Personal tools
The TMBG Knowledge Base

Archived Main Page Talk (Page 3)

From This Might Be A Wiki
Current Discussion | Archived Main Page Talk (Page 4) | Archived Main Page Talk (Page 3)
Archived Main Page Talk (Page 2) | Archived Main Page Talk (Page 1)

Contents

[edit] new Bed-Bed-Bed-ish releases? no?

On the 2005 page, there was something indicating that news had arisen about "Two more book projects with Simon and Schuster" being in the works. And a look back to the mailing list archive shows this: 

TMBG is also happy to announce we will be creating two more book-and-CD sets for Simon & Schuster (the fine publishers who brought you "Bed, Bed, Bed"). We'll embark on the first new book this fall while I'm working nights in NYC in the extended run of the off-Broadway production of "People Are Wrong!" at the Vineyard Theater. It's too soon to announce the titles, but this next one will definitely be for young adults, or really old kids.

Anyone know whatever came of that. To my knowledge, I don't think Simon & Schuster are with Disney, so I don't think they were talking about Here Come The ABCs (unless they ditched S&S for Disney Sound).

[edit] This Just In

On my websites bashing move, I noticed a new news item on http://tmbg.com -
COMING IN A WHILE: TMBG is contributing a song to CG feature Coraline and A Day for Wilbur Robinson, as well as the soundtrack for an animated short entitled Moongirl.
Woo! - Whirrrlwind (Woosh!) 09:33, 30 Apr 2006 (CDT)

I found more info on moongirl here. Just click on "Projects"; "Moongirl". Looks sweet! -AtionSong 12:26, 30 Apr 2006 (CDT)
Oh, and Coraline too. -12:27, 30 Apr 2006 (CDT)

Awesome...has anyone read the books? Neil Gaiman is fantastic, and Dave McKean is my favorite artist of all time. I read somewhere that the Magnetic Fields were doing some music for Coraline as well; if TMBG and the Magnetic Fields got together I think I'd just die. --Martorano

Ha-ha, ironic... I just read Coraline last year for a school project (I had to "become" her in a speech)... I hope the song (and the movie!) is any good. =) Coraline is fantastic, a TMBG-esque book. Y'know, their whole darker bits of songs... Wow, cool.--Lemita 18:00, 2 May 2006 (CDT)
I know it makes me an ass for pointing it out, but nothing about that is ironic. It's just coincidental. Sorry, pet peeve of mine... -Cronny

[edit] arbitrary song meanings

This might sound somewhat stupid, but don't you think that perhaps the meaning of the songs is something that we can't know because they're way too personal, or because the songs only mean something if we establish our own meanings for them? What if they don't have any meaning at all and we're supposed to fill in the blanks? Or what if there are no blanks to be filled, that they are meaningless?


Well, duh. ~scottus0

[edit] Conservative Fans

Is anyone else here a conservative TMBG fan?

I am. ~Drew
Socially conservative or economically conservative? --Martorano
If you mean socially, you probably didn't like what they said during Why Does The Sun Shine? at one of their recent concerts: "At a Seattle concert (Nov. 7, 2005) at the Moore theater, Flansburgh instead said 'The heat and light from the sun are caused by the nuclear reaction between a failed foreign policy, a failed domestic policy, and a failed presidency.'" -Cronny
That's brilliant! How long do you think the song would be if he listed everything the president has completely bungled? You'd need an intermission. --Martorano
God what I wouldn't have given to be there... I hope they say that when I see them, which will hopefully be soon, but who knows? -Cronny

It's hard to be a conservative TMBG fan, since at least one of them is a Liberal and most of thier fans are too.

He said that at the St. Louis show 5/6/06 as well- I freaked.
I don't know how hard it would to still be a fan- I love Morrissey, but I'm not a vegetarian. I guess the in-your-face liberalism would get old really fast though. --Martorano
I don't know how "in-your-face" it is. Aside from the MoveOn.org CD and this new version of The Sun, there's not much else. -Cronny
That's true, Flans isn't exactly Al Franken, ha ha. --Martorano
Yar. - Doug the Aquacell Guy 09:51, 23 May 2006 (CDT)

Maybe you guys are right. I probably shouldn't focus on political opinions of bands I like.

Hahaha! I was the one who put that Seattle concert note there. I downloaded that show and HAD to share it with everyone! By the way, I'm pretty liberal. You should hear the Johns RIPPING on Bush throughout the concert. Maybe because They knew they were in the Liberal Left Coast, because the audience loved it, too. We don't like our Bush up here in the Pacific Northwest. Also, Call Connected Thru the NSA is pretty awesome, too. I wrote the lyrics up on the board of my Humanities class and my instructer liked it so much she kept it up for a week! HA!

BTW, Here's a little transcript of said ripping:

Linnell: Remeber back when we were Republicans? Wasn't that crazy?
Flans: Yeah
Linnell: I was like "This war is gonna be grreat! It's gonna be GRREAT!"
Flans: I give it three weeks max. Three weeks. They got no idea. Yeah, it's a mess....Alright the pundit part's over.
--tehbagel ( o ) 09:31, 14 May 2006 (CDT)


Can I ask what you guys don't like about George W. Bush? Between this and hearing about them being jerks to a fan, I find it hard to listen to the music.

Do you really want to open up this can of worms? Here is just a short list of complaints I have about the current administration: 1. The gradual reduction of freedoms in the name of "preventing terrorism". The truth is, none of us are really safer. 2. There have been accusations of trying to find the source of leaks (NSA story). Why would the government do this unless it had something to hide? 3. What people don't realise is that our government is supposed to be working for us, we appoint them to protect our best interests, and I feel the government is moving alarmingly quick to totalitarian mode. 4. The rich are getting richer, and the poor are getting poorer. This administration is in the back pocket of big businesses, so much so that the average American is well aware of and considers it normal. This is an atrocity. 5. I believe that George Bush has committed treason against his country, and continues to lie to us. The fact that he isn't behind bars for the death of thousands of soldiers troubles me. 6. As Benjamin Franklin said, "Those who are willing to trade freedom for safety do not deserve either."

As soon as I have the required work experience, I'm moving to Canada. America is quickly moving toward a dictatorship. Did you hear about Bush talking about why his brother Jeb would be a good successor? Can you say "monarchy"?--tehbagel ( o ) 15:00, 19 May 2006 (CDT)

