Roxxiie. Posted March 3, 2010 Share Posted March 3, 2010 How beautiful leaves in this photo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
haushinka912 Posted March 4, 2010 Share Posted March 4, 2010 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deshabillage Posted March 4, 2010 Share Posted March 4, 2010 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newsflash777 Posted March 5, 2010 Share Posted March 5, 2010 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GREENDAY30 Posted March 5, 2010 Share Posted March 5, 2010 Love all the Mike pics. I've been a little Mike deprived lately. My stupid computer was down for 2 months. It feels nice to be back on broad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danger! Posted March 5, 2010 Share Posted March 5, 2010 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silviagreen Posted March 5, 2010 Share Posted March 5, 2010 http://img176.imageshack.us/img176/5004/securedownloadc.jpg OMG Where did you find that picture? I was there!! I remember Mike sorrounded by all those little girls... I took this picture a few minutes later : Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Metanoia Posted March 5, 2010 Share Posted March 5, 2010 ive never seen this one before : Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farley drexel hatcher Posted March 6, 2010 Share Posted March 6, 2010 This came from a public website, where Mike would have given the OK to share it, so I don't see any problem posting it here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AleKerplunk Posted March 6, 2010 Share Posted March 6, 2010 This came from a public website, where Mike would have given the OK to share it, so I don't see any problem posting it here http://i45.tinypic.com/2aa0ays.jpg he looks so pretty with brixton ^^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
henderson dirnt Posted March 6, 2010 Share Posted March 6, 2010 This came from a public website, where Mike would have given the OK to share it, so I don't see any problem posting it here http://i45.tinypic.com/2aa0ays.jpg THATS SO ADORABLE <3 what website did it come from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danger! Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deshabillage Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 i think i found the pic on facebook... dont really remember. sorry! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pritchy Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 ive never seen this one before : Sweet This came from a public website, where Mike would have given the OK to share it, so I don't see any problem posting it here http://i45.tinypic.com/2aa0ays.jpg If you really found this on Facebook it is Not published. Mike has no Facebook so he cannot have uploaded it. Do you even know how many “fans” use those kind of pics? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
haushinka912 Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabot gal Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 If you really found this on Facebook it is Not published. Mike has no Facebook so he cannot have uploaded it. Do you even know how many “fans” use those kind of pics? she didn't find it on facebook, it's from this site Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SOMERTEN Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 Sweet If you really found this on Facebook it is Not published. Mike has no Facebook so he cannot have uploaded it. Do you even know how many “fans” use those kind of pics? Another example of how people seem to over-react to pictures that are indeed on public websites. Remember the Dirnt wedding picture debacle when some twit accused the photographer of posting pictures illegally without checking the facts? To be honest I'm surprised this picture is still here. Anyway the pictures pages have gotten boring since the 20 million restrictions were put on posting.....Too many regulations for a punk website!. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharon mitchell Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 Another example of how people seem to over-react to pictures that are indeed on public websites. Remember the Dirnt wedding picture debacle when some twit accused the photographer of posting pictures illegally without checking the facts? To be honest I'm surprised this picture is still here. Anyway the pictures pages have gotten boring since the 20 million restrictions were put on posting.....Too many regulations for a punk website!. These people are entitled to a private life - there can never be too many regulations to protect their privacy. And as for the wedding photos, I wasn't involved in the argument on here, but there were many very private photos published and I know for a fact that Mike and Britt were very grateful when they were removed. And i think you'll find Mike DOES have a FaceBook - he just hasn't used it in forever! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SOMERTEN Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 These people are entitled to a private life - there can never be too many regulations to protect their privacy. And as for the wedding photos, I wasn't involved in the argument on here, but there were many very private photos published and I know for a fact that Mike and Britt were very grateful when they were removed. And i think you'll find Mike DOES have a FaceBook - he just hasn't used it in forever! Yes I seem to remember being told the wedding pics were removed from a British Green Day site too and the photographer was very upset at being accused of putting them online illegally. The person who declared this was left with egg all over their face. I also know for a fact that Mike and Brittney were very proud of the pictures, and they even allowed them to appear in a wedding magazine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farley drexel hatcher Posted March 9, 2010 Share Posted March 9, 2010 Sweet If you really found this on Facebook it is Not published. Mike has no Facebook so he cannot have uploaded it. Do you even know how many fans use those kind of pics? It didn't come from Facebook. As for the privacy issue - they deserve their privacy. As for Mike having a Facebook - if you mean the one with this photo - then I am about 90 percent sure that is NOT him. I added it once, and it has fan photos on there - screen caps from shows, which Mike wouldn't have, i'm sure. Also that photo is a fan photo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pritchy Posted March 9, 2010 Share Posted March 9, 2010 These people are entitled to a private life - there can never be too many regulations to protect their privacy. And as for the wedding photos, I wasn't involved in the argument on here, but there were many very private photos published and I know for a fact that Mike and Britt were very grateful when they were removed. And i think you'll find Mike DOES have a FaceBook - he just hasn't used it in forever! The only one of GD who has a facebook is Tré! He personally confirmed that in an interview with a drum magazine or something. It doesn't matter. To the wedding pics: Mike and Britt allowed Lone to use some of the photos on her