Am I reading this correctly?

progbethyname wrote: Well I think QUEENSRŸCHE's album OPERATION MINDCRIME should be in the top ten. Not too many conceptual albums better than that one. My god it's good. It's a 5 starer for sure.

I still haven't listened to Queensryche. I really need to check them out.

Thanks for contributing^

thellama73 wrote: Dayvenkirq wrote: dtguitarfan wrote: thellama73 wrote: octopus-4 wrote: btw, I think CAMEL should be on top 10 Hell yes they should. I can't believe they got voted into the Hall of Shame in the Battle of the Bands thread. Oh, that thread is completely invalid.  It was controlled by the haters and the only purpose of it was for them to express their hatred of some of the most well known and respected Progressive bands ever. That's funny - some of the most well know and respected progressive bands ever are in the Hall of Fame. With the exception of Camel and Kraftwerk, I agree completely with both Halls.

I didn't participate at all, I don't think (I tend to avoid the Just For Fun section),, and just checked it out now.  I see that Magma entered the Hall of Shame, which if I cared about such things which I don't, would be my biggest disappointment.  I participated a bit in a contest like that that when I joined PA, but I found the process too tedious (slow moving/ back and forth) to keep my interest.  And in such topics you get a very limited number of people who post frequently, so it can become like a ping pong match (I'm too impatient for such things).  I was going to say that perhaps controlled by passionate people would be more apt (passionate people who both love and hate certain bands), but for such a silly little contest, I wouldn't expression much seriousness about it..  I haven't seen much of the thread, though, as it's very dull reading.  I prefer topics where people discuss and share impressions of music, and am not into these contests.  I'm fine with those who are, of course.

To me the real fun would be in knocking out ones I don't much care for and then adding a favourite of mine.  I wouldn't expect that hate would the dominant  motivator of most of the active members in that thread.  It is about getting rid of the ones you don't like and propping up those you do, and for me, mostly it would be about getting the chance to add my favourite band.  Hate can be part of the equation, but I find it hard to believe that most of the people who were most active in it (thereby controlling it) participated with the express purpose to express their hatred of many of the most Prog lauded bands (to kill sacred cows so to speak). Side-note:  I've read a lot of people claiming that large and outspoken groups of individuals despise bands simply because they are loved by the majority (a sort of herd outsider mentality), but I think most of follow our own paths.  I'm sure it happens, but I've always felt that that was overstated.  And it doesn't really follow from the results I see.  The biggest (first string), most historically important names of the Prog movement did make it into the Hall of Fame.  Camel is the biggest name that didn't make it in Prog, but that's not as well known as Yes, Pink Floyd, Jethro Tull or Rush, nor as generally respected here as King Crimson (I knew Camel in the 70s unlike KC).  Compare it to the top 100 list, and I think you will see that that is not really at odds with what people generally most like.

The most well-known and lauded of the Prog movement generally did do well (the real classics and seminal acts that helped kick-start the movement and bring it  popular attention during the so-called "golden age").  Frank Zappa is a bit of surprise in the Hall of Shame, but then I don't associate him with the Prog movement as much as others.  Most of the bands that got into the Hall of Shame are not originators of the Prog movement/ part of the classic era, really well known, and are ones that people are really divided on (Magma, a classic era one, has haters and lovers,  Marillion, a revival band really divides opinion).

if one spoke to the majority of people who know what Prog is (especially of my generation and older), I am confident that more of the ones that got into the Hall of Fame would be known as Prog acts than  those who went into the Hall of Shame.  I would expect most of the popular classics to be voted out if there was some agenda by powerful in that contest individuals to express their hatred of some of the best-known and respected prog bands ever (ever implies that the band has been around since Prog's beginnings to me, by the way).   The ones one is mostly likely to find in the most books about Prog I would expect generally did well.




Edited by Logan - October 04 2012 at 12:40

Logan wrote: Hate can be part of the equation, but I find it hard to believe that most of the people who were most active in it (thereby controlling it) participated with the express purpose to express their hatred of many of the most Prog lauded bands (to kill sacred cows so to speak).

Logan - yes, some of the most active people in that thread were there with the chief goal of eliminating groups like Frank Zappa (surely not Hall of Shame worthy - I mean, he's not my absolute favorite and there are works by him that I do NOT like, but he is incredibly influential and an historical figure), The Flower Kings (they practically started the Swedish Prog movement), and Dream Theater (um...just shut up already, they're awesome and you can't change that no matter how loud you shout).  And there's plenty of other groups in that "Hall of Shame" (Kansas?  REALLY?!) that anybody with a brain who knows anything about Prog and its history should be able to say with confidence that they do not belong there.  So yes, I believe there was the mentality of "I'm mad that these bands are historically relevant, so I'm going to be as active as possible in order to eliminate them" going on there, and really in general on this forum.  And I just don't get it - I can't see my way around having a problem with someone liking something I don't like, but I definitely have a problem with people actively hating music.  Unless of course it's Justin Beaver or Katy Perry. 

