SR V: To boldly go where no room has gone before

James wrote: birdwithteeth11 wrote: James wrote: Oh I'm quite aware they're opinions. I just say it deliberately.  I knew you'd pick up on the objectivism thing like a nun to a habit.  It worked.  You were drawn in. What in the world does objectivism have to do with this? We're talking about subjective vs. objective opinions. Alex was the one talking about Objectivism.

I haven't said a word about Objectivism in the past 24 hours.

I said "objective" and "elitism", which have nothing to do with Ayn Rand's Objectivist philosophy.

TGM: Orb wrote: Gentlemen James finds presenting his opinions as facts entertaining. I'm pretty sure that's why he does it. I'm fairly confident he doesn't necessarily believe they're absolute facts. He does it on far more serious issues. Don't take it too seriously when he does. Alex takes things too seriously sometimes, and responds to things which weren't really looking for a response sometimes. That's not really a reason to provoke him. Everyone calm down, and let's talk about something worth talking about which we haven't talked about before. Edit: and sorry about mild rant mode, but is anyone getting anything out of this discussion about not a lot. (subject FOABP - not a prog album, really, according to my personal definition, but then I can't remember enough of it to say accurately whether long song was just a long song or a prog one)

Someone sees sense.

James wrote: birdwithteeth11 wrote: James wrote: birdwithteeth11 wrote: Alright. Go tell the symphonic team what they'd think about Yes being moved to jazz rock/fusion. That's just a silly notion. One album is jazzy.  Others have jazzy moments.  They're not a jazz rock/fusion band. *sigh* You just mentioned on the last page... James wrote: Yes can often be jazz rock/fusion.   Relayer is a very jazzy albums at times. You just contradicted yourself. Nope. I didn't. I said "often".  I mentioned Relayer, not other albums. I never suggested they are a jazz rock/fusion band. Stop twisting my words.

I quoted directly from what you said on the previous page. Kind of hard for me to twist a direct quote, don't you think?

birdwithteeth11 wrote: James wrote: MovingPictures07 wrote: James wrote: Oh I'm quite aware they're opinions. I just say it deliberately.  I knew you'd pick up on the objectivism thing like a nun to a habit.  It worked.  You were drawn in. So you purposefully say your opinions like they're facts just to get people pissed at you or to get attention? Nope. You can chose to ignore it.  I'm not asking for you to get pissed off. And yet this isn't the first time you've said similar things and gotten a similar response. Some would call that trolling.

Gentlemen

James finds presenting his opinions as facts entertaining. I'm pretty sure that's why he does it. I'm fairly confident he doesn't necessarily believe they're absolute facts. He does it on far more serious issues. Don't take it too seriously when he does.

Alex takes things too seriously sometimes, and responds to things which weren't really looking for a response sometimes. That's not really a reason to provoke him.

Everyone calm down, and let's talk about something worth talking about which we haven't talked about before.

Edit: and sorry about mild rant mode, but is anyone getting anything out of this discussion about not a lot.

(subject FOABP - not a prog album, really, according to my personal definition, but then I can't remember enough of it to say accurately whether long song was just a long song or a prog one)


Edited by TGM: Orb - May 13 2009 at 16:18

birdwithteeth11 wrote: James wrote: birdwithteeth11 wrote: Alright. Go tell the symphonic team what they'd think about Yes being moved to jazz rock/fusion. That's just a silly notion. One album is jazzy.  Others have jazzy moments.  They're not a jazz rock/fusion band. *sigh* You just mentioned on the last page... James wrote: Yes can often be jazz rock/fusion.   Relayer is a very jazzy albums at times. You just contradicted yourself.

Nope.

I didn't.

I said "often".  I mentioned Relayer, not other albums.

I never suggested they are a jazz rock/fusion band.

Stop twisting my words.

James wrote: MovingPictures07 wrote: James wrote: Oh I'm quite aware they're opinions. I just say it deliberately.  I knew you'd pick up on the objectivism thing like a nun to a habit.  It worked.  You were drawn in. So you purposefully say your opinions like they're facts just to get people pissed at you or to get attention? Nope. You can chose to ignore it.  I'm not asking for you to get pissed off.

Then what's your reason for doing it?

James wrote: MovingPictures07 wrote: Padraic wrote: MovingPictures07 wrote: Objective elitism ftl I'm sorry, but these are facts: 1. Porcupine Tree is prog. Lol, you rail against objective elitism and present "PT=prog" as a fact? Do you think anyone would question the progressiveness of Yes? Porcupine Tree fit the progressive rock label, and that's why they're here. Want me to prove it to you? You cannot prove it. Like I cannot prove Yes are prog or Henry Cow are avant-prog. Yes can often be jazz rock/fusion.   Relayer is a very jazzy albums at times.

But then what's the whole point of this site? If we can't prove that Yes are prog and System of a Down aren't, then why is Yes here and SOAD isn't?

There are standards and characteristics that we set in order to bring organization and order, to bring meaning into a set of terms. These are explicitly defined on the site's webpage (http://www.progarchives.com/Progressive-rock.asp#definition).

Yes aren't Fusion though. Fusion has a history, a movement, and certain key innovators in it that make it what it is. Not to mention all the countless musical characteristics that define what Fusion is.


For example: The color blue. If someone said it was red, they'd be wrong. Why? Because we have a certain set of terms that define what the color blue entails. Now when you get into greyer areas where the color could look either blue or green (blue-greenish colors), then it becomes more and more subjective on certain leanings. But it doesn't change the underlying criteria that makes something blue or green. Just like Jazz or Prog.

birdwithteeth11 wrote: And yet this isn't the first time you've said similar things and gotten a similar response. Some would call that trolling.

Most wouldn't though.

It's human nature to say something is sh*t or something is amazing without giving any reason.

birdwithteeth11 wrote: Alright. Go tell the symphonic team what they'd think about Yes being moved to jazz rock/fusion.

That's just a silly notion.

One album is jazzy.  Others have jazzy moments.  They're not a jazz rock/fusion band.

*sigh*

James wrote: MovingPictures07 wrote: James wrote: Oh I'm quite aware they're opinions. I just say it deliberately.  I knew you'd pick up on the objectivism thing like a nun to a habit.  It worked.  You were drawn in. So you purposefully say your opinions like they're facts just to get people pissed at you or to get attention? Nope. You can chose to ignore it.  I'm not asking for you to get pissed off.

And yet this isn't the first time you've said similar things and gotten a similar response. Some would call that trolling.