I wonder if there are liberal Alan Jackson fans? Or liberal Toby Keith fans? Can you be a fan of Eminem and not be a homophobe? Can you like Bob Marley and not smoke pot? I think this is an interesting discussion. And tehbagel has only skimmed the surface of what is drastically wrong with the current administration. What about Katrina? What about the constitutional admendment banning gay marriage? The erosion of church and state, the castration of life-saving scientific research involving stem cells? I hope that there are a lot of non-Americans on this wiki, because I want you guys to know a lot of people in this country feel the same way about Dubya that you do. I'm not a fan of the Democrats, either (I'm a Libertarian), but if we don't start seeing the tide change a little bit I'm going to write my own protest album. -Martorano
I don't want to get into trouble on here, because like everyone else here, I love TMBG, so I don't want to make enemies. But could someone explain to me (briefly) exactly how they think the separation of church and state is being messed up? Also, George W. Bush is a conservative, so you have to expect him to support conservative political policies--like banning gay marriage and stopping stem cell research. So saying that his support of these policies are examples of what's "drastically wrong with the current administration" is like me saying that support of legalized abortion is an example of what was "drastically wrong with former administrations." Sure, that may be my opinion, but supporting abortion is a liberal policy, so it should be expected of liberal administrations. So while someone may think that Bush's conservative policies are examples of things wrong with the world, that's just that person's opinion. And as much as someone may hate those policies, there are a lot of people who support them, and Bush's support of them shouldn't come to anyone as some kind of outrageously unexpected surprise. Some of the other points brought up above may seem a bit more grey, but does everyone at least see my point?
So with that said, I have to now second the idea that this is a can of worms we may not want to spend too much time on. Some people love Bush and some people hate him. But we all love TMBG, so let's focus on that (though you can still answer my question about "the erosion of church and state"). Also, I'd be pretty surprised if the Johns really ever treated fans like jerks just because the fans were conservatives. (Assuming the fans didn't start some kind of fight themselves . . .) ~Drew
PS: I get the point of the quote, but it's probably not a Franklin quote, and it's also a misquote. For more on that, go here
Drew, the erosion of the seperation of church and state is pretty evident. The president has changed regulations preventing faith-based groups from recieving federal funding- in fact, 2.1 billion dollars were awarded to faith-based groups last year alone, which is about 11% of federal money awarded to community groups. The whole gay marriage ban is based upon the Biblical theory of homosexuality as an abomination, and the religious tradition of marriage being between a man and a woman. George Bush means to alter our Constitution based on a religious principle, and I find this supremely troubling. You make some good points about Bush's policies being conservative policies, and I guess some of them are a matter of opinion, but discrimination and human progress shouldn't be liberal or conservative issues. By discrimination I mean the denial of rights to certain Americans- in this instance, gays, who can now join the ranks of Native Americans, African-Americans and women who have been afforded less rights than the majority. Once, women weren't allowed to vote or own land, and now gay people can't marry or adopt a child. To me, this is clearly discrimination, and anyone who supports discrimination is always in the wrong. And when I talk about human progress I of course mean stem cell research, which scientists estimate could save millions of lives, drastically increase our lifespans, and virtually eliminate many common bodily ailments. I understand that this site probably isn't the best forum to openly and freely discuss these issues, but it was brought up, so I'm merely stating what I (and, apparently, a lot of TMBG fans) believe. -Martorano

Exactly. The argument that conservatives give for being against stem cell research basically boils down to "we shouldn't have to sacrifice the innocent lives of the few for the good of the many", even though it is debatable how "alive" fetuses are. However, isn't what we are doing in Iraq, sacrificing the lives of innocent troops in order to set up some kind of government, the same thing? There is a level of hypocracy in Government that makes me red in the face. Listen: I am ALL FOR you being against abortion. I don't care if you think it's "right" or "wrong", but don't push your beliefs upon others by making them law. If you don't like abortion, fine, don't be involved in them, but why should your beliefs be law to anybody? Why do conservatives feel the need to force their opinions and beliefs (especially ones that are backed up by, "God says ______ is wrong/right") upon the masses? How religion can EVER be used as an argument in any kind of debate appalls me. Just because of the fact that one may think homosexuality is wrong, doesn't mean they can discriminate against gays. They are people and deserve the rights guarenteed to them by the constitution. I guess that's my libertarian streak showing. The founding fathers were very afraid of government doing exactly what it is doing right now, and it's why they wrote in the Second Amendment, the right to form a militia (the whole point of bearing arms) so the government has to fear the people. It is every true patriot's duty to question the government at every step, and fix what is broken.--tehbagel ( o ) 10:33, 20 May 2006 (CDT)

I'm not sure if some of you guys really understand the purpose of the separation of church and state. When it was created, it had to do mainly with preventing what has happened so often in Europe and other areas of the world in the past--one religion gaining control of a nation and persecuting or outlawing all other religions, etc. It had nothing to do with federal funding to faith-based (or non-faith-based) community groups, etc. It also had nothing to do with protecting the "right" of atheists to not have any exposure to religious material in puplic places, schools, etc.--an argument often used recently by those who think that all traces of religion should be erased from public life and that every religious person is some kind of crazed fanatic. But I'm going to leave the rest of these issues alone to avoid contention and anger on the wiki, other than to point out that enough people agree with Bush and traditional, conservative Judeo-Christian values for Bush and others like him to get elected. As someone said above, "our government is supposed to be working for us," so you can't blame a conservative official for supporting the conservative policies of the millions of conservative people that elected him or her, whether or not you agree with them. So liberals have to remember that the liberal beliefs and opinions they might have are not as "self-evident" or unquestionably "correct" as they may think, since about half of the nation seems to disagree with them. And, of course, the reverse side of that is true as well--about half of the nation disagrees with conservatives. ~Drew
Drew, you make a good point about the origin of the church/state seperation in the United States. However, and this is something of a cliche, how would a Christian feel if Vishnu or Allah were represented on the currency, or in the Pledge, or uttered by the President following the State of the Union address? How would a Catholic feel having to swear upon the Koran or even "Dianetics"? (That was a lame joke, sorry.) The seperation of church and state is to protect everybody, so that, like you said, no one religion gains too much control, which is unfortunately what we're seeing in the current political climate. The religious right has a lot of sway in our country, and are constantly pandered to by conservatives for fear of losing their votes. You point out that there are a lot of people that agree with Bush, and that's true, but a lot of people agreed that the world was flat. A lot of people packed the Roman colosseums to watch Christians being fed to lions. A lot of people owned slaves. Just because something is popular does not in any way make it right. --Martorano
Similarly, the fact that gay marriage and other such issues are popular among many people now does not make them right. That argument goes both ways. ~Drew
Yes, it does, but in the case of gay marriage I'd argue that anyone not in favor of it perhaps needs a bit of a history lesson. Like I said, this country has a very sad history of denying rights to certain sectors of its population- women, African-Americans and other minorities. Interracial marriage was illegal until 1967. Not to mention slavery or segregation, or forcing Native Americans onto reservations. Or Asian-Americans into internment camps. I'm certainly not going to compare slavery to the proposed ban on gay marriage, but how is denying a gay couple the right to get married any different than not allowing an African-American the right to vote? Or would you have that right stripped away? I know that was a low blow, but it's a question that has to be asked: if you support certain people having more rights than others based on who they are, what's to say you're not opposed to allowing only white Christian males to vote? Or own land? --Martorano
While I don't agree with any of the types of discrimination you mention from America's past (which, in reality, isn't any sadder than anyone else's past, since large portions of the world still had the same types of discrimination when we did, and some still do NOW), I don't think banning gay marriage is discrimination because, among other reasons, I think marriage, by definition, has to involve a member of each sex. And a lot of Americans (among others) agree with me, as I've mentioned and as many recent elections prove. Slaves were denied freedom, while others had freedom. Blacks were denied the right to vote, while others had that right. But gays are denied gay marriage, as is everyone else. There's no difference between "white freedom" and "black freedom" or between "white voting" and "black voting." But there is, in my opinion, a fundamental difference between traditional marriage and gay marriage, as much as people now are trying to "redefine marriage" (hence the re- in the phrase). So I guess I'll have to use a couple cliches and say that this is neither the time nor the place for this discussion, so we'll just have to agree to disagree. ~Drew
If I may, though: you say that marriage has to, by definition, involve a member of each sex. I wonder what you base that on? Religion? Tradition? I'm not trying to be hostile, I'm honestly curious. By the way, even though we obviously disagree, thank you for being clear, concise, and respectful- so many times it's easy to resort to childish name-calling and finger-wagging, and I admire someone who can stand up for what they believe in in a mature fashion. --Martorano
Marriage is a religious observance, hence the wedding. Marriage was created by and for religion. If homosexual couples feel they must share the same benefits as a marriage, almost all states offer civil unions.


