@n00b100 said:

@JMart said:

1. it's not that I care if you weren't there when you write these retrospective reviews- I myself like that you take the time to write them- it's that there were so many people who WERE there who could be chiming in for .net. Again, I think this is more the case with for shows in the here and now. We're all die-hards at this point. Surely there's someone in attendance who's willing to bang out a review?!?

There have been folks willing to do just that, and they've posted them on the setlist pages for 7/17 and 7/18/99. While obviously reviewing the shows goes into this because we have to talk about them and that just goes hand in hand, we're approaching this more from the standpoint of "should these festivals deserve the reputation something like IT does?", which I think can be discussed without having attended - honestly, based upon what we often get from of "I was there!" folks, it might well be the *only* way it can be discussed. YMMV, obviously.

Completely agreed. The argument really surfaces when the official .net review comes from someone on couch tour, not these reviews which obviously are happening in retrospect and in a historical context.
For what it’s worth most of my favorite phish moments are from shows I didn’t attend.