The #WallyWisdom Greatest Hits Collection: A collection of wisdom, insights and prolific posting

[Mac Casper]

Post 1 In regard to DMX's introduction to the market and why some bum rapper with a similar goal would fail in today's market​

Extremely doubtedly will this man have this man have the effect of DMX's introduction to the mainstream market when the result of Tupac and Biggie's death resulted in the hip-hop consumer having aggressive content stripped from the supply chain and replaced by an artificially inflated shiny suit era that the industry tried to push to distance itself from the violence that hip-hop was being associated with despite the fact that there was no waning interest from the hip-hop consumer in the former product. This left an immediate void in the market for aggressive hip-hop that wasn't being satiated by any rapper in the game. It would be the equivalent of cocaine disappearing form the market and being replaced by something that nobody wanted and then coke makes it's return, not only is the interest still there for the first shipment upon it's arrival but people are leaping at the opportunity to get it

In this era there's no potential for growth with this content, his success will be marginalized and compartmentalized into a segment that has no value to the mainstream. Could you imagine little Sally who has trigger warnings all over her tumblr hearing this?


It simply comes down to economics. You have to think of little Sally

#WallyWisdom

Reviews
"you sound like a wikipedia article" -tuckdog


Post 2 - in regards to a guide for longevity in the game

An explanation for this isn't provided in the realm of hip-hop analysis

It's provided in the art of seducing the masses

Any star power is based on an illusion. The danger is that people will grow tired of it and turn to another star. Once you're on top there's nowhere to go but down and your clock starts ticking. If your perception of being "on top" is correctly calibrated than you're perfectly aware that you've never seen anybody on top for an extended period of time. They may even disappear for awhile before reemerging in the public eye because it's easy to reintroduce the perception of success when the public doesn't see your star power wane right before them

So when you're at the top and you find yourself at the end of the album cycle, you should be looking for a departure time. Disappear. Let the public latch on to it's next star without seeing your star power deplete before their eyes. Come back 4 years later with the impression that you're too successful to drop an album every year, if you do this the public's only perception of you is that you are on top. Inevitably enduring star power will require adaptation and ultimately you will need to reinvent yourself or you run the risk of becoming obsolete. You must always renew your luster because there is nothing more laughable than an image that was fashionable 10 years ago

Jay Z never being on top at any point is his career played the benefit of allowing him to never be diminished by exhibiting a steep decline before the public eye. It's easier to longevity when you settle for maintaining consistency rather than aiming for the top spot, because there's a gamble. The material requires you to be completely out there in the sense that you aim for a hit record, which result in great success or obvious failure in an attempt to make a hit record. Example of this would be Papoose's "Bang It Out", you've got the Scott Storch beat at the height of Scott Storch's influence on the hip-hop soundscape, the major feature from Snoop and a record that sounded like it could've came from 50 Cent. Any listener with a discernible ear knows when someone is making an attempt at a hit record, every listener can tell the difference between a single and an album track.

Where's Eminem when he doesn't have a new album coming out? Where's Madonna when she doesn't have a new album coming out? They are maintaining their privacy and distance from the public eye, appearances are very rare until they wish to return to the public eye. Jay Z has learned to do the same

http://www.thecoli.com/posts/20842756/

 

[Mac Casper]

That's just today let's look at some more wisdom dropped by Wally this week

Post 3 - in regards to the inflation of Jay Z's legacy

I'm also noticing that Jay Z sympathizers have a penchant for omitting DMX from the discussion entirely

However DMX offered a brand of music that is single handedly responsible for offering an alternative to the shiny suit era. He brought aggression back in the game when the game needed it. Exhibiting success in a route that puts him against the grain certainly represents a strong level of influence. Also I don't know about your but I was a lot more exciting at that time to hear DMX on the radio than Jay Z - that's me personally though, I don't use that as a statement to make my case (which I will get to later)

And as my memory recalls more I remember to note that there's absolutely no question that Ja Rule was having more radio success than Jay Z during this early millennial years . .those records were formulaic and not my cup of tea, I wouldn't be able to pick out one of those songs from the other. If I were to map out a trajectory of the songs' energy they would all consist of verses with an a voice that was akin to the cookie monster and a chorus from Ashanti/ So I wouldn't be opposed to an assertion that his brand didn't lend itself to being an influential member of hip-hop. DMX however . .

You know how we can show pure evidence of how overstated Jay Z's legacy was? He went from being the typical hot rapper to automatically having "legend" status overnight. Where did he earn that? By being around? I wouldn't try to undermine his status but I also don't appreciate a false narrative and inflated legacy. The most glaring misnomer you have to account for is the lack of discussion of DMX in top 10 discussions.So Jay Z is GOAT but the guy who was hotter than him, had a bigger wave, bigger singles and arguably a better catalog isn't even in the top 10 discussion?

Hmm why isn't DMX not receiving the same reverence or at least a proportional amount?

Oh I know because Jay Z's PR move to inflate his legacy didn't include bringing up the status of any of the rappers who were comparatively hot during their peaks . . so you have glaring hole here

Let's do this again - DMX, same time frame. Hotter. More record sold. Bigger hits. Arguably a better catalog

but yet we still don't see any inflated status for DMX

How does that work?