To Drew: Oops! I think I should have been more clear. The Johns weren't (supposedly) mean beacause the fans were conservative. They were just all around (supposedly) unfriendly. JUST SO EVERYONE KNOWS, I AM NOT SAYING I BELIEVE THEY WERE JERKS. I DO NOT MEAN TO SPREAD RUMORS. I JUST READ IT ON TOONZONE FROM SOMEONE WHO I FIND TO BE RELIABLE. I DO LIKE TMBG! I'LL STOP TALKING IN CAPS... now. To Martorano: While my opinion on gay marriage is different than yours, I respect your respect for Drew's respect for your opinion.

I, too, am thankful for how respectful this conversation has been all around. Internet discussions about politics can be notoriously hateful, childish, and disrespectful, so I'm glad this one has been anything but. My beliefs on gay marriage are personal beliefs that are largely faith-based. "Tradition" strikes me as the wrong word, because I've seen what blind tradition can do to people. You've seen it--the person who can only explain his or her religious beliefs by saying, "I'm ________ (insert any given religious denomination here) because my parents are/were _________. It's a tradition." Or some variation thereof. Informed, personal religious beliefs would be a better term for my beliefs. Also, in large part I agree with the comment above that "Marriage is a religious observance, hence the wedding. Marriage was created by and for religion." And, if you're not against dragging out this conversation, Martoano, I think it would be only fair if you explained the origins of your beliefs a bit. I'd be interested to hear what you have to say.
I also appreciate the above explanation/clarification about the Johns being "jerks" from the unnamed creator of this thread. And, again, I appreciate the respectful discussion from Martorano and everyone else involved here. ~Drew
There is a personal reason I feel very strongly about this particular issue. I worked for about a year with a man in his sixties, a gay man who has been with the same partner for about forty years. Forty years! And they aren't allowed to marry, yet any heterosexual couple can go and get a quickie marriage from a drive-thru in Las Vegas. So that's why gay marriage kind of hits close to home for me. But, Drew, I think you're right: we should agree to disagree. --Martorano
It's agreed, then! :) Thanks for all of your comments. (Oh, and I'll try to briefly address everything below later.) ~Drew

I must put my two cents in: Drew, your statement that marriage is by religion for religion is grossly wrong. The word marriage was never used in religion until the goverment coined the phrase. The word that religion used for marriage was a hebrew word meaning "ownership", in that the man traditionally owned his woman; she was property. I don't recall the word right now, but I could get you the word tomorrow in my Bible As Literature class. Anyway, if you think marriage is just between a man and a woman, then don't be involved in same sex marriages. How does two gay men being married hurt you exactly? I don't understand why religious beliefs are being made into law that all have to follow. As Stephen Colbert greatly summed up a stab at the neo-cons, "I accept all, be you Muslim, Jewish, Christian, Hindu or Buddhist, no matter which path you choose to accepting Jesus Christ as your personal savior."--tehbagel ( o ) 14:25, 21 May 2006 (CDT)

I'm not touching the political debate, but I'm rather curious about what you heard "about them being jerks to a fan." What did they do exactly that was so terrible? I've had nothing but positive experiences when I've had the opportunity to interact with them, and I think the vast majority of fans would say likewise. — aliste 23:53, 19 May 2006 (CDT)

Drew: http://forums.toonzone.net/showthread.php?t=166729 Read Zubby's post for even more clarification. ALSO, I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT THEY DID GET DONE WITH A CONCERT JUST RECENTLY, AND THEY MAY HAVE BEEN TIRED, JUST AS ZUBBY SAYS. No more caps!

[edit] Lack of Beardo downloads

I was dissapointed to hear this, but does anyone else think that rather than it signaling the end of the download store, it's just showing that they want to keep their new albums' songs under wraps? -Cronny

Exactly what I was thinking. EckSig.gif

What is the source of this news item? Hasn't it always taken a while to get the shows up? Additionally, At the show in St. Pete they had audience mikes next to the confetti canons. --badqueso 12:24, 4 May 2006 (CDT)

That's a good point. But if the guy's source is correct, they may just be waiting until the album comes out to release the Beardo live shows. -Cronny

The guy had no source other than the fact that the theymightbegiants.com shows page lists "Not available" for the Beardo shows. Someone might've wrote that instead of "Coming soon"... -CapitalQ / @ / 14:12, 4 May 2006 (CDT)

Maybe it was an insider... or not... -Cronny

Hee, I made the front page! I feel so special. —aliste

I certainly hope TMBG eventually releases the downloads from this tour. It would be a waste of a new digital mixer to keep the shows under wraps. And besides, they released shows that contained performances of songs from "Here Come the A-B-C's" before it had been released. -Reynoldbot

Seriously, it seems like goofy logic to hold them. I don't think anyone's going to say, "I've got live recordings of two tracks from the new album. I guess I won't buy it." Similarly, people likely would buy the downloads to get a couple tracks early. -Buschap

It may sound like goofy logic, but maybe the Johns noticed that a common complaint by reviewers about Mink Car was that so many of the songs on the album had already been available in other forms and on other releases, etc. Similarly, if you look at the "What songs do you hope will be on Their next album" section of the TMBG's Mysterious Next Album page, you'll notice that several people have put or supported things like "something new" or "something we've never heard before," etc. The Johns seem to be quite aware of their fans--and their reviewers, I'm sure--so they're probably just trying to learn from their past experiences. ~Drew

There could be a legal reason behind it.. remember, They don't even list the titles of the ABCs songs on their download page in shows that occured before the album came out.. maybe this time out, They can't even give us the live music. -TDK 06:10, 10 May 2006 (CDT)

I'm really disappointed about this... especially for all the US Servicemembers overseas who are unable to enjoy this year's tour through the live downloads. I hope that that doesn't mean that this tour will be lost forever, and that they can release it when their new album is out. -jesseg

[edit] KoL references

I just fixed one but I'm not eager to do them all. I'm not even sure if you want them on the wiki. If you do, however, and anyone wants fill them in, here's a comprehensive list and table of TMBG references in Kingdom Of Loathing: http://pop.shinketsu.net/search.php?seek=giants - Whirrrlwind (Woosh!) 09:15, 6 May 2006 (CDT)

[edit] MusicVid Announcement

I realize it's innapropriate to post a news item about a fan-vid, but would anyone be offended if I announced it here? This is more of an open forum, so I think it would be okay, but I'd like to know what you think before I do it. -Cronny

Theres been huge debates over whether fan vids should be allowed to be posted on the main page, or even on the specific song page. Im pretty sure that no one will be offended if you write it on this Talk page, but as far as I know the arguement favours that fan-made vids dont get mentioned on the Front Main Page. To read up on the arguement: Talk:Videos --AnklePants 22:07, 16 May 2006 (CDT)
Thanks, I was actually part of that discussion, but we never really touched upon the talk pages. Anyway, here's the link: http://newgrounds.com/portal/view/313104 if anyone gets mad I can blame you ;) -Cronny
Deal--AnklePants 06:17, 17 May 2006 (CDT)
Great video :) - repugnant

