Proto and Prog Related

andu wrote: akin wrote: Who really cares about the useless top 100 list? andu wrote: If nobody cared, it wouldn't have been there.

The top 100 list was discussed many times and the conclusion reached is that the list doesn't have problems because people complain about it for some time and then forget it.

andu wrote: akin wrote: So this is the point. If it was so simple, there wouldn't be all those bitter arguments regarding these categories and the respective bands.

These arguments are very old, but nothing has changed because it seems quite good to those who rule the site.

Those dissatisfied can ignore the bands or use another site.


Edited by akin - January 22 2007 at 11:41

i dont' think that the top 100 list is useless as well. about the proto prog and prog-related, i think the way they are now is good enough for me. after all this site is about the ultimate discography of prog, so everything about prog could go on the front page
just my opinion...

It is good the way they are.

The owners want everything to be possible to review.
Who really cares about the useless top 100 list?

So this is the point.

Ghost Rider wrote: bluetailfly wrote: I just goofing around...sorry, ... that was a pretty obtuse rant, it wasn't directed at you at all, but to an imaginary "metalhead" who would be offended by my comment.   You know, this whole categorization thing gets pretty volitile sometimes, so I'm just satirizing the whole thing... Next time, please, when you are 'goofing around', add an emoticon as the site rules point out. Your post might very well cause offense to those people who like metal and don't like to be depicted as morons - even in jest.

hahahha yes.. even the acne-scarred masses have feelings too

bluetailfly wrote: I just goofing around...sorry, ... that was a pretty obtuse rant, it wasn't directed at you at all, but to an imaginary "metalhead" who would be offended by my comment.   You know, this whole categorization thing gets pretty volitile sometimes, so I'm just satirizing the whole thing...

Next time, please, when you are 'goofing around', add an emoticon as the site rules point out. Your post might very well cause offense to those people who like metal and don't like to be depicted as morons - even in jest.

my two cents has always been.. let them have their reviews.. let the main page be for prog albums only. Sure that would only involve some tweaking of the program.

I just goofing around...sorry, ... that was a pretty obtuse rant, it wasn't directed at you at all, but to an imaginary "metalhead" who would be offended by my comment.

Edited by bluetailfly - January 22 2007 at 10:55

bluetailfly wrote: I say we return to the categorizations of day one on this site. And that includes getting rid of "prog metal" which to me is a contradiction in terms.   Yeah, that's right, you heard me...   Oh really, well, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree...   Whoa...are you sayin' you want a piece of me?   Well, I got news for you, metalhead, I could drop you like a sack of dirt...so if you want to start something, just try me, just try me, because I would LOVE to take it outside and slam that flying V right upside your head...

i don't really get what you mean

Yeah, sometimes is.. uh.. strange to see on the homepage so much Doors, Zep or Queen reviews. You might be.. yeah.. right

Should "Prog Related" and "Proto Prog" be on "Prog Archives" as reference only categories, and not be included in the reviews and top ratings lists? Or should they stay as they are?

I say as reference only,after all they are not genres of music. They make the site too watered down. You come to the site and what do you see on the home page? Led Zepplin or the Beatles? Even though "Prog Archives" isn't claiming that these are prog the casual visitor may not pick up on that.
Or maybe we should go one step further and include another category called "Prog Opposite" and include everything that is absolutely not prog.