Sex Pistols...but seriously.

I closed this thread because I thought the proposal was ludicrous,and I perceive it as an abuse of the Suggest section.

If you all want the bands you Suggest to be taken seriously I would suggest to you all to not post "joke" topics here.

If the topic creator was trying to stimulate debate over controversial additions or whatever,a thread in the appropriate section would have been a better idea.

Interesting idea. I'm not sure if it would work though. But I think it's worth a try.

After the topic was closed, I've sent a PM to Progtologist; although there was no reply, I see the topic is now reopened. Thanks, Ghost Rider for understanding, and also thanks to Progtologist for doing his job promptly (although I disagree with the decision).

You can describe my post/thread as ironic, ridiculous, distasteful, even blaspheming - and I agree to some extent, but my intentions are to rise a constructive debate.
I don't think that  my proposition will ever see the light of the day, however  I still  think  that  inclusion of any non-prog entry will emphasize prog entries and their qualities and characteristics in a good way.

As I said, I tried to develop the constructive and fruitful discussion here, and my mistake is that I used a trigger that is waaay too "close to the edge".
To Progtologist: my post was not a "joke" post in any way. Actually, after seeing too many threads with intolerance and almost hating atmosphere on certain prog subgenres, the whole thing left quite bitter taste in my mouth. Not a joke at all.

I explained my intentions very clearly in a PM to administrator and I won't be repeating myself further on, but I will repeat one thing:

My intention was not to trivialize informations, work or members of PA in any way.

If anyone feel offended because of subject of my thread, I apologise.

To Ghost Rider: you don't have to worry, there shouldn't be signs of any intolerant or aggressive behaviour. Let's keep it civil.

The same goes for any thread, right?

I didn't understand a single thing out of the therapeutical thing.

Punk rock was more a fashion movement than moving music forward, it was the antithesis of Prog, and definitely has no place here!  

Edited by mystic fred - January 24 2007 at 15:00

sex pistols is anti prog ,they are famous but ,i listen one cd of their hits,and i only listen 20 sec of each song  because that music is horrible is like go to the dentist for an extraction. without anestecia

Edited by markosherrera - January 24 2007 at 15:18

Ricochet wrote: tuxon wrote: 1. to add non-prog bands so to bash them? 2. to add only one album of a band? 3. to not allow access to a band? 4. to not allow a band a fair review result (meaning tops, artist image appreciation etc.) 5. to call a band that's not prog a band for all possible prog genres? 6. to be deadly serious, but to act confusingly? 7. to propose, promote and consider possible a band that isn't prog by A THOUSAND MILES?! besides points 1 to 7, upon the last things I'll agree in this life of mine is for Sex Pistols/Celine Dion/J. Timberlake to be added... .................. I´ll give you the first 6 points, but the 7th is open for discussion. I´ll trade it for Peter gabriel though [IMG]smileys/smiley2.gif" align=middle> But a non/prog band in a discussion can help us realise what it means to be progressive, and work as a bonding thing between us proggers. Though I would have taken Mariah Carey for that purpose, and not the by many proggers loved punk band. Of course Mariah Carey is already used for obsolete silly things.   tux, seems I'm in heavy to weird polemics with you lately, sure it isn't...intentional? [IMG]height=17 alt=Tongue src="http://www.progarchives.com/forum/smileys/smiley17.gif" width=17 align=absMiddle>   no problem towards having an eye towards what's progressive by what's progressive (and, by punk, what actually killed the prog star [IMG]height=17 alt=Wink src="http://www.progarchives.com/forum/smileys/smiley2.gif" width=17 align=absMiddle>), but we're talking artist's inclusion, appartenences etc. in other words, no problem realising what prog means by observing Sex Pistols and co., but surely outside prog archives.

    

I enjoy watching the ricochet of my friendly fire

I want to observe the sex pistons inside progarchives. And i don't know what polemics mean.

anyway. back on subject.

I do not favour the Sex pistols or any non-prog-related band in the archives as entry, but within discussion these bandns can be used to numerous benefits of us proggers.

A common enemy, a mutual disinterest, a short break from real music discussion, let's all gang up on the weakest entry and bash it's ugly head in and so form friendships unimagined before. But let the weakest entry be a non-prog artist so we do not hurt someone we actually care about.

and of course we all have tea with a cookie afterwards.


    

Edited by tuxon - January 24 2007 at 15:26

No, we'll still get people who want to sl*g off Dream Theater/Rush/Yes/Genesis/whoever.

   I think I see the point in this.... Maybe the perosn who suggested this was LITERALLY suggesting this, but then maybe it's an astute way of having us discuss how come we get so excited in extra-musical arguments that don't lead nowhere or how we let ourselves become so passionated that we either bash an artist without actually giving him any chance or worship and revere him without sitting down and checking for flaws.... Whatever purpose, this thread is, to my liking, not as useless as many do. Of course this subject could have been better discussed in a prog lounge, but then again, what better way to entice people to answer immediately than to see "sex pistols addition" as the topic's name? I think it was a great inverse-sicology maneuver.... Bad thing is, the results weren't that good.

But no matter what i said, whoever bashes DT without equilibrium will have to meet my flaming sword!