[edit] User locations

I was just wondering how far (gloabally speaking) TMBW users span. Maybe this could become a misc page. Please discuss. I was specific wondering if I am the sole user who is representing the entire continent of Oceania (what a responsability!)--AnklePants 06:25, 17 May 2006 (CDT)

Maybe "Location" could be one of the babel boxes for the user pages. -Martorano
Thats a good idea, coz then it doesnt have to specific, it can be rather general, such as American states or countries outside the US. I have no idea how to make babel boxes though. If anyone else is interested and know how...--AnklePants 08:07, 17 May 2006 (CDT)
I could get started on those tomorrow. Leave me a list of places on my talk page. Alternatively, I could set up a Frappr map. — User:ACupOfCoffee@ 03:34, 21 May 2006 (CDT)
No Frappr. Another Wiki I know of does that and I hate it, since you have to give city too (right?) Personally I vote Babel boxes, ones for all 50 American states, the Canadian provinces, and then other countries. (Well, you know, other countries you'd -expect- to access a TMBG Wiki, and then if someone from say Slovenia comes up here and asks for a Babel box we can make him one.) I can help. - Doug the Aquacell Guy 10:07, 26 May 2006 (CDT)
What, you don't expect someone from Slovenia to like TMBG? That's rude! (P.S. Slovenia is a country right? It sounds like something from The Lord of the Rings). --Martorano 12:59, 26 May 2006 (CDT)
Yep. It's actually a new country that came out of the end of the Cold War. Actually, quite a few people over there may like the band. It's quite a bit better off than most other new (1990+) nations. (If Lord of the Rings took place on October 11th, Gandalf would've had THEY printed on his forehead. They're popular there too.) - Doug the Aquacell Guy 21:05, 26 May 2006 (CDT)
Or we could just type in what ever place we're from, like we would type in what ever our username is for one of the Wiki babel boxes. --Droffats 21:08, 26 May 2006 (CDT)

[edit] A Poll Question, Sort Of

I'm curious to see people's answers... a lot of unreleased TMBG songs are only circulating in really bad quality. Which one of these songs would you like to hear in prime quality?

I vote for "What Is Everyone Staring At?" Even in its early form, 'Sleepwalkers' had the making of a great tune.

I'd say either What Is Everyone Staring At, or maybe The Bloodboat. They both would've sounded great, and they still do, even if they're low quality. ~ magbatz
How about No Answer? Or--though I know it'll never happen--the adult version of Four Of Two? ~Drew
How could I have forgotten No Answer? That definitely trumps my other two favorites. And although I prefer the suicide version of Four Of Two, the No! one satisfies all my broken clock needs.
I have the pretty bad quality of No Answer on my mp3 player, and I absolutely love that song. =) I would love to have a nice quality version (or studio!) of that. --Lemita 11:27, 20 May 2006 (CDT)
I'd also like to hear studio versions of Coffee Table Of Love, A TMBG Song, Hi, Live Like Pigs, Reminder, Side 2, Welcome To The World, The Sun Is On Fire, The Writing's On The Wall, We Love All The People, and Titanic Fog. Then again, I'd also just like to hear the Dial-A-Song versions of those songs. Anybody have them? :)
Take a sneak peek to this page: Talk:Power Of Dial-A-Song. Our dearest fellow Liam uploaded some of these songs. - Whirrrlwind (Woosh!) 05:12, 21 May 2006 (CDT)
COOLNESS! Thanks! :) That's a really cool Web site. Whenever I finally find a job and therefore have more (guiltless) free time, I'll have to post some of the rare stuff I have. BTW, Whirlwind, any more links like that on random pages/talk pages on here? ~Drew
None that I know of. - Whirrrlwind (Woosh!) 06:34, 21 May 2006 (CDT)
Okay, okay--that wasn't really on topic. But really, would anybody else love to hear an album version of I'm Your Boyfriend Now, Kids Are Different Now, or Kings Of The Cave? Maybe even Sally Boy Candy Bar? (And you can still answer my question about having those DAS songs above . . .) ~Drew
Tumbleweed. -TDK 07:53, 21 May 2006 (CDT)
I'm going to have to say "No Answer", too. Awesome song. --Martorano
I'm Your Boyfriend Now, Kids Are Different Now, and Sally Boy Candy Bar. Three of my favoritest songs. And I only have them in crappy 32kbps quality. --Valerie 17:35, 23 May 2006 (CDT)
Kids Are Different Now always sounded way too...pop-punk for me. Does that makes sense? It sounds like Sum 41 or something. --Martorano
It's mimicking the style of 1994 (Dookie-era) Green Day. -CapitalQ / @ / 18:58, 23 May 2006 (CDT)
That's always been one of my favorite things about TMBG--they can write songs in so many different musical styles! ~Drew

[edit] William Allen White's head

Okay, so TMBG used it in a few concerts and video projects. It was always put in a context of other surreal and bizarre imagery. When I come here, I have to stare at that fuckin' head everywhere: as a background, site icon, everywhere. Even if the guy's supposed to be a mascot, that picture is way too ubiquitous. Where's the diversity of strange imagery that is the visual hallmark of TMBG? Why do you ONLY use that guy's head? TMBG's website is delightfully odd. This one is just... creepy and disturbing. 66.90.73.96 01:46, 24 May 2006 (CDT)

I would just like to note that User:Drew took it upon himself to censor the above comment, but did not feel it necessary to admit doing so or post attribution for the change. The word censored was the evil "f-word," you know, like the one in the TMBG concert favourite "Sorry I Fucked Up The Show". Thankfully, User:Drew has not yet seen fit to reprimand the Johns themselves for their horrible, horrible use of such vulgarity. Next time you see fit to alter someone else's comments, User:Drew, at least have the cojones to follow-up and admit what you've done. Puritans are supposed to be forthright, not cowardly. 66.90.73.96 06:06, 24 May 2006 (CDT)
So who went back and uncensored it? - Doug the Aquacell Guy 09:47, 24 May 2006 (CDT)
Checking the page's history or looking at the Recent changes would show you that the original poster put it back. -CapitalQ / @ / 14:27, 24 May 2006 (CDT)
It would, but, that would involve actual effort ;) - Doug the Aquacell Guy 17:41, 24 May 2006 (CDT)
If you consider three or four clicks effort. :D -CapitalQ / @ / 18:38, 24 May 2006 (CDT)
If you don't like the logo, you can always change your skin under your preferences. --Duke33 07:41, 24 May 2006 (CDT)
I like the WAW head. Just my two cents. --Martorano 08:06, 24 May 2006 (CDT)
Agreed. Black-and-white 40's/50's heads are just wonderful. - Doug the Aquacell Guy 09:47, 24 May 2006 (CDT)
The picture was most likely taken during the 30's actually, judging by William Allen White's age in the image and the fact that he died in 1944. -CapitalQ / @ / 14:27, 24 May 2006 (CDT)
I'm sorry if I offended anyone, but I felt no need to mark a change like that, given the ease with which the source of the change could be found by checking the page's history or using the Recent Changes page and the fact that I wasn't adding a comment myself. You'll also note a little warning/disclaimer at the bottom of the page every time you edit or add to a page, which goes like this: "Please note that all contributions to This Might Be A Wiki may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then don't submit it here." People edit the spelling, phrasing, grammar, and other content of my posts all the time, and I make minor changes (especially spelling) to others' posts as well. And given the fact that lots of kids like TMBG (like I did as a kid, though I didn't know them well), I just try to keep a public forum like this as free as possible from needless profanity. So sue me. I do, however, draw the line at changing the names of songs that I had nothing to do with the writing of. Just curious, but does anyone else have an opinion on this matter? I'm open to feedback. ~Drew
Editing someone else's work on an article and changing their signed comments on a talk page do not seem to fall into the same category. As far as "kids" and profanity are concerned, if it's not used to abuse or demean other posters I don't see the problem. They're just words, right? As a "kid" I read Mark Twain, Chaucer, Shakespeare, Heinlein, Salinger... all sorts of profane literature. Somehow I managed not to sprout horns and cloven hooves...
I personally don't see much wrong with swearing (well, with the exception of a few words, the f-bomb not being one) some people do, and it's best just to respect their wishes and keep the actual TMBW.net content clean. However, songs, song titles, shows, et cetera...keep them as they are. Puppets gonna screw you up =D - Doug the Aquacell Guy 14:37, 25 May 2006 (CDT)

