A ProgArchives Congress???

(I think I changed the subject too much on the original posting site, and I want to talk about this)

My opinion on this is that the albums should be rated on quality, not essentiality (?).  This way, people don't look upon these ratings as "you need to have this/that"... however true it may be.  It seems like nearly every band has a 5 star album... instead of cheapening the state of a 5 star (relatively speaking of course), I feel we could try to add an Honors rating system to any fiver, so that you have 5 normal stars for any exceptional album, and five gold stars for a masterpiece. 

However, ratings for these albums (fives only) could only be submitted by impartial, fair reviewers (i.e. Gatot, Maani, ProgLucky, M@X, various others who have proved their credibility and fairness.) Also, a 2/3 majority of this board must vote this album in by nomination from 25 members of the forum.

This way, we can eliminate fanboyism, ratings sabotage, and all the albums we consider masterpieces would be equally represented.  And if your favorite obscure, yet amazing album doesn't get in, chill out! Your favorite still has a stellar five star rating.  Spread it around some and maybe it'll get done next year. Yes, this will happen yearly, like elections.  I would like to see that the admins and board don't have to spend every day negotiating with lobbyists from the CTTE foundation (like it won't be first in line).

richardh wrote: No thankyou.To every 'fanboy' there is a 'hater'.It all balances out fine.

yeah, but i don't want to read eithe of their ignorant reviews.

stonebeard wrote: richardh wrote: No thankyou.To every 'fanboy' there is a 'hater'.It all balances out fine. yeah, but i don't want to read eithe of their ignorant reviews.

Being a fan or a detractor doesn't make you ignorant.If I follow your argument then you should never write reviews about ELP as you hate them.Is that your intention?

stonebeard wrote: i believe that if everyone on this site were to honestly review albums, then every album would end up being 3 stars. for every person who loves an album, there is one who dislikes the same record.

That's not true. I KNOW that some albums are better than others. Trusting that at least SOME reviewers are sane, the average ratings should reflect the quality of the albums for a sufficient number of reviews.

Fellow Aaron,

great review.  I just felt that there are so many 5 stars that few people talk about that should be recognized.  There are also 5 star albums in respect to the rest of the catalog by the band.  I feel that the top 100 rated are also a good start for gold star albums, but after the top 100 (for now at least) the rest can simply be five star albums, excellent, but not truly essential.  I though a congress would give people more of a chance to participate and might be fun...

How did I get promoted to groupie? It happened after I started the Robert Fripp is Dead thread

stonebeard wrote: richardh wrote: stonebeard wrote: richardh wrote: stonebeard wrote: richardh wrote: No thankyou.To every 'fanboy' there is a 'hater'.It all balances out fine. yeah, but i don't want to read eithe of their ignorant reviews. Being a fan or a detractor doesn't make you ignorant.If I follow your argument then you should never write reviews about ELP as you hate them.Is that your intention? if you really hate an album, or if you really love an album andd what to express your views in a well-written review, then that's just fine. but ignorant, 30-word spout-offs in favor or against albums do no good. Define ignorant in this context.If you love or hate something then you should say it as best you can without being offensive or personal.Its only ignorance in my view if you havnt heard the record.If someone writes a review 'I hate this sh*t' then that can still be an honestly held view.Why should it automatically be regarded as ignorant? Some express themselves in as few words as possible.That is cool in my book.I never read long reviews personally and don't give them any more credability than short reviews. well, ignorant could be attacking another review, purposly giving an album 1 star or 5 stars because a previous reviewer gave the album a "unjust" rating. disagreeing with the mainstream is in no way ignorant. and i read/enjoy both short and long reviews, but i think longer reviews are usually (emphasizing usually) more informative. take gatot's reviews. he takes time to fully develope his ideas and provides an excellent, concise review. i'm not saying short reviews are dismissable by nature. but they need to provide the same quality and relevance that a longer review does for me to take it seriously.

I agree that Gatot's reviews are excellent and I also hate it it when reviewers mention other reviews.

Re length of reviews. Taking the benchmark that 'informed' reviews should have at least 50 words(under progarchives own guidlines), there is an interesting fact that progarchives still accepts reviews of less than 50 words .If the 50 word rule was actually enforced then we wouldn't be having this discussion at all I suspect.50 words should be strictly adhered to.'Ignorant' reviews would be easier to spot then.That doesn't mean that short reviews are ignorant though,just that it would be easier to tell whether someone has actually heard the album if they manage to come up with 50 'meaningfull' words.

Easy Livin wrote: Richard, As far as I know, reviews with less than 50 words are not displayed, even if they are submitted. Is there evidence to the contrary?

I'm sure I'd seen loads.However I may be wrong ....sorry

this one is close though

GENESIS Seconds Out
Review (Permanent link) by Hugues Chantraine @ 7:57:09 AM EST, 3/1/2004
PROG REVIEWER

 —  For those who missed those tours , this is the proof that Collins did the Gabriel stuff as good as the Gabe did and sometimes even better (a flower?... although I suspect studio tampering of this live album), this is such a delight to hear new version of Cinema Show and the rest.