Revolutionise the site

What about having a "site tag" for the band (assigned by the Collabs as-is) and a "reviewers tag" for each album. Each time a review is posted the reviewer is asked to assign the sub-genre he thinks best fits the album. The system would display for each album the tag which has most votes (optional to have different weight for Collabs and non-Collabs, same as with the stars).

Edited by Dayvenkirq - January 13 2013 at 22:27

Dayvenkirq wrote: Ambient Hurricanes wrote: Dayvenkirq wrote: ^ In this case it really does sound like this discussion should be open only to the teams and the collabs, because, well, ... I don't know a first thing about how hard it comes for them to work out things like "where should this band be". I disagree.  I am a believer in transparency and open discussion, and I think the opinions of regular members are just as valuable on this issue, because they use the site and are affected by the system too.  No one is going to be happy if the collabs decide to introduce a new system that everybody else hates (not that I think that would happen, but it's best to have everyone involved so that we can safeguard against that type of thing). Can't please everyone. And why would anyone be unhappy with or hate a new system that seems rational?

You would be surprised how many people hate systems that either are or seem rational.

I mean, we're prog fans, right?  A lot of us probably don't like the system in the music business right now.  It's totally rational; it's geared toward making money, which is quite a rationally justifiable pursuit.

And although you can't please everyone, the decision should be made in a way that would best serve all the members of the site.  Thus, it seems reasonable for all members to be able to give their input.  That seems to be what Steve wanted.

I like the current sub-genre system, and to see sub-genres merging unnecessarily with others will not help those who come to the site searching for artists with a specific sound, and perhaps artists from a specific time. I think individual album tagging with using the already existing sub-genres as a guide, is the best way to go. The problem that arises then, is that's a hell of a lot of work, and it is, if members from sub-genre teams and such are dealing with it all. 

Edited by irrelevant - January 13 2013 at 21:53

Dayvenkirq wrote: Atavachron wrote: Not anal?  Prog fans? No, the collabs. I'm just getting the vibe that they don't want to redo what was already done.

By 'prog fans' I meant all of us.

I'm not sure why having a band tagged as eclectic instead of symphonic is so important that we should consider revising the website's system. Maybe i'm missing a major point or i just care a bit less about things that are, in my opinion, trivial. 

^ It's not like they have to be really anal about tagging it, right to the bones. One can just think of the best (minimal) set of tags or just tag it as "various sub-genres". But again, it's just too much work, and I doubt that anyone wants to do this.

Edited by Dayvenkirq - January 13 2013 at 20:50

^ In this case it really does sound like this discussion should be open only to the teams and the collabs, because, well, ... I don't know a first thing about how hard it comes for them to work out things like "where should this band be".

I support the system we have in place, which for me as a User has been invaluable in finding new music, and which we have spent years honing.  I find some of the OP's comments regarding RPI to be disheartening at the very moment I was again feeling good about our team and the site generally.  I sensed a positive direction of late.  The thought of the RPI sub being dissolved and our overall classification system being scrapped makes me very sad, and a bit angry.  A lot of sweat and passion has been invested by many people building enthusiasm and site traffic.  PA is now one of the best sites for RPI fans....and while some of you may not believe it, there are a lot of us out there.  

The problems we have relating to personality clashing and occasional differences of opinion are to be expected at any large website (or workplace), and in this case they reflect on people's attitudes and civility, or lack thereof.  They are not the fault of our genre system, which again, is a very useful tool for many of the site's users.  Our system of evaluating and classifying bands can work---This is proven daily by the manner in which many of us perform our job, with efficiency and with very little drama. 

I'll leave it at that, just wanted to tally this man's voice in support of our current system.  I am not against Collabs working together to find solutions to persisting problems-- teams need to communicate to resolve problems.  I am, however, against throwing out the baby with the bathwater.



Edited by Finnforest - January 13 2013 at 20:45

^ And again, since I wanted to append a little to my post in an edit: we could also probably "enhance" the search engine with the help of the tags.

Dayvenkirq wrote: Then, we could have an algorithm that would filter the database and yield all the results that I'd be looking for. Say, I want to see what bands/artists were involved in making experimental metal. These are the results that the search engine would yield with the help of the tags.

Edited by Dayvenkirq - January 13 2013 at 17:16