Why did you reject Within Temptation?

Actually, you'll have a better chance of succeeding by being polite.  Think about it.  How do you react to people whose first contact with you is hostility?

That isn't the reason why I was acting a little rude, it's to be noticed. To use your own words, think about it: Who mostly gets what they want in the world? Those who whines the most and loudest. You want examples? Check the politics, every single case there is an outcome of this psychological factor.

Toto were never very progressive... Although neither are Nightwish or Mew... Whatever.

NaughtyShrink wrote: Actually, you'll have a better chance of succeeding by being polite.  Think about it.  How do you react to people whose first contact with you is hostility? That isn't the reason why I was acting a little rude, it's to be noticed. To use your own words, think about it: Who mostly gets what they want in the world? Those who whines the most and loudest. You want examples? Check the politics, every single case there is an outcome of this psychological factor.

NaughtyShrink wrote: WHAT?! You based it on a freaking vote?! What are you? Retards? Listen, it's clear that someone here lacks a proper understanding of what prog.-rock is (which btw is quite outrageous for a site calling themselves www.progarchives.com). While Nightwish is definately NOT prog.-rock, Within Temptation undoubtfully is. I, btw, don't agree to them being very similar; they're playing in two quite different genres for crying out loud! When all that's out of my mind, I think Within Temptation fits better into the "Symphonic Prog.-Rock" genre than the Metal one, but that's just my opinion anyways...

I've never been involved with the Prog Metal team, but it's commonly not that simple for teams.  Progfreak provides a record of votes, but team members commonly discuss and debate potential additions before recording their votes at progfreak.  Something to bear in mind, though, is that team members often do not have access to all the musical material and it is not that uncommon for bands to be re-evaluated (but there are so many evaluations and so much work being done such as preparing additions that being asked to re-evaluate can be onerous and, well, not a joyful task).  A team like Prog Metal deals with a lot of proposals, and does a lot of work for the site, and obviously don't have unlimited funds to buy albums or unlimited time to listen to albums (it's voluntary work and can be both very time-consuming and expensive for the individuals).  It's saddening that people don't appreciate the time and effort people put into this.  They gain nothing personal from having an album added or excluded, but try to do their best for the site and community.

I think that´s a slightly disrespectful way of putting it, but the prog-related definition should probably point out that the genre is only for artists that have been greatly influential on progressive rock. Not for artists who are slightly influenced by progressive rock or have some lose relation to progressive rock.

If I were to decide I would delete the first and the second point and only keep the middle one. That way no one would misunderstand that Prog-related is only for artists who have been musically influential on progressive rock. This is just my opinion of course. Feel free to form your own. If my interpretation is the interpretation that is generally considered ( by the admins who control the Prog-related sub) the correct one those changes to the definition would be greatly appreciated. It´s the most common conclusion people come to when the artists they suggest are rejected in another genre. If I can´t get my artist included in this or that sub I´ll suggest them for Prog-related. People should be left with no doubt of what Prog-related means. The definition is a bit vague as it is now and prone to a lot of misunderstanding and even worse a lot of frustration.

Personally I don´t see why an act such as Within Temptation should be considered for the Prog-related genre. They haven´t been influential on the progressive rock/ metal genre. They are a symphonic metal/ rock act that might or might not qualify for the progressive metal sub, but calling them influential on the progressive rock/ metal genre wouldn´t be my choice of words.

I think a new vote is in order.

There has to be a justifiable reason for re-evaluating a band, normally through new material being available. Simply insisting on a re-vote until a pass is achieved is not going to work. Also, since this band has previously been rejected they now qualify as a "Controversial  Band" which means that any subsequent vote by the PMT has to be unanimous (ie all active members must vote and all must vote "yes" for them to be accepted).

Edited by Dean - January 17 2010 at 11:57

^ I don't see how "your taste" has anything to do with it

^ that isn't what I meant Olav.

sort of makes the 'archive' in the site name look stupid doesn't it....   for all the fear of driving people away with 'dubious' additions...  the site should REALLY fear driving people away for what doesn't get added.... and being a joke of a site at that.   The list is growing of 'recognized' prog bands that this site has not.. or will not add.