Uncomfortable truths

Welcome back, Raff!

Yep, instead of concentrating on lesser known prog-acts (I'm afraid I'll soon become "the guy to laughed at" with all my endless Russian Prog/DISCIPLINE, OCEANSIZE, AMBER LIGHT etc moanings) last days we have THE WHO among most popular albums based on ratings. To be honest, I didn't even own a single THE WHO album and simply don't care about them. Instead of it we have less than 10 reviews on THE WATCH's Primitive, FLOR DE LOTO, GRAYCEON, BEARDFISH, FROMUZ and other astonishing Prog-bands. Sad indeed

Edited by Prog-jester - July 31 2007 at 10:19

Great to see you around again Raf, I hope the break has been good for you, and that you feel refreshed.

Nicely put, Rafaella, and welcome back.

I recognise a lot of your points, I actually to a large extend stopped participating in polls and certain threads that, as you put it, are only based on superlatives etc.

As for PP/PR: a lot of bands deserve to be there, the owners are quite right in keeping these categories. I agree with you that the reason for keeping them there needs to be made more explicit. Currently, some biographies contain a one-liner explaining "Why this artist must be listed in www.progarchives.com" but it's often less than clear. Could be lack of time of those including it, or lack of understanding how important it is for other to know and understand an inclusion - I don't know, but fact is that a one liner like the one included for The Who is insufficient. Earlier this week I started a thread about the influence of jazz bass players and bass as lead instrument in prog. One topic that came up there was the role of John Entwhistle in this context - a far more explicit reason to include them here than the fact that they influenced 60s rock together with The Beatles.

More explicit explanation of why a band should be included is likely to occur in the Collab zone, and showing the conclusions of that in the band page in some way would likely already solve part of the issue. At least, it would be a source for honoust discussion outside the Collab zone as well.

I do understand that writing bio's, collecting information and discussing additions takes time, a lot of time, but in a truly collaborative forum, it is possible to make this change. I'm willing to help out, and strongly believe that working together as a community on these issues rather than fighting one another off the forums, will increase PAs position amongst other sites as well.

Now, shoot me ...

Angelo

P.S. I think The Eagles should be included in Prog Related, because their song Hotel California is about ProgArchives.com, as correctly indicated by Ivan. 

Welcome back Raf!!!

And thank you for the support. My whole motivation was not because of the merits of Proto/Related additions, but the excessive energy wasted over them (primarily the backlash). I was growing weary of it. Then it occurred to me that the prog lounges were also getting stale. So, instead of complaining, I decided to do something about it.

Welcome back Raff! You make many excellent points, from your citique of the constant bickering that occurs even now with The Who. Also, I like your idea of sorting out the PR section.

stonebeard wrote: micky wrote: stonebeard wrote: Just because other sites are more inclusive than PA is no reason to think that adding borderline bands is alright. Stonie.... one thing that we can't lose sight of is exactly what Raff said.. there is no magic formula for what is prog and what is not... we can let history be our guide to a certain extent, but in the end.. it is like art... as individuals, we all see it differently and since this site IS inclusive...  we must recognize that what is prog to one, is sometimes not prog to another and some of the problems that have arisen here are when people seem to forget that,  and think their ideal of prog... is and should be the sites. Of course, but my view is one ingredient in the stew that becomes the overall ProgArchives policy. The good thing about PA is that the policy is (generically) an amalgam of  the individual views of the collaborators and owners. Not all the ingredients have to be the same (in fact, it would be boring if they all were) and my ideal vision of prog counters or parallels that of dozens others. Each is necessary to create an acceptable final product.

that is the real strength behind this site.. it is a collaborative site.  We all are but ingrediants in the stew hahhah (like that analogy)  

Well, I agree with you on many points, and I disagree on a bit as well...

I was going to say I avoid the whole proto/related subject. Once a band is added I just dont review it, dont discuss it. Then I realized that you guys are collab's and it is harder for you to do that.

Atavachron wrote: Raff is absolutely right when she points out that certain other Prog sites have a wider and often more absurd range of bands-- I've seen artists such as Los Lobos, Judas Priest, The Cars, Def Leppard, Heart, Earth Wind & Fire, Dio, and on and on. Sure, some of those acts have even been discussed here, but don't tell me PA goes overboard with non-prog additions, it just isn't the case. Conversely, PA has many new artists that do not appear at these other places, such as Aviva, Le Silo, Counter-World Experience and tons of others. This site works its collective ass off being the most cutting-edge and accurate Prog Rock center in the world, and that shows. ..and welcome back, you were missed

Benvenuta, Raffa!