Lets stop posting about this idiot Brushwood & start praying he sets himself alight with his fire eating.

On 2013-03-07 18:51, Stucky wrote:

Quote:

Lets stop posting about this idiot Brushwood & start praying he sets himself alight with his fire eating.

And I hope you get cancer... AND DIE! (That doesn't feel good does it? Think before you drink.)

Lol. At least I don't already look dead. Now run along little freak boy.

On 2013-03-08 07:01, Stucky wrote:
These colors don't run. It's too dark I'd bump into something.

On 2013-03-08 04:30, Russell Davidson wrote:


And I hope you get cancer... AND DIE!

On 2013-03-08 12:40, Ray Haining wrote:
I have no idea what L&S stands for.

On 2013-03-07 11:33, Matt Adams wrote:

Quote:

On 2013-03-07 00:32, Paul Rathbun wrote:
I guess my point was in my mind there isn't much difference between Brushwood and the pitch person. They are both selling secrets for money essentially on stuff that is not theirs to give away.

Here's my thoughts on this. The method of selling the secret makes all the difference. The pitchman is selling to an INDIVIDUAL. However, Brushwood exposed ID not to individuals, but the masses who didn't pay for the effect. Not only did it reach more people (and create more exposure), but those people didn't have to invest anything into the effect and are thus less inclined to understand the inherent nature of the secret of magic.

Whether we like it or not, the ID is certainly in public domain as no one is able to claim rights to this effect. I'm not debating here what is and what isn't public domain right now. The point is that the secret belongs to "all" the magicians and not just one.

SO in that sense it's not respectful of our art, our fellow performers, and our audience to reveal a secret that is not solely ours to share. If someone wants to reveal a trick they created that is exclusive to them, then that's one thing. But naturally that doesn't typically happen! It's guys who have NO RIGHT to a trick who feel they can ruin it for everyone else for the sake of "challenging people to create better magic." Are you serious?! Why don't YOU create the better magic rather than to reveal secrets that other people have worked hard to create and protect? It's because these exposers are LAZY and want to take an easy way to fame (I'm thinking more masked magician than Brushwood as I have yet to see Brushwood perform anything.).

And that is my primary issue with the exposure of guys like the masked magician (and in this case, Brushwood).

Now that I've been around the block a few times, I don't really think it will hurt magic in the long run. We just have to keep adapting. I'm not saying it doesn't hurt magic though...it does. But exposure won't KILL magic.

On 2013-03-08 14:16, writeall wrote:

Quote:

On 2013-03-08 12:40, Ray Haining wrote:
I have no idea what L&S stands for.

It's something about male genitalia.

On 2013-03-08 14:55, gdw wrote:
I COMPLETELY disagree with your initial premise. The pitchman is trying to sell it to as MANY people as POSSIBLE. He just has a rather inefficient business model.
...
So, in the end, Brushwood simply has a much better, more efficient, business model.

On 2013-03-08 14:55, gdw wrote:
As for what "secrets" they have a "right" to share, if you (legitimately) possess information, then that information is yours to do with what you wish. If I tell you something, I have given you that information, and it is now yours to do with as you wish. I'm not saying it's "respectful" for you to do whatever you like, just that you CAN, and that I made the information available in the first place.

On 2013-03-08 16:29, BrianMillerMagic wrote:
Guys, I don't agree with Brushwood exposing the ID on a mass video. However, do you really, honestly believe it's going to affect the lives and acts of regular working magicians? I've done the ID probably 20 times on stage since he exposed it. No one, other than magicians, have said the words "Brian Brushwood", "Scam School", or "Invisible Deck" to me.

But keep talking about it on a publicly accessible forum (Magic Café) and just maybe Google will pick up on it. Then it'll get even more attention!

On 2013-03-08 16:19, Matt Adams wrote:

Quote:

On 2013-03-08 14:55, gdw wrote:
I COMPLETELY disagree with your initial premise. The pitchman is trying to sell it to as MANY people as POSSIBLE. He just has a rather inefficient business model.
...
So, in the end, Brushwood simply has a much better, more efficient, business model.

Meh...the point is that Brushwood is selling to a network knowing they will share the information with the "public" versus a pitchman who sells to individuals IN the public. Obviously a pitchman would LOVE to sell a deck to every person in the room...but even so in that way it would cost EVERY person something (more than time). This is different than watching on TV or the internet...would you not agree?

Quote:

On 2013-03-08 14:55, gdw wrote:
As for what "secrets" they have a "right" to share, if you (legitimately) possess information, then that information is yours to do with what you wish. If I tell you something, I have given you that information, and it is now yours to do with as you wish. I'm not saying it's "respectful" for you to do whatever you like, just that you CAN, and that I made the information available in the first place.

Try that in all cases of information you possess...you'll end up in prison. lol. You have restrictions placed on you by governmental laws, social pressures, internal conscience, religious beliefs, etc. I agree you CAN do whatever you want, but you and I both agree there will certainly be consequences for doing "anything" you like with the information at your disposal!

In this case, Brian is certainly earning the spite of many working magicians who use an ID in their work. He's hurting the pitchman (who is selling secrets and not just trick decks - once the secret is out, why buy the deck?), and also the public (who don't REALLY want to know how something is done - regardless of how much they beg and plead).

All around bad mojo IMO