort to make money off of Jimi's legacy. nothing more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Rock Posted October 26, 2009 Share Posted October 26, 2009 It is completely obvious that this was nothing more than an effort to make money off of Jimi's legacy. nothing more. ALL signature models are build to make money... In fact, ALL guitars are build to make money!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bword Posted October 26, 2009 Author Share Posted October 26, 2009 Fair enough. You are correct - most companies' primary goal is to make money. I could argue that ALL guitars are not built to make money but that would be irrelevant. What I actually said was "It is completely obvious that this was nothing more than an effort to make money off of Jimi's legacy". Regardless, I don't see how anyone could view this stunt as anything but absurd. Gibson making a Hendrix signature strat copy....really? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bword Posted October 26, 2009 Author Share Posted October 26, 2009 Whoa now. I don't feel that I am beating a dead horse. I feel that this subject should be discussed and Gibson should be held accountable. As a Gibson customer and member of the public I feel I have the right to voice my opinions. I have not broken any forum rules. I find it slightly pathetic that Gibson would feel the need to delete my posts here. Just like they tried to delete all mentions of this guitar line and pretend it never happened in order to save face. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bword Posted October 26, 2009 Author Share Posted October 26, 2009 Not one of these guys. So if anyone here mentioned something already discussed I assume it is "beating a dead horse"? I'm not here to speak to you nor do I care to hear your opinion on the semantics of posting a topic on this forum. I have posted my topic to share my opinions. I tried finding a thread about this topic and could not find one so I started this one. I assume you are just as rude to someone who posts something on any topic that has already been discussed...but I doubt it. I understand that most moderators feel the need to assert authority publically though I feel in this case it was rather unnecessary. Having said that, as you know, you are free to voice your opinions on the matter but please refrain from mocking me (whoa) and/or trying to one-up me. Such things are useless. Now back to the issue. Isn't it absolutely ridiculous? How can anyone logically justify such an action. I truly hope Fender releases a Zakk Wylde Les Paul copy with Zakk's wife after he's gone. - If in fact he proves to be a mere mortal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.