[edit] Commission Junction

I noticed in the latest news post has a redirect-thingy in the front of the address. And that when Ecks attempted to get rid of it, it was reverted. Could you tell us what this is, Duke33? Doing a little research on it leads me to believe it's some sort of advertising technique. --Droffats 14:24, 26 May 2006 (CDT)

Yes - We have an affiliate program with eMusic, Napster, iTunes, Amazon, and other sites...We get paid for people that click through to emusic and then open up a subscription with them. So, i try to make sure that all emusic links on the site go through our affiliate program, in case someone clicks through and then signs up. --Duke33 14:27, 26 May 2006 (CDT)

Heh. My dad used to be the CFO of Commission Junction. I'd never actually seen them in action before.--Salt-Man Z 19:39, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Random page

What about making the Lyrics, Chronology and Interpretations namespaces accessible for the Random page function? Is that possible at all? - Whirrrlwind (Woosh!) 10:39, 3 Jun 2006 (CDT)

[edit] Page Idea

WOuld anybody mind if I created a page "Tab Squad" where users who regularly create guitar tabs. It would contain a sign up sheet for regular contributators as well as a count of how many tabs they've created and then a list of songs that still need tabs and tabs that users think need improvement. Does this sound good? Can I go ahead and make it? -AtionSong 12:28, 3 Jun 2006 (CDT)

Sounds fine to me. :) -CapitalQ / @ / 13:00, 3 Jun 2006 (CDT)

[edit] An Idea...

HOw come there isn't a "related songs" area in each music page? I think it would be helpful if you found your way to a live version of a song, when you wanted the album recording. Sorry if this is already somewhere and I missed it.--71.240.7.23 15:10, 4 Jun 2006 (CDT)

You were right but you don't have to be sorry for that. It's the chronology page for each song. - Whirrrlwind (Woosh!) 15:21, 4 Jun 2006 (CDT)
Oh, thanks. I really should have searched thoroughly before I asked.
It's not really a matter of searching, there's a Chronology link on the bottom right of every song page. :) -CapitalQ / @ / 16:43, 4 Jun 2006 (CDT)

[edit] I have no idea what to title this...

Well, a problem I've been seeing is things like Your Own Worst Enemy (Demo)'s song name is "Your Own Worst Enemy (Demo)", but the song's name is Your Own Worst Enemy, Your Own Worst Enemy (Demo). So, I guess I think we should just take off the "(Demo)" part out of song names, and stuff like that, because it's not the song's name, I guess. I could be totally wrong about this, but that's what I think and if there is a specific reason why the demo portion of the song name is totally intelligent and isn't really retarded, just explain it to me. --liam 09:20, 22 Jun 2006 (MDT)

I agree. The song name doesn't include descriptions about it's release or how we at the wiki differentiate them. --badqueso 13:06, 22 Jun 2006 (MDT)
Maybe you guys are looking at this wrong...but I think the only reason the field was called Song Name is because it sounds and fits a lot better than Version Name. In other words, how we have it set up now is the correct way, despite the fact that the line is called just "Song Name." -CapitalQ / @ / 19:19, 22 Jun 2006 (MDT)

[edit] Knowledge Base

Hey, I don't mean to be a stickler, but this has been bugging me for a while, and now that it's on the main page twice (and in big letters one of those times), I have to point out that knowledge base is two words, not one. I would change it myself, but I don't know how to change the one at the top of the side bar. Also, for consistency's sake, we might want to pick either "The TMBG Knowledge Base" (what it says in the side bar) or "A TMBG Knowledge Base" (what it now says near the top of the main page). What does everyone else think? ~Drew

Done and done and done. -CapitalQ / @ / 22:02, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Head?

Who is that cut-out head that the people wear in the Don't Lets Start music video? It's appeared numerous other times, I AM DYING TO KNOW!!!!! --Homfrog 19:23, 7 July 2006 (MDT)

You mean the one in TMBW's logo and in the big discussion about the head on this very page? See William Allen White. -CapitalQ / @ / 19:31, 7 July 2006 (MDT)

[edit] State Songs EP wanted!

Does anyone have the original 'Hello' EP, with the five early State Song mixes? If do you, email me at knawdas@hotmail.com. Thank you!!

It still appears on eBay for cheap from time to time. -CapitalQ / @ / 20:21, 7 July 2006 (MDT)
That's where I got it for pretty cheap just a few months ago. ~Drew

[edit] tmbg.org

On the discography at tmbg.org, there are a few things we don't have on here, e.g. - "Selections From The 2-CD Retrospective Then: The Earlier Years" and "New York City Live!!" (not Live!! New York City 10/14/94 for those who might think it is), so I was wondering whether I should put them on here? - ( Herwwiyal ? )

Go ahead. :) Nice finds. -CapitalQ / @ / 06:46, 8 July 2006 (MDT)

[edit] Main page tabs and links centered

L-R: IE, Firefox
L-R: IE, Firefox

Hello. I've noticed that the Main Page renders differently when viewing it in various browsers. Specifically, the tabs along the top and all the links along the left are centered in IE when they shouldn't be. I think the problem could be resolved if you removed the <center> tags before and after <h3>Site Map</h3> at the bottom. (You really should use CSS instead of <center> tags anyway, and there's a missing </div> at the end, but those are other discussions for other days.) Talk atcha later. — It's dot com 23:53, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Nice catch, fixed. :) -CapitalQ / @ / 21:55, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] What is this Linnell single??

