The Stranglers???

Olav, you don't know how much time it took me to partially understand Progfreak. 

Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - October 23 2008 at 00:55

Windhawk wrote: Speaking about how one may see an act - a good example of how confusing this can be. US band Mind Furniture, which I had my fellow team members check Me: Unsure Others: One not prog, one unable to vote. External sources: Proggnosis: Symphonic Progressor: 70's aor/pomp with prog tendencies Sea of Tranquility: Classic prog Babyblaue: HardRock; Melodic Rock / AOR; RetroProg To make it even more interesting the album is a semi-concept piece consisting of two 20+ minute epics divided into 5 segments ;-)

Speaking about how one may see an act - a good example of how confusing this can be.

US band Mind Furniture, which I had my fellow team members check
Me: Unsure
Others: One not prog, one unable to vote.

External sources:
Proggnosis: Symphonic
Progressor: 70's aor/pomp with prog tendencies
Sea of Tranquility: Classic prog
Babyblaue: HardRock; Melodic Rock / AOR; RetroProg

To make it even more interesting the album is a semi-concept piece consisting of two 20+ minute epics divided into 5 segments ;-)

micky wrote: exactly Ivan.. and thanks    We just call them as we see them...  if any of you want my job...  you can have it   Trust me though.. just bring some asbestos panties when it is YOUR ass that gets flamed when people don't agree with a decision....  it isn't all fun and games and don't see a dime for it hahahhah.

exactly Ivan.. and thanks    We just call them as we see them...  if any of you want my job...  you can have it   Trust me though.. just bring some asbestos panties when it is YOUR ass that gets flamed when people don't agree with a decision....  it isn't all fun and games and don't see a dime for it hahahhah.  

micky wrote: hmmm.... this group required a unanimous  decision to be included... there were 3 people who judged it.. and there were 3 different opinions of it.  What we did agree upon was.... the Stranglers were not a group that belonged in the Crossover prog section. We agree for DIFFERENT reasons.   That was a team decision... there was no single reason why.  Prog is not a science... no hard and fast rules.. no matter how much some here try to make it so.  What we judge on is gut, and what our ears tell us.   Very disappointed in the responses here...  I have a PM box... if you wanted my personal thoughts...  the lack of respect shown the team.  Especialy namecalling... I don't stomach too well, nor will forget it.

hmmm....


this group required a unanimous  decision to be included... there were 3 people who judged it.. and there were 3 different opinions of it.  What we did agree upon was.... the Stranglers were not a group that belonged in the Crossover prog section. We agree for DIFFERENT reasons.   That was a team decision... there was no single reason why.  Prog is not a science... no hard and fast rules.. no matter how much some here try to make it so.  What we judge on is gut, and what our ears tell us.   Very disappointed in the responses here...  I have a PM box... if you wanted my personal thoughts...  the lack of respect shown the team.  Especialy namecalling... I don't stomach too well, nor will forget it. 


Edited by micky - October 22 2008 at 12:49

Feel free to ask the team - that would probably have been a more useful approach in the first place, rather than attacking them.

BaldJean wrote: Angelo wrote: BaldJean wrote: well, I stick to what I said; I am obviously inept by the standards of this site. my votum seperatum, however, is that the team which decided it is inept. and I will stick to that too May I suggest a cool down here? Angelo, I am not heated at all, I am merely stating a fact: either I or the responsible team is inept. I would have staked my reputation on the fact that the Stranglers are fully prog; if they are not I am inept by my own standards. if they however are, then obviously the team is inept. and that's not name-calling at all; it can't be if I concede my own possible ineptitude. I was totally serious when I wrote my status of "prog reviewer" should be removed; how can I be trusted as a prog reviewer if my assertion of the Stranglers is so blatantly wrong? their rejection, however, raises a serious discussion about what we call prog. I gave a checklist for the Stranglers, using the site's own standards. if they still fail to be accepted nevertheless then we should in my opinion redefine the standards, and in a way that makes the rejection of the Stranglers somewhat plausible, or else we lose credibility

As Iván already remarked - this is not a matter of ineptness, rather of perception of what is prog. The team were selected based on their willingness to do work for the site and their knowledge of prog.  No matter how strict we write rules, guidelines and standards, there's always going to be some room for perception and interpretation. The teams decide, and in this case they ruled unanimously against The Stranglers for Xover. They were already rejected for P-R in April, so that road is closed as well. That's how ProgArchives works - there's no reason to rejudge them after 6 months based on the same output.
Nor is there, as also mentioned in the posts before mine, any reason for anyone to take this personal. As you can see, your request was granted, per your own choice.

We hear with different ears, and focus on and give weight to different qualities/ aspects.  We know that different people have different perceptions of Prog.  It gets more complicated when one gets into the dynamics of team evaluations, and the weighing up that takes place -- and there's the fact that different teams work in different ways (the PR team, in particular, works in a very different way to the other teams).  Team members don't always agree, but they agree to try to add that which they think fits their category well.  Though from what I've heard, I think there's a case for The Stranglers in the archives, I don't know that it fits the parameters of Crossover sufficiently well -- plus, that it's controversial to begin with might factor in, even though the music, rather than what others say, should speak for itself.  But music really does speak differently to different people.

I feel that I have a good handle on Prog, yet I don't always "get' why one thing was included and another excluded, or why one was thought more appropriate to a particular category over another.  There is music (albums) in Prog-Related that for me is Prog, but that doesn't mean that others were wrong to put it in PR over a Prog category (often a question of perceived degree and so mnay considerations to take into account), and there is music in Prog categories that for me is Prog-Related.  Prog can be such a nebulous classification, and the categories themselves can be difficult to come to grips with.  For instance, I suggested a band once that I thought was a kind of progressive Metal (and is generally classified as metal), and they thought it was Heavy Prog (of course they know metal better than I).

The teams tend to know their categories best, and set the direction.  Art Rock, of which Xover is a part, is quite nebulous in itself, but teams look for certian things and exclude based on other qualities.  There aren't that many categories here where I feel really confident when it comes to suggesting music to (I know well how the teams work and am very familiar with music), but I'm often stumped/ unsure.  As Micky sometimes says, sometimes we're trying to pound square pegs into round holes.

Prog is in the ear of the behearer, and commonly we don't agree on what is Prog or Prog enough as there are different perceptions and conceptions of Prog.  I'm more inclusive (not when it comes to the team I've worked for as there I'm more cautious and work in tighter parameters), so for me the umbrella is bigger than many.  One has to respect differences of opinion (of course, at the same time, we don't have to agree or agree to disagree -- we just need to really listen and try to understand where the other side is coming from).


Edited by Logan - October 21 2008 at 14:46