FAO Hawkwind Band: NikWar Spam

[M Holmes]

Colin Allen writes:

[Re: suggestion to can it...]

> A very sensible suggestion Michael; as all this is still the subject
> of legal process the Hawks are, very sensibly, saying nothing until
> the case is resolved.  Perhaps we should all do the same rather than
> reacting to what can only, at the moment, be conjecture, rumour,
> hearsay and propaganda.

That's fair enough, except that one side is trying to involve us
directly by holding a "Benefit" to raise cash for the summoning up of
lawyers.  I think it's a reasonable topic of discussion as to whether we
ought to persuade those who might attend to balance off any artistic
merits against making contributions to such a purpose.

Not that I'm suggesting a boycott of Nik's band. As I've mentioned, I
saw them at Glastonbury. However, in this case any profits will go to
attempting to gut Hawkwind of their very name, and the tenor of the
recent spam indicates that any support is all too likely to be quoted as
support by the fanbase for Nik's Court claims.

In the case of this specific "Benefit" gig, I think conscience tells me
that I have to personally stay away and furthermore encourage advocacy
of others to do the same.  I have a gut feeling that what's really at
stake isn't just who carries the name. The real effect of removing
"Hawkwind" from Dave would possibly go a lot further than that.

I intensely dislike being put into a position where I effectively have
to choose a side, but it seems to me that one faction has now put me
into that corner.

I'm therefore choosing my Masque.  The simple fact is that there's no
"Benefit" to me in what's being planned and I'll not only not
contribute, I'll proselytise against doing so.  I vote we don't go and
we don't contribute.  I very much doubt that the lawyers will starve.

FoFP