There are a couple copies of a strange single on eBay - it's "The Dream Lives On" by John Linnell, released in 1987... found it on a couple other sites too. I'm 99% sure it's NOT the real Linnell, but I thought it's worth a look: http://www.netsoundsmusic.com/nsudsii/2/204209435/1118/2.html

Hahahah, yeah, those have been on eBay forever. It's definitely not our Linnell. -CapitalQ / @ / 00:27, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sandbox

After noticing the recent deletion of a page titled "Sandbox", it wade me wonder why we didn't have one in the first place? (Though, preferrably not in the main namespace.) It's practically a wiki standard like "Recent changes" "Whatlinks here" (usually referred to as "Back links"). — User:ACupOfCoffee@ 22:13, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

We sort of do already. I've used it a few times. I guess it's just not really advertised. These pages suggest using it to test and whatnot. Someone usually just deletes it after they're finished testing though. TMBaB's welcoming message leads to it's mention somewhat indirectly, but that's probably the only way people would know to use it. I wouldn't mind having a permanent page (meaning we don't just keep deleting it), and I would agree to keeping it out of the main namespace, but I don't think it would get much use as we probably wouldn't use it too often. And it would most likely encourage spamming and other nonsense, as people see the page's contents as inconsequential. --badqueso 22:49, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
Spamming could easily be taken care of with a robots.txt file. — User:ACupOfCoffee@ 22:58, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
I don't really see the need for a Sandbox. First off, as Badqueso said, we wouldn't really use it all that often. And secondly, if someone needs to, each user has their own personal space on the wiki to do pretty much anything they'd ever want to do, their username-page-whatchamacallit. When I've experimented here, I just clear off my current stuff from the page (if that's even necessary), test stuff, and then revert it back to how it was before. All nice and clean. ~ magbatz 23:27, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] dalnet

we gotta link to it on the main page. it's empty as shit --liam (wtf?) 03:27, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Videos

So are we documenting the filming locations of any of the videos on TMBW? Just thought seeing as its not hard to tell where they're all filmed:

  • Put Your Hand Inside the Puppet Head: N 8th St, Williamsburg
  • Don't Let's Start: Tent of Tomorrow, Flushing Meadows-Corona Park
  • Ana Ng: supposeldy a Fireman Training Grounds, Long Island
  • They'll Need a Crane: Bethesda Terrace, Central Park
  • Birdhouse in Your Soul: 31 Chambers St, Manhatten
  • The Statue Got Me High: Sepulveda Dam, Los Angeles Rivers

etc --AnklePants 15:16, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Accordion Music

Doesn't anybody think it would be a rad idea if there was a massive page dedicated to accordion players? And it would like teach us TMBG songs on the accordion. --Mr.klaw

Have a look at Talk:Accordion. This may not teach you anything but it's the answer to the first part of your wish. - Whirrrlwind (Woosh!) 15:08, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wonky Lyrics pages?

What's up with all the lyrics pages? It looks like all the line breaks have disappeared. --Salt-Man Z 16:54, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Discussed here. We're working on it...kinda. -CapitalQ / @ / 17:00, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Clooves Question

Does anybody know what happened to They Might Be Giants Multimedia? It doesn't appear to exsist any longer

I'm not sure, but you can contact the site's creator at leolapyre [at] gmail [dot] com. -CapitalQ / @ / 00:09, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
I found what I believe to be all the videos from TMBG Multimedia here -ill masta
I can't see that webjay website right now (I'm on a school computer and the site's blocked), but I think this is the place you were looking for-- it has all those 120 Minutes and JBTV and Conan performances, though I'm not sure if the links work: http://bangbangbanquet.net/tmbg/ ~ magbatz

[edit] Trivia

I think it would be a fun/educational idea if there was like a trivia page where users could post questions about TMBG, and then smart people could answer them. The post-ers would need to know the answers to the questions they post, so that they can tell the guess-ers they are correct. Since the Wiki contains sooooooooo much info d'Giants, we probally shouldn't use it to search for answers. The correct response would have to come from lots of TMBG knowledge. Example: Name the singer of "Boat of Car" Mr.klaw


Actually, I am goin to create a trivia page called Talk:Trivia Mr.klaw

[edit] New Users

Just out of curiosity, where are all the new users coming from? I count some crazy number like 18 in the last 2 days, which is quite a lot by our standards! Not that I'm complaining...I'm just wondering why the sudden spike? --Duke33 03:13, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Maybe we got some new fans via the supposed reggae stylings of that new Dunkin' Donuts commercial? ~ magbatz 03:19, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Instrument Listing

I think it would be a good idea to put a label showing the instruments used in a song, such as the guitars, or a trumpet, synth, etc. Leonard Carrier 03:55, 5 October 2006 (PST)

We've talked about it too...check this out: TMBW To-Do List. --Duke33 23:51, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
Shouldn't be too hard, I'd be up for it myself, all one has to do is sit back and listen to some TMBG... --Vixus 00:59, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fan Art/Poetry/etc

I was just looking on the wiki for that edited TMBg publicity photo with John and John in a car as the grim Reapers or something, and I looked around and I couldn't find it anywhere. Or anything else for that matter, like the "Dizzy TMBg" poem and a few other things I remember being on here. Did we decide to get rid of that stuff, or is it just somewhere I can't find it? (and on a personal note, I'm looking for some user's track listing for an awesome mix, and I'm half-positive that it's the same person who did the grim-Reaper-Johns picture, so if anyone knows who or where that is, you will have just helped me greatly! thanks)  ~ magbatz

You can find that awesome poem here and the picture here. The playlist you are likely thinking of is on the user page of Flux. --badqueso 02:33, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
Thank you, and thank you, and thank you. It was a good playlist, and mad props to you for being able to find that stuff--thanks. But let me ask you (or anyone): was there ever a singular page devoted to that kind of fan-created art?  ~ magbatz 03:08, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
There was, but Duke deleted it a few months ago. I didn't want the poems and such to be gone forever so I restored them to the user's namespaces. -CapitalQ / @ / 03:13, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dec 16 @ 9 PM - Brooklyn Show

It's going to be great, but my friend had computer problems and couldn't get his ticket through ticketweb. I'm scrambling to find him a ticket, so if any kindhearted fellow fans have an extra ticket, please let me know ASAP! My email is firelily AT gmail DOT com.

[edit] STD vs LTW

TMBG calls The Spine their tenth album, right? Well they're probably

  • Pink Album
  • Lincoln
  • Flood
  • Apollo 18
  • John Henry
  • Factory Showroom
  • Mink Car
  • No!

Wait... we're missing one. There should be one more.

It could be either Severe Tire Damage or Long Tall Weekend, right? Well, which one is it? This question has bothered me for forever, and now I'm asking you guys. Can you help me? -User:AgentChronon

So here's what each album has going for it to be considered the 7th album. STD is more popular than LTW, seeing as They had a label when they released it and it's an actual CD. It also contains studio releases of three new songs (Dr. Worm, About Me, and the Theme To STD), two new live songs (First Kiss and They Got Lost) and like 7 never-heard-before Battle of the Apes things. It should be noted, though, that the never-before-released live songs were both reworked and put on studio albums.
Now LTW. There are 15 songs, most of which are unreleased. (Well, They Got Lost was previously released on the live album, but if you're rooting for LTW, then you could argue that the same thing happened with First Kiss reappearing on Mink Car. And then Token Back To Brooklyn was a hidden track on Factory Showroom.) All were studio recordings. Wikipedia calls it "the first major full-length album released exclusively on the Internet by an established major label band." However, that also brings up the fact that LTW was never widely released in CD form. Another weakness for LTW is that maybe five of the songs were also released on They Got Lost (the album) and two reworked for Mink Car.
So, in short... Pros for STD: some new material, some studio material, was widely released. Cons for STD: mostly live versions of old material, some reworked for later albums. Pros for LTW: all studio material, mostly new material. Cons for LTW: an online release, songs were mostly FS-era outtakes, some were rereleased on a rarities album.
So the argument, in my opinion, is: Can a live album be considered album? Is an obscure, outtakes-filled CD a compilation or an actual album? So there's what I think are the main arguments for either side-- so, pick one. And thank you, Agent Chronon, for just happening to wonder which album was the seventh. Very smooth ;) ~ magbatz. Now as for view on it, I personally would go with LTW, because I think STD being a live album basically disqualifies it from being a real album, while LTW was at the time unreleased new material (besides Token...) and consisted of songs taken from the two or three years before LTW was released (as opposed to Misc. T, which was material from all the way back in the early 80s).
TMBG's definitely referring to Long Tall Weekend as one of the first nine albums. Severe Tire Damage was a live album that just happened to have a couple of studio tracks added on (perhaps as a bonus). -CapitalQ / @ / 00:30, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, yeah, but since some songs from LTW are on They Got Lost, it's considered a "rarity" and on User's Guide on the actual disk it listed all the different albums and didn't mention Long Tall Weekend... but that's probably because no songs from it were on User's Guide. -User:AgentChronon

