Plans on PA for becoming an all-music site?

You probably assume too much.

I wish I had your faith, but I am quite confident that David was not at all being sarcastic. His posts have time and time again shown his desire for a very narrowly defined idea of prog, and his bewilderment at many bands and artists already in PA.

As for the idea of not-even-close-to-being-prog, that is entirely subjective, and has been argued ad infinitum. PA’s idea of what is or is not prog is much wider than that of many who write in this forum, while simultaneously being much narrower than many people who enjoy and discuss prog outside PA. It is never going to be able to please all the people all the time, and it doesn’t set out to do that. If that makes people like David sad, or mad, so be it.

In the UK, I have definitely seen much dismissal and/or joking about PA, because of what it doesn’t consider to be prog. Bands and artists written about in Prog magazine, and in UK-based prog FB pages and groups; who are reviewed on UK-based prog websites, and who frequently perform at UK prog festivals (and whose headline and/or support gigs are advertised as prog) do not feature in PA. Whether or not I think they are prog, and whether or not PA think they are prog is somewhat irrelevant, for their UK audience.

I’m sure there are similar cases throughout the world. Certainly a great deal of the modern Aussie and Kiwi prog scene would not be likely to be prog “enough” for PA. But that doesn’t stop their audiences from thinking of them as prog, nor the bands themselves, nor the way they are advertised and promoted. A recent “Progressive Alliance” tour of Aotearoa had four main bands, plus support. Only one of the bands is in PA (suggested by me, as I thought they would be prog “enough”), and I doubt any of the others would make it in. Similarly, I’ve seen plenty of Aussie bands been suggested, and rejected, as not prog “enough”. That’s fine. PA has to draw the line somewhere, or else it will be “all music”.

But to think it is already “all music” is laughable. Outside PA, the site is almost renowned for its “snobbery” and “guardianship”, and narrow view of what is or isn’t prog. It’s really only within these walls, that people think that PA has too broad a definition of prog. We are far from being an “all music” site, and it is highly unlikely that PA will ever even come close to that.

If anyone thinks PA os already “all music”, or is headed that way, then that says far more about them and their own ideas on what is or is not prog, than it does about the site.

^ Maybe you should abandon the idea that there is a "best" use of the term progressive rock, because all that is very subjective. You will have less worries, then. So many people, so many ideas about prog and about music in general. And I guess that 99% (but maybe I'm underestimating) of the forumers here on PA are not very much interested in a definition of prog, but are here to talk and exchange about music.

I wouldn't be worried either by prog lists that have some non-prog artists in it: it is just a way to say that there is more good music outside of the prog realm. Sometimes this is done as a joke, sometimes just to show others that a non prog artist/band might be interesting, sometimes it is to provoke reactions/debate. Nothing wrong with that, on the contrary: it nourishes the discussions.

It is only when you let definitions dictate your music appreciation that things get awry...

my hell man... do you ever give this stuff a break?  i leave for a while and come back and again you are trying to define and classify.  ffs!!! get over it and move on.  enjoy the ride.

my hell man... do you ever give this stuff a break?  i leave for a while and come back and again you are trying to define and classify.  ffs!!! get over it and move on.  enjoy the ride.