Perhaps Jay Z's status is inflated beyond the market value of his brand in the sense that if we commit something to text it'll eventually show up on Google and inevitably be associated with his status. Now if that is the case then we also must assume that you've bought into this. Let's get some other opinions on both sides to be sure.

I never seen him more than just another rapper who was around at the time, so surely you can see my concern when overnight people are inflating his status. I remember him headlining the Rock Da Mic tour over 50 Cent but 50 Cent was the name that was used to promote the concert. Everyday leading up to that concert the radio was talking about 50 Cent tickets . . despite Jay Z being the actual headliner. Do you know what I mean?


What I've just outlined for you is something that needs immediate explanation . . I would consider this to be on the level of $3.5 trillion dollars going missing from the Pentagon. You know? Something isn't right and it's looking funny in the light. I would really like a solid explanation from you. I'm completely open to accepting some aspect I may be overlooking

Never straying from controversial topics

 

[Mac Casper]

Post 4 - in regards to the myth of disparity in lyrical skill between Biggie and Tupac

It's literally a myth, the difference is Tupac made no effort to extentuate the intricacies of his interior rhyming patterns so it's not as perceptible to the ear for those not paying attention and his style didn't lend to immediately recognizable lyrical device, where Biggie talked nice and slow so you heard everything . . Tupac was rapping with (what some people call) a "rapid fire delivery". Tupac projected his voice from the pit of his stomach like a preacher would


I don't know though, I mean if I'm talking to some who's comparing The Beatles to The Monkees knowing that The Monkees were a made for TV band that never wrote their own songs and The Beatles are noted for writing some of the greatest songs that human civilization has to offer than there's only so far that I can entertain the validity of such an argument

We know that Biggie hated the sound of the songs Puff was putting together for him . . . he literally acquired a fan base selling music he hated and looked down upon. What do you think he thought of his fans? So he has no responsibility for the sound of his records and you're expecting me to evaluate him like "awww, you can sit at the cool kids table to" and "everyone gets a participation trophy. He's an all time great in status and he offered a unique style that is without a doubt his own but as an artist he is nothing more than a rapper brought into the studio to rap between the lines that Puffy laid out for him. It's really unfortunate that people can't see things for what they are simply because they want to cling to an idea.

Let me reiterate that his name was on a product that he didn't like, he sold that product to you and you are now his fan because of a product he didn't even like and had little input in it musically beyond rapping the verses. He also had nearly the same amount of time as Tupac in the industry and his output isn't even comparable. It's like comparing the back up short stop coming in off the bench and having a batting average of .400 with 10 at bats to the guy with a .350 batting average that played all season and has 300 plus bats . Like where do people do this at this is why aliens won't visit us and the worst part is these people are going to have kids with their trash genetics that will likely leave the kids with piss poor mental aptitude and to top it off they're going to be the ones teaching these kids thinking, reasoning and logical skills. This is why aliens won't visit us, I'm starting to realize that this country having two candidates that are most unfavorable in political history is no more than a reflection of what these people are. We have stupid people and stupid people will be governed by stupid people. There's no legitimate basis for comparison on any level. The only thing you can assert is that you have a preference for Biggie's style and because of that you're not able to evaluate the two with an unbiased point of view. These people have placed religious like conviction in their childhood hero and simply being asked to look at the most basic disqualification has the potential to result in the unwiring of the reality as they know it.

And I really think these people hating Tupac 20 years after his death are people who took the line "That's why I fukked your bytch you fat muthaphukka" to heart and felt betrayed so they took all of their Tupac posters off the wall and burned his albums . . . instead of losing weight

#WallyWisdom

this is outta control. The lack of logic and the insistence on clinging to a warped view of reality and false criteria literally looks like a case of mass hysteria that they were infected by 20 years ago and never got out of it. This is worthy of study

Post 5 - WallyWisdom on the monetization of a rapper's brand and economics

I'm of the belief that such a song (that I personally find distasteful) has replay value in rural America. I'd be interested to learn more about the character traits of the people who end up being fans of these pop singles. The artist's job is garner influence but the demographic that you hold influence over also effects your brand's value. Companies pay more for pop radio station ads because the demographic is shown to spend more than hip-hop fans . . . when it comes down to it, a mainstream songs success is about how well it upholds a platform for advertisement (radio ads). So a pop artist would ideally be attracting fans in the consumer class.Every aspect of the music industry comes down creating a platform for advertisers. This is why record labels standardized 360 deals, they found themselves investing in the growth of a brand and their investment is monetized via outlets outside of music that they didn't hold a claim to. The best song for radio is the one that keeps the listener pacified enough not to think, because thinking leads to a higher likelihood of changing the channel which would lower the play retention. That's why the industry has that new program where they don't engage in payola but they will put a single in test rotation through various markets and it's potential is judged by the retention. If your song is the one that people are changing the channel to than you run the risk of lowering the radio stations value to advertisers and your song is quickly removed from air play. This is why radio stations that play local artists do so during a designated time to play local artists, the listener has no familiarity with the song and thus there's a statistically higher chance of lower retention, these segments are also discounted to the advertiser so you'll usually catch the local guys ad who didn't want to pay top dollar for the most effective ad time.

