Plans on PA for becoming an all-music site?

It's a small 'p'. imo the guidelines don't stop anything being discussed about bands not in the archive.

MikeEnRegalia wrote: ^ The guidelines explicitly say that bands not included in PA cannot be discussed in the Prog Music Lounge. The "about progressive music in general" refers to discussions about prog genres and qualities of the music, not non-included bands.

That's what I thought. Thx for clarification!

Yeah, it's not nice being just a tool.

This is hilarious to be honest because we all have such a solid understanding of the subject. NOT!

Music comes from artists and bands not from the air. How do you discuss any genre (prog or not) without referencing a band?

No, he's not saying that. 

The rules say, "discussions in "Prog Music Lounge" should only be about groups/music currently included in Prog Archives, 

or about progressive music in general.", and I can't interpret them otherwise than you can talk about artists included in PA, 

or about progressive music in general where you maybe just can mention some other artists from various genres.

EDIT:  (just in case my post is being taken out of context). It is an exact opposite reaction to what I perceive as a view for a very rigid approach to this forum's guidelines in prior posts and also a tie-in to our beloved genre's philosophy. People aren't machines and being this rigid is in my view unwelcoming to newcomers to the forum. Please don't take my post to imply that we shouldn't have any guidelines. 

Hi,

You know well what I mean, and such.

I only review a few things, not everything I listen to. I subscribe to the theory that it is nicer to not say anything, maybe a wee bittie joke, about something, but not a poor review. There is a lot of literature, paintings and music, that I am not enamored with, but I grant them the right to be there, and will not specifically say anything bad. As an example, in a school class I had to read "Our Lady of Flowers" and that is not something I like reading, but the descriptions and insane imagery makes the book amazing. I wouldn't review it if it were music, or painting, but seeing it, or hearing it, is another story. And a lot of rock music feels like that for me!

I do review a few things, but will not, EVER, be involved in "ratings" whatsoever, something that I find ridiculous and sometimes malicious as it is very obviously done by a few overzealous fans, and it is much less about the music itself than it is about the fans themselves. I find that, since the day that folks fought for a piece of the pig at Anaheim stadium the most disgusting thing I have ever seen in human idiocy and behavior ... which was a by-product of the commercialization of the product ... it brought out the wrong fans, that otherwise would not be there, and in my book, took the adventure and the beauty of a lot of music away from it.

I don't give a damn about ratings, or having to post them anywhere. I care about the music itself, and playing the commercial game is not something you are going to catch me on .. .EVER.

My reviews, often, are about a lot more than just a song ... and for me, all the ratings are about the song, and have nothing to do with the artist whatsoever, or the actual idea behind the music. The "ratings" do not speak for the music and the artist ... they speak for the fans, and what your stating is that the fans are more important than the artist ... and you might as well kill all the artists then, because they don't care about the music ... they just care about their favorite song!