Just giving STD some more props here. (She Thinks She's) Edith Head (1) and Older (2) were remade for Mink Car. Lullabye To Nightmares (3) was a remake and On Earth My Nina (4) was pretty much too. Rat Patrol (5), Token Back To Brooklyn (6), Reprehensible (7), Certain People I Could Name (8), and They Got Lost (9) were all put onto the They Got Lost (Rarities Compilation) ("rare" being the key word there). And The Edison Museum (10) was re-released on No!. So that's 10 songs on a 15 song album (or 2/3) that were "messed with."
Severe Tire Damage was half "remakes" (aka live versions) and half totally new songs (or 12/24. You could say the hidden songs don't count and make it 5/17, but this is an argument for STD). But at least the "remakes" were different from the originals. Six of the tracks on LTW were straight re-released, not remade, most onto a "rarities" collection, lowering LTW's status, and it was never "officially" released in a physical format. (By the way magbatz, the guy who worded that currently thinks Wikipedia is a joke. Just saying.) Remember, STD is the album that has Doctor Worm, a favorite of many, on it. It was even released as a single and as their first video in four years. What singles were on LTW again?
Now I also understand the difficulty in considering a live album as a "numbered album" but maybe this will make you think about the possibility. And then there's the thought that the Giants may not have it set themselves, though I don't think this is what I'd ask them if I met them (though I have thought about it..). I'm not rooting for any side here, just opening up discussion some more. I'm sure I could come up with an equally strong (and equally fallacious) argument for LTW. --badqueso 03:14, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, both albums have a lot going against them. LTW basically consisted of a) re-used songs and b) songs that would later be re-used. STD is the only live album up for "consideration". But back to the real discussion about my main man Mr. Branddobbe. He may have recently had his userpage say that, BUT he's made something like 4000 or 4500 (I lost count) edits to wikipedia in the last 3 or so years, and his last userpage and his userbox/personal page are pretty extremely in-depth and he's a really committed wikipedian. So THERE!!! ~ magbatz
Hey, I told you it was fallacious! (don't eat me!) --badqueso 05:45, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
As long as I can have your soul, I promise I'll leave your body alone. Deal? ~ magbatz 08:29, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
As long as you don't send the nbsp demons to harvest it. And I think it's tainted from the 80s, so wear gloves. --badqueso 08:41, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
Long Tall Weekend had only ONE previously released studio track on it when it came out, and that was originally a hidden track (Token Back on Factory Showroom). The other song that had been previously released was as a very differently-tempo'd live song on Severe Tire Damage, They Got Lost. Now, think about how many songs Severe Tire Damage had that were brand new studio recordings, compared to LTW's fourteen. -CapitalQ / @ / 23:22, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
Oh yeah, I forgot to include Token Back To Brooklyn and They Got Lost in some of my numbers. So that's four old ones: Token Back To Brooklyn from Factory Showroom, Lullabye To Nightmares from Hello The Band, They Got Lost from Severe Tire Damage, and On Earth My Nina which is Thunderbird (previously a live song) backwards. My bigger point concerning LTW was that most of these songs were re-released (and on a rarities compilation to boot). Calling these songs rare devalues LTW as a whole. If this were as firmly an album as you suggest, then why do the songs need to be re-released on other albums? I don't see them putting Everything Right Is Wrong Again on another album. Is it worse for the album for a song to be a remake (like tracks on STD, Mink Car, etc.) or for a song to be remade/re-released (LTW)? Now if you want to debate the meaning of "studio track" then you're on your own, especially if you're comparing to a stated "live" album. --badqueso 00:23, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
My vote is totally for LTW. It's a studio album, albeit a novelty (online-only) studio album, while STD is a live album with a few studio tracks included. ~Drew

I know this debate died down a few months ago, but we have official word now on what Flans says. Although they said the Spine was number ten (meaning one of the two sort-of albums wouldn't count), he said in this article that the new one was either number 12 or number 13 (Spine is 10 or 11, ABCs, is 11 or 12, new one is 12 or 13). So the final answer is: They don't if only one or if both count as albums, and it doesn't seem like they care to figure it out. Whoo. ~ magbatz

[edit] That streamable radio show today

For those of us who, unlike me, did not have to be at school for the first show, and who, unlike me, actually were smart enough to tune into the 9-o-clock thing-- what happened? Was it an interview dealy thing? Was it them playing a few (new?) songs? Anyone? ~ magbatz 02:49, 6 December 2006 (UTC) (and as a side, this radio station rocks! I just went to it and they're playing Bob Dylan's Dignity. Great song.)

They played Bee Of The Bird Of The Moth, We Live In A Dump, and (as a request from the DJ) Doctor Worm, had a really funny interview, and had the DJ play a The Long Winters song on the second radio show they did today. I didn't hear the first show, but both should be on the radio station's Web site archive. :) ~Drew
Sounds cool, thanks. I'll definitely look out for that. ~ magbatz

[edit] Well...

It's a shame about the free MP3s thing, but I can understand. And I respect y'all for taking it down and respecting their wishes. Good job! :) ~Anna Ng hears your words.

[edit] Can anyone in here read Japanese?

Apparently with the "cryptic" message mentioned on the News section, They were trying to put the message in Japanese but something or other didn't support it. So now they just made a picture out of it [1], but to me it's still unreadable. So can anyone read this and tell us what it says? I'm gonna see some kid who's in 4th-year Japanese class on Saturday, so I can probably ask him to translate it if no one's figured it out before then. ~ magbatz 01:26, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Translation

A friend who knows japanese has translated it for me:

I want you to listen to the new podcast of They Might Be Giants! We are planning to have a very big tour to promote two [TMBG] albums that we are releasing in 2007. We have just finished recording an awesome album, working with legendary producers, Dust Bros. & Pat Dillett. We are working on a kids album "Here Come the 123s" and its DVD.

User: Guy-Smiley

[edit] New Vid On Youtube!

http://youtube.com/watch?v=zYGHpFC3TS4

Whence that wince.

Check it out..

Cody-schmidt

[edit] Update

Their MySpace profile's been updated. Yay! Kaiilaiqualyn 13:22, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Secret?

