Forum Home Forum Home > Other music related lounges > General Music Discussions
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Most Controversial/Persistant Nominees?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedMost Controversial/Persistant Nominees?
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 456
Author
Message
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
FunkyM View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: November 12 2010
Location: Funkytown
Status: Offline
Points: 134 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 26 2011 at 00:21
Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

Originally posted by FunkyM FunkyM wrote:

Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

Originally posted by FunkyM FunkyM wrote:


Yeah, but this isn't a case of inconsistent approvals by the genre teams. These are bands that are on the site that were apparently never evaluated at all. That would seem to be exactly the opposite of what you describe above - rather than being on PA through a collaborative effort, these legacy bands are here because somebody added them before the rules were established.

Like I said, I have no problem with Nightwish (for example) being on PA. But I agree that having them listed under prog-metal will imply to those visiting the site that they meet the site's criteria for prog-metal and imply that prog-metal team considers them prog-metal.

If genre team members are saying that some bands are only in the PA because they never had to be evaluated, then I'm just suggesting that maybe they should be evaluated so people can settle the debate, that's all. If there's more important stuff to worry about, that's cool. Smile

No, if we do that for some legacy bands that some people think shouldn't be here then we have to do that for all bands added before the genre teams were established; and since the genre teams change as people come and go then would would have to do that everytime there is a team change. That is impractical and wrong. There was nothing inherrantly wrong with the pre-team system, those collaborators who added artists in those days were SCs, and therefore entrusted to add those artists - it was still a collaborative effort.


I don't think there's any evidence that there'd be an impetus to reevaluate non-controversial legacy bands, but point taken. Smile
It has been questioned in the past on this forum whether Pink Floyd is prog. That makes them ( and Genesis, Yes, Tangerine Dream, Mike Oldfield, Jethro Tull, Dream Theater, etc., etc.) controversial in someone's estimation.


Sure, I'm aware that people have all sorts of definitions of what is and isn't prog. But I don't recall anyone suggesting the site must reevaluate a band every time there's a forum post. How frequently are the presence of Genesis, Yes, Floyd, etc. brought into question by members of their respective genre teams when people bring them up? I'm going to guess it's not that often.

But hey, you're the ones who make the decisions. I don't want to argue with ya. Do what you think is best. Smile
Back to Top
rogerthat View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer


Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 26 2011 at 00:42
Originally posted by FunkyM FunkyM wrote:

 

Sure, I'm aware that people have all sorts of definitions of what is and isn't prog. But I don't recall anyone suggesting the site must reevaluate a band every time there's a forum post. How frequently are the presence of Genesis, Yes, Floyd, etc. brought into question by members of their respective genre teams when people bring them up? I'm going to guess it's not that often.

But hey, you're the ones who make the decisions. I don't want to argue with ya. Do what you think is best. Smile

I agree. A few people like resurrection might question whether Genesis is prog but the Gabriel as well as four man Genesis years are generally widely accepted as prog.  So, even though people have their own definitions of what is and what is not prog, there clearly is no issue with some bands which are widely accepted whereas some bands are clearly rather borderline. It's a bit too reductive to presume that what applies to borderline bands will necessarily spread to a Genesis or Yes. Further, Genesis and Yes are among the first movers of prog as a whole, so suggesting they are not and, hypothetically, that Nightwish is (and I don't believe anyone is going to do that) is just ridiculously revisionist and lacking in historical perspective.  Prog started with those bands among others, it's not up for people to question whether they are prog or not by their own yardsticks.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 456

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.188 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.