dtguitarfan wrote: Logan wrote: Hate can be part of the equation, but I find it hard to believe that most of the people who were most active in it (thereby controlling it) participated with the express purpose to express their hatred of many of the most Prog lauded bands (to kill sacred cows so to speak). Logan - yes, some of the most active people in that thread were there with the chief goal of eliminating groups like Frank Zappa (surely not Hall of Shame worthy - I mean, he's not my absolute favorite and there are works by him that I do NOT like, but he is incredibly influential and an historical figure), The Flower Kings (they practically started the Swedish Prog movement), and Dream Theater (um...just shut up already, they're awesome and you can't change that no matter how loud you shout).  And there's plenty of other groups in that "Hall of Shame" (Kansas?  REALLY?!) that anybody with a brain who knows anything about Prog and its history should be able to say with confidence that they do not belong there.  So yes, I believe there was the mentality of "I'm mad that these bands are historically relevant, so I'm going to be as active as possible in order to eliminate them" going on there, and really in general on this forum.  And I just don't get it - I can't see my way around having a problem with someone liking something I don't like, but I definitely have a problem with people actively hating music.  Unless of course it's Justin Beaver or Katy Perry.

I can't speak for their motivations, and haven't seen enough of the thread to see the patterns of behaviours (or comments).  Frank Zappa's great, I think, and generally very well-respected, so I do find that rather surprising.  He does divide opinion, though.  Frank Zappa's music played an integral role in bringing me back to Prog and exploring it more deeply (hearing Peaches en Regalia on classic rock radio was electrifying).  I've come across quite a few who hate him because of his lyrics, to which I would respond that he did a lot of instrumentals.  Kansas seriously divides opinion -- there are a lot of haters of that band here, and I rather doubt that the vast majority of people who have heard of Prog and know who Yes is think of it as a Prog band even if they have made Prog albums (perhaps one could say the same of Genesis, though).  The Flower Kings is another band that people are extremely divided on from my experience and is not one of the most well-known EVER (it's a revivalist band) and definitely not one of the most respected.  I've spent six years here, and that is one of the bands that gets the most criticism (called regressive rather than progressive, retro, w**ky etc.).  As for Dream Theater, it's not my cup of tea, but I have no problem with the band (not a band I loathe), but it is a band that has a lot of haters as you know.  It's not about who you think belongs though, is it?  I thought it was just about who you like and don't like.  I don't like ELP, but would still list them as one of the most important Prog bands.  I don't like Kansas generally,  FK, or DT, so yes, I would vote against them while propping up the bands I like if I had participated (I dislike Marillion more, so I'd be voting that out first).  Those are all one that people are divided on  -- they are not amongst the generally most respected bands at this site from my experience (all seem to divide people).  Having  those oft hated ones in the competition would attract more haters to join the for fun contest.

But people's choices would not generally be based on what is most important from a historical Prog perspective.  I would vote Magma (which entered the Hall of Shame) over Yes if I had the chance because Magma fits my tastes better even if I see Yes as more important to Prog-by-genre.

It sounds dreadfully tedious to me, but to each his or her own fun.

By the way, I'd quite like to see a  new forum called Not Quite Fun or Not As Fun As You Might Like for Just for Fun type topics that fail to be fun, just plain aren't much fun, or may be taken rather too seriously....

Logan wrote: It sounds dreadfully tedious to me, but to each his or her own fun. By the way, I'd quite like to see a  new forum called Not Quite Fun or Not As Fun As You Might Like for Just for Fun type topics that fail to be fun, just plain aren't much fun, or may be taken rather too seriously....

I really like the idea of a "Not Fun At All" forum.

Logan wrote: thellama73 wrote: Logan wrote: It sounds dreadfully tedious to me, but to each his or her own fun. By the way, I'd quite like to see a  new forum called Not Quite Fun or Not As Fun As You Might Like for Just for Fun type topics that fail to be fun, just plain aren't much fun, or may be taken rather too seriously.... I really like the idea of a "Not Fun At All" forum. Good idea.  It would, however, be difficult to consistently maintain the "not fun at all" integrity of said forum.  Failure to comply with the no fun rules could entail serious punishment, but the punishing may be too much fun. So, perhaps in to order to uphold the forum's "no fun" purity, only certain PA members (we know who they are even if they don't) who are known to consistently be no fun at all should be allowed to post in the forum.

Would one get banned for using  in the "No Fun At All" forum?

Monty Python - Now thats when the thread DOES get funny !!!

M27Barney wrote: Monty Python - Now thats when the thread DOES get funny !!! The top 100 - should be by genre - you can't really compare 1970's Genesis - with Dream Theater but you could compare it with The Flower Kings....By Genre the poll would be more representative..... Nobody expects the spanish inquisition....our chief weapons are.....