Hey, how did they know that today's my unbirthday? --badqueso 07:23, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

I'd assume they're sending a link to that to any MySpace friends who are having birthdays, however they do that. Then again, that doesn't explain why it says the song is from Lincoln. -CapitalQ / @ / 16:06, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
And while I'm not sure if that unlinked page was considered a secret, I think I've found the only real secrets on tmbg.com; clicking the TMBG image at the top of that It's Not My Birthday page loads the song in one of the Dialasong.com pop-up song windows, and clicking the crane image on the News / splash page does the same. -CapitalQ / @ / 16:17, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
It's Not My Birthday is off the "B-sides" from Lincoln, is it not? --Salt-Man Z 18:49, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Peter Pan 2?

Woah! According to this, TMBG wrote music for Peter Pan 2, Return to Neverland. Did we know this? Does anyone own the movie who can check the credits or something? You think something would've been said at the time, but then again, I wasn't a fan back in 2002, so I wouldn't know if They did say something. --Ganna

See Disney's Return To Neverland. -CapitalQ / @ / 01:01, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
Oh! Alrighty then. -- Ganna

[edit] Tagline

Hey, if we can think of a better tagline, are we allowed to change it? Or is it off limits?

Everyone's allowed to change the tagline whenever they want, that's why we have the "Edit the tagline" link under it. :) -CapitalQ / @ / 14:52, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "(The Song)"

Somewhere at some point I remember there was something said about songs being titled either "Song Name (The Song)" or "Album Name (The Album)" and changing them to be simply "Song Name (Song)" or "Album Name (Album)". I don't know where I stand (or if I even stand at all on this), but yeah, I'm just putting it out there, because I'm pretty sure some people started talking about it. Though maybe not, I've been known to think weirder things... ~ magbatz 04:47, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

I moved all the "The Song"s and etc to "Song" a few days ago, it just seems a lot cleaner and uses less unnecessary wordage. -CapitalQ / @ / 04:54, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
Well then, I guess I'm a little bit late on bringing it up. Whoo! ~ magbatz 20:03, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cleaner 'Welcome to TMBW' look

It just occurred to me that you could have Main Page redirect to say, This Might Be A Wiki - The TMBG Knowledge Base. It'll not-have the 'Redirected from <page>' thing at the top, and it'll avoid having two level-one headers. Just a suggestion.

And as proof, or to just see it in action, you can check this out for an example. -J2

I much prefer having the main page titled as such (and the discussion as Talk:Main Page). I'm open to other not-so-radical suggestions for getting rid of the two level-one headers, though, and I'm sure Duke33 is as well. -CapitalQ / @ / 01:08, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
All right. Well, you could probably do it with CSS. I'll play around with it in the sandbox later. -J2
I know this is a rather old thread (two months), but the css needed to do it is: 
<div class="firstHeading" style="font-size: 188%; padding-top: 0.5em; padding-bottom: 0.17em; float: left; position: absolute; left: 0.5em; top: 0%; width: 98%; background-color:#FFFFFF">This Might Be A Wiki - The TMBG Knowledge Base</div>

— User:ACupOfCoffee@ 23:26, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for that, it looks great except that the bottom of the "g" from the original title (Main Page) is still (ever so slightly) visible in Firefox. Know anything that can be done about that? -CapitalQ / @ / 23:41, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
No, but it's happening because the title's not being changed on the page but being covered up by the new one. Maybe if a space were added to the beginning of the title it would make the "g"s line up?
That's a bit of a messy solution, plus the font isn't monospaced so they likely wouldn't line up perfectly anyway. -CapitalQ / @ / 00:24, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
I don't know anything about this type of stuff, but would making the div-table-box-thing's "padding-bottom" greater cover up the bottom of the G? then, I guess, you could just underline the title on its own. Although I'm not sure if that thing of code you have up there is blocking out the already-existent underliney headline, since if it isn't, then my solution probably wouldn't work. ~ magbatz
Other than on the edit revision pages, it looks perfect! Absolute genius, Magbatz. -CapitalQ / @ / 03:12, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
Edit: Though it seems to now look very spacey in Internet Explorer. I guess it's best without modifying the padding-bottom, it didn't have any problems in IE then and the only problem in FF is very minor. Thanks for trying, though. :D -CapitalQ / @ / 03:16, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
Awwwww! But I like it better when I win! *pout pout cry* ~ magbatz
Just an FYI...it looks fine in monobook, but it's severely honked in other skins, such as the TMBW skin. --Duke33 15:49, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wired Cameo

I don't think that this is worthy for main page news, but TMBG got a brief mention in the latest edition of Wired magazine: 

p.159

GEEK TAG NECKLACE
You finally traded your They
Might Be Giants T-shirt for a suit...

-AtionSong 18:31, 19 November 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Political Cartoons/Art

I was just wondering if anyone else had seen this art exhibition or read anything about it. A couple of TMBG collaberators, Brian Dewan and Kurt Hoffman, had pieces in the exhibit. I haven't yet looked through them all, but there might be others. Just thought others here might be interested. Krueger 04:30, 10 February 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Rectangular Guitar

Anyone know what that squarish/rectangular guitar that flans has used frequently, as seen in this pic? [2] I figure the one he uses is probably out of my price range, but has anyone else seen any guitars like that, that would be less than say... 3000$? I always wanted to build up my reputation as the "Geek that rocks" I figured that would be exactly how. Thanks! --Fasterthanyou 02:24, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

it's a custom made mojo guitar. you could probably get one custom made like it for something like $3000


[edit] Move powarz?

What? We have the ability to move pages? Has this always been around? Maybe it's a bug? -J2

Everyone has always had this ability, even on Wikipedia. -CapitalQ / @ / 15:57, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
What. Wow. I'm probably blind. -J2

[edit] I'm bored. really really really bored.

anyone wanna get on tmbw chat?

[edit] Particle Man is LyricWiki's song of the day

http://www.lyricwiki.org/Main_Page for March the 9th :)

[edit] Uh-oh...

Hahaha what a foreboding message to put on the homepage. Exactly what changes will we see? I'm excited. -Cronny

What can they do to the site that's note Web 1.0? Rename to "This Might Be a 2.0?" 71.113.47.254 04:15, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
Well, I'm not going to tell anyone how I did it (it was pretty easy), but the changes are really good! :D Stalefries 04:21, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
Psyche. -CapitalQ / @ / 13:12, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
It's not April yet. I thought, perhaps, for a second... -Cronny
For the record: I know, and it's pretty. :p --Luke 16:00, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
Damn, someone found it before me. -J2
I was under the impression that wikis were "web 2.0" by default. When did this change? --badqueso 05:07, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
So did I. Hah, I'm not gonna complain about an upgrade though. -Cronny
So, exatly what is going to be different? --Josherz 19:23, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
All will be revealed on Saturday. -CapitalQ / @ / 19:27, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
The question should be, rather, what ISN'T going to be different-- bwahaha! ~ magbatz 23:08, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
Somehow I get the feeling they're enjoying this... -Cronny
At least someone is. Also: this was a secret? --badqueso 00:39, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
Ok, you've definitly piqued my curiosity :-) --Josherz 23:26, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
Hah. I thought it was an album debut thing at first. A wiki upgrade, huh? Sweet. :) I'm quite curious as well! --Lemita 00:38, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
zomg, noon, eh? What time zone? Or will it depend on my system clock via some wacked-out javascript or something? Stalefries 00:10, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
EST stands for Eastern Standard Time. :) -