Yes, the first sentence does seem inconsistent, but I admitted even in that quote that the rebellious flaunting was an inappropriate, flippant reaction. Moreover, I WAS playing to the crowd the entire time, even in the initial set that kicked off the furor.julius wrote:I'm not trying to tweak you here, honest, but how do you reconcile this paragraph with 'give the DJ's employer what the employer wants', an attitude you have espoused in other threads?Lawrence wrote: In a flippant act of defiance, I intentionally flaunted the "rules" for a few months thereafter to test the issue and show just how successful a set could be while blatantly flaunting the rules, until some friends convinced me to just continue to simply ignore the guidelines instead of intentionally trying to push the issue. Of course, they were right and the "rules" have faded back into obscurity where they belong. But they are still there to be abused, again.
Also, the DJ coordinator who took the single complaint at face value was not even at the dance, and, again, the complaint was aggravated by his enforcing "rules" without even being there. The point was not to undermine the goal of the venue/employer; it was to mock the rules that someone no longer involved had quickly and inartfully drafted years before.