Our society raises sheep, not taste makers. You buy our products. We put Nike shoes on our artist in the video so when we export our American pop music - yes, American pop music is a genuine export that effects our GDP and the power of our brands,so it retaining it's influence over foreign markets has a small part in keeping our economy strong by strengthening the power of our brands when those stars are wearing whatever brand of shoe they're wearing Kim Su-Wong in China sees it on that girl that she thinks of and wishes she could be every time she looks in the mirror and then she is more likely to have favorable thoughts about buying said product

This is how the wheels of the economy spin. The reason a lot of you aren't seeing the American dream is because at some point you rationalized and made the decision that you were content with settling for something that was within reach, in doing so you're now your only outfit of pleasure and feelings of attaining is to buy a product from a brand that you desire. So you've dropped out of the American dream and into the lower realm of consumerism where you spend your earnings on the acquisition of products. Capitalism relies on the investment of private capital with the intention of building a business that employs people and serves a product or service to where there is a demand for it. Capitalism subscribes to no moral code, it is completely dictated by the market. It takes no stance on it's own and operates best when government doesn't meddle in the regulation of it - because most government regulations hinder the opportunity for other capitalists to compete in the market and that results in a monopoly, which is what you recently saw with the epipen. The government, through the FDA has essentially granted them a defacto monopoly

I'm of the belief that such a song (that I personally find distasteful) has replay value in rural America. I'd be interested to learn more about the character traits of the people who end up being fans of these pop singles. The artist's job is garner influence but the demographic that you hold influence over also effects your brand's value. Companies pay more for pop radio station ads because the demographic is shown to spend more than hip-hop fans . . . when it comes down to it, a mainstream songs success is about how well it upholds a platform for advertisement (radio ads). So a pop artist would ideally be attracting fans in the consumer class.Every aspect of the music industry comes down creating a platform for advertisers. This is why record labels standardized 360 deals, they found themselves investing in the growth of a brand and their investment is monetized via outlets outside of music that they didn't hold a claim to. The best song for radio is the one that keeps the listener pacified enough not to think, because thinking leads to a higher likelihood of changing the channel which would lower the play retention. That's why the industry has that new program where they don't engage in payola but they will put a single in test rotation through various markets and it's potential is judged by the retention. If your song is the one that people are changing the channel to than you run the risk of lowering the radio stations value to advertisers and your song is quickly removed from air play. This is why radio stations that play local artists do so during a designated time to play local artists, the listener has no familiarity with the song and thus there's a statistically higher chance of lower retention, these segments are also discounted to the advertiser so you'll usually catch the local guys ad who didn't want to pay top dollar for the most effective ad time.

Our society raises sheep, not taste makers. You buy our products. We put Nike shoes on our artist in the video so when we export our American pop music - yes, American pop music is a genuine export that effects our GDP and the power of our brands,so it retaining it's influence over foreign markets has a small part in keeping our economy strong by strengthening the power of our brands when those stars are wearing whatever brand of shoe they're wearing Kim Su-Wong in China sees it on that girl that she thinks of and wishes she could be every time she looks in the mirror and then she is more likely to have favorable thoughts about buying said product

This is how the wheels of the economy spin. The reason a lot of you aren't seeing the American dream is because at some point you rationalized and made the decision that you were content with settling for something that was within reach, in doing so you're now your only outfit of pleasure and feelings of attaining is to buy a product from a brand that you desire. So you've dropped out of the American dream and into the lower realm of consumerism where you spend your earnings on the acquisition of products. Capitalism relies on the investment of private capital with the intention of building a business that employs people and serves a product or service to where there is a demand for it. Capitalism subscribes to no moral code, it is completely dictated by the market. It takes no stance on it's own and operates best when government doesn't meddle in the regulation of it - because most government regulations hinder the opportunity for other capitalists to compete in the market and that results in a monopoly, which is what you recently saw with the epipen. The government, through the FDA has essentially granted them a defacto monopoly

Oh you posting better than #WallyWisdom huh?

Show me a candidate for The Booth's poster of the year that has better posts th

 

[Yoda]

give me your nearest mental hospital address so i can write letters to you about how the coli brehs is doing when you get admitted, jesus.

 

[Dusty Bake Activate]

You are a shytty poster and no one pays attention to you.

 

[Mac Casper]

give me your nearest mental hospital address so i can write letters to you about how the coli brehs is doing when you get admitted, jesus.

You are a shytty poster and no one pays attention to you.

Be adverse to intellect brehs

 

[Barney Rubble]

dikkriding yourself and flaunting your so called intelligence is always a sure fire method of gaining respect and followers

 

[tuckgod]

#WallyWisdom - sounds like a Wikipedia article

Yep

Not one original thought

Just a bunch of unverified bullshyt cobbled together from the minds and experiences of other people

 

[Mac Casper]

dikkriding yourself and flaunting your so called intelligence is always a sure fire method of gaining respect and followers

Works for Jay Z