website because they wanted to support her. And yeah of course they were proud of the photos, that's why the InStyle magazine was allowed to use them. But there has never been an OK from Lone or anyone of GD for fans to use them or watermark them. I do have a few fansites about GD on MySpace and it's a shame how FANS treat their privacy. They use pics that have nothing to do in the internet. Cuz they do have a private life and they need to have their privacy. I think GD do enough for their fans so that there is no reason to use those kind of pics as long as they're not published. And Mike never really published or gave his ok for private pics. The only ones of Estelle for example have been the ones from an MTV show where Estelle has been little. And Mike and Britt published the photo of Brixton right after he was born so I think it is enough. We all know Brixton and Estelle were born that's it. We don't need more to know. Mike is the famouse one, not his kids. I'm not yelling at someone. I'm in close contact with Lone and I know she was and she's still very upset about the fact that the photos she took of Mike and Britt (wedding or pregnancy) are still on so many sites in the web. And Mike and Britt are also very sad about the fact that pictures who are PRIVATE are also in the web. That's it. You can all have your own opinion about that. I won't go and ignore their privacy. I love the music of the band, and yeah Mike is my fav and of course it's kinda great to see those kind of pics but really: when I know that they are sad about it I don't wanna see them! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pritchy Posted March 9, 2010 Share Posted March 9, 2010 It didn't come from Facebook. As for the privacy issue - they deserve their privacy. As for Mike having a Facebook - if you mean the one with this photo - http://profile.ak.fbcdn.net/v226/1604/47/n1214485785_3295.jpg then I am about 90 percent sure that is NOT him. I added it once, and it has fan photos on there - screen caps from shows, which Mike wouldn't have, i'm sure. Also that photo is a fan photo. I agree! The guys, except for Tré and his facebook, always say that they don't have one. But there are so many roleplayers and fakers at MySpace, Facebook..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
henderson dirnt Posted March 9, 2010 Share Posted March 9, 2010 Okay, this is a picture thread, guys. But seriously, I've spoken with the wedding photographer quite a bit myself and the only thing she was upset about was the fake Brittney MySpace's using the wedding pictures and claiming them as their own. Mike and Britt wouldn't have allowed Lone to publish them on their site if they weren't okay with them getting out into the public. They're not stupid, they know fans find that kind of thing. The metroflog and fotolog accounts are what they should be concerned about, if they even know they exist, because that's where the really private pictures are coming from and yeah, we all love seeing Brittney and Mike but it's wrong posting pictures of Estelle or Brixton for the world to see. People find pictures and watermark them and won't show the original because quite frankly, they're greedy and... creepy. Let it drop, if someone's going to post a personal photo, they'll get in trouble for it from the mods/admins and the post will be deleted. Simple as that. And no, Mike doesn't have a facebook. My ex actually RPd the Billie to that Mike on facebook so I know both of them personally. Tré is the only one with a facebook. And so I'm keeping this thread on topic: His glasses <3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SOMERTEN Posted March 9, 2010 Share Posted March 9, 2010 Okay, this is a picture thread, guys. But seriously, I've spoken with the wedding photographer quite a bit myself and the only thing she was upset about was the fake Brittney MySpace's using the wedding pictures and claiming them as their own. Mike and Britt wouldn't have allowed Lone to publish them on their site if they weren't okay with them getting out into the public. They're not stupid, they know fans find that kind of thing. The metroflog and fotolog accounts are what they should be concerned about, if they even know they exist, because that's where the really private pictures are coming from and yeah, we all love seeing Brittney and Mike but it's wrong posting pictures of Estelle or Brixton for the world to see. People find pictures and watermark them and won't show the original because quite frankly, they're greedy and... creepy. Let it drop, if someone's going to post a personal photo, they'll get in trouble for it from the mods/admins and the post will be deleted. Simple as that. And no, Mike doesn't have a facebook. My ex actually RPd the Billie to that Mike on facebook so I know both of them personally. Tré is the only one with a facebook. And so I'm keeping this thread on topic: His glasses <3 http://i442.photobucket.com/albums/qq143/TornadoSirens/normal_tlan.jpg Sorry I know this is the picture thread and I have to confess I never post pictures. I just wanted to say I agree with the above comments. Mike has been in the business 20 years and he knows that fans always find the pictures. I also wanted to say that younger fans posting the pictures that are deemed private is one issue, but what I do find extremely offensive is people who join the facebooks of the bands' family members then claim to know the band personally. I find this really creepy and far more of an invasion of privacy, as they are the people who post the private pictures. That and the fact that someone posted a message to GDA claiming the wedding pictures were posted by Lone illegally, which was a pack of lies and Lone was upset by this. Also, it is generally thought that one or two of the loud protesters here are the ones that steal the pictures from family facebooks, put watermarks all over them on their own sites! And yes the fake Brittney sites are even wierder! I would be the first to support Mike if he genuinely got upset by particular pictures but I hate people speaking for him when they don't know him at all. p.s. georgous picture of Mike and Brixton, has that onsie got guitars all over it? aaaaaahhhhh! rock'n'roll baby! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farley drexel hatcher Posted March 9, 2010 Share Posted March 9, 2010 I just have to say - I know who runs the Armstrongs fotolog. I don't know who runs any of the others, but I hope it's not been implied that I or any of the others who 'protest' this kind fof thing are doing it. I do know people who are posing as the band on fake Facebook pages, which is is just sad on a whole other level. Like has been said, there is a line here. If the band have given the OK to post a photo on a public website, then yeah, I don't see any issue in sharing them, even if they do have the kids in them, which rarely to never happens. Like the photo I posted of Mike and Brixton. But taking photos from personal accounts, tagging them, and putting them up for the world to see, is 100 percent wrong. I guess the family members will have to just watch who they add. It's simple as that, really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.