I'm not one for harassing journalists over negative reviews. But Dan Silver got to me, because he was so biased, and his 2 stars were based on the fact he hated axl rose. Here's what i wrote to the editor...

Dear Sir,

One had always imagined that facts, song titles, styles and reasons for opinions were almost a pre-requisite when constructing a review of any style of music. It seems that these key journalistic values have been unashamedly abandoned when Dan Silver "reviewed" the Guns N' Roses album "Chinese Democracy".

Mr Silver chose to abandon any sort of impartial reporting, instead, he focussed on the melee of what became the making of said album, choosing to mock Axl Rose. The article did not articulate the style of the album, name any band members, contain a track listing, or even give a reason for his negative opinions.

After reading the review one could possibly question if the reviewer has actually heard the album, echoing the scandal of Maxim magazine who made disparaging comments about an album by the Black Crowes when in fact promotional copies were not available. That journalist was said to have made "an educated guess preview".

Does the guardian have some sort of (not so hidden) agenda against Axl Rose, and the band he calls Guns N' Roses? I refer back to the review of the Chinese Democracy single by Elizabeth Day where she referred to Axl rose as someone who has,

" been cryogenically frozen in the early Nineties, with his fingerless gloves and his Stars and Stripes bandana."

Other quotes about the track include

"I am struck by its uncanny resemblance to the Crocodile Dundee soundtrack" - simply untrue.

Obviously everyone has their own opinions, i respect that. Conclusions should, however, be drawn with respect to the writers reasoning behind such opinions. none of which i have read in the Guardian.

Obviously Guns N' Roses are not to everyone's tastes, their album should, however, be reviewed fairly. i would be interested to hear what exactly made these reviewers feel so strongly against the music presented to them?

The Guardian is a well respected newspaper, and I'm shocked to see this brand of lazy, petulant journalism has a place in the newspaper.

Regards

Dr. David McKay

hopefully I'll hear back. btw. the rolling stone review was bit over the top. OMG is not better than "everything" on TSI?

i agree with the dream theater comment. i said this a few days ago in relation to this i love, (its sounds like a track from scenes from a memory).

in terms of guitar complaints......imo, the current line up to fine on the heavier tracks, BUT, when it comes to a ballad (witht he exception of sorry which has a beautiful solo) there is something missing.

I have NEVER< EVER said i felt the new line up missed slash. NEVER. But i will admit that on this i love, one of his bluesy dynamic and soulful solo's would suit it better.

Its not about who is a beter guitarist, its just conflicting styles

my guess is thats its MSL thats leaking this crap. (although im sort of grateful but annoyed that he wont leak fully).

The leaker (MSL???) is either scared of being tracked and damaging a close contact or loves to see us do this merry dance

I have to say i haven't been a member here all that long, but i think this forum is real cool, pretty much everything is discussed, good, bad and ugly.

HTGTH, as you have all said, WAS the premier GnR site but it just got beyond tiresone having posts deleted for trivial things. And as you have said, people over there have been called trolls etc which i bad

so where exactly did this list come from, how did you get your hands on it?