7/4 Posted May 24, 2007 Report Share Posted May 24, 2007 Thanks Jim. Folks are busy... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.A.W. Posted May 24, 2007 Report Share Posted May 24, 2007 So this project is shelved for the time being... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teasing the Korean Posted May 25, 2007 Report Share Posted May 25, 2007 I say we post all classical music topics on the organ forum... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bright Moments Posted May 25, 2007 Author Report Share Posted May 25, 2007 OMG 32 yes's out of over 1600 members!!! Sorry for being a stick in the mud, but I haven't had time to mess with this and I won't for a while. no fair counting aric twice. no fair counting deep. frankly jim you know that we do not have 1600 members posting, let alone voting. and all members have had the opportunity to vote! the poll fairly represents the will of the majority. i prefer your honesty that you don't have the time to mess with this to your false derision of a fair poll. -_- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Gould Posted May 25, 2007 Report Share Posted May 25, 2007 OMG 32 yes's out of over 1600 members!!! Sorry for being a stick in the mud, but I haven't had time to mess with this and I won't for a while. no fair counting aric twice. no fair counting deep. frankly jim you know that we do not have 1600 members posting, let alone voting. and all members have had the opportunity to vote! the poll fairly represents the will of the majority. i prefer your honesty that you don't have the time to mess with this to your false derision of a fair poll. -_- No poll is fair when it has two "joke" answers. A fair poll is "yes" "No" and "I don't care". And furthermore a poll on such a question is inherently biased toward those in favor. They want the new subforum and will happily vote for it. Who's to say how many of those who vote "I don't care" actually would be in opposition if they took a moment to think it through? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Nessa Posted May 25, 2007 Report Share Posted May 25, 2007 What Dan said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aggie87 Posted May 25, 2007 Report Share Posted May 25, 2007 I haven't voted yet, but still think if you're going to separate classical music out of the miscellaneous music forum, you should separate all the other "categories" of music too. Why doesn't "miscellaneous music" adequately cover classical music? I still don't understand that. If I'm searching for a historical thread on King Crimson, I search for King Crimson. Likewise if I'm searching for a Peer Gynt (to use a current topic) thread, I would search for Peer Gynt. I wouldn't care which forum the results come from. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7/4 Posted May 25, 2007 Report Share Posted May 25, 2007 I haven't voted yet, but still think if you're going to separate classical music out of the miscellaneous music forum, you should separate all the other "categories" of music too. Why doesn't "miscellaneous music" adequately cover classical music? I still don't understand that. If I'm searching for a historical thread on King Crimson, I search for King Crimson. Likewise if I'm searching for a Peer Gynt (to use a current topic) thread, I would search for Peer Gynt. I wouldn't care which forum the results come from. So vote Huh? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7/4 Posted May 25, 2007 Report Share Posted May 25, 2007 I'm worried Dan is going to take it to the Supreme Court. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aggie87 Posted May 25, 2007 Report Share Posted May 25, 2007 I haven't voted yet, but still think if you're going to separate classical music out of the miscellaneous music forum, you should separate all the other "categories" of music too. Why doesn't "miscellaneous music" adequately cover classical music? I still don't understand that. If I'm searching for a historical thread on King Crimson, I search for King Crimson. Likewise if I'm searching for a Peer Gynt (to use a current topic) thread, I would search for Peer Gynt. I wouldn't care which forum the results come from. So vote Huh? I don't feel strongly enough about it to vote. If it happens fine, if not, fine. I'll get the same hours of sleep per night either way Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RDK Posted May 25, 2007 Report Share Posted May 25, 2007 I haven't voted yet, but still think if you're going to separate classical music out of the miscellaneous music forum, you should separate all the other "categories" of music too. Why doesn't "miscellaneous music" adequately cover classical music? I still don't understand that. If I'm searching for a historical thread on King Crimson, I search for King Crimson. Likewise if I'm searching for a Peer Gynt (to use a current topic) thread, I would search for Peer Gynt. I wouldn't care which forum the results come from. Stop assailing us with your filthy logic! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aggie87 Posted May 25, 2007 Report Share Posted May 25, 2007 (edited) I haven't voted yet, but still think if you're going to separate classical music out of the miscellaneous music forum, you should separate all the other "categories" of music too. Why doesn't "miscellaneous music" adequately cover classical music? I still don't understand that. If I'm searching for a historical thread on King Crimson, I search for King Crimson. Likewise if I'm searching for a Peer Gynt (to use a current topic) thread, I would search for Peer Gynt. I wouldn't care which forum the results come from. Stop assailing us with your filthy logic! LOL... The only argument I can see that would favor splitting it all out into separate categories would be if you simply want to browse topics in a general category, and you arent looking for something specific, but just sort of surfing. Then I could see the benefit to having all the classical threads together. Same with rock, country, etc. Edited May 25, 2007 by Aggie87 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoGrubb Posted May 25, 2007 Report Share Posted May 25, 2007 Could this be another voting scandal in the making? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Van Basten II Posted May 25, 2007 Report Share Posted May 25, 2007 I'ld also vote yes to a poll on 'Do we need an improved Search system?'. I think this item is more important and more useful than the current poll, the search function that we have now is pretty much useless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bright Moments Posted June 3, 2007 Author Report Share Posted June 3, 2007 um - does this mean we aint gettin a classical music forum? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.A.W. Posted June 3, 2007 Report Share Posted June 3, 2007 um - does this mean we aint gettin a classical music forum? Not in the foreseeable future - I think Jim was pretty clear about that in his post #100. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.A.W. Posted June 3, 2007 Report Share Posted June 3, 2007 (edited) OMG 32 yes's out of over 1600 members!!! Sorry for being a stick in the mud, but I haven't had time to mess with this and I won't for a while. no fair counting aric twice. no fair counting deep. frankly jim you know that we do not have 1600 members posting, let alone voting. and all members have had the opportunity to vote! the poll fairly represents the will of the majority. i prefer your honesty that you don't have the time to mess with this to your false derision of a fair poll. -_- No poll is fair when it has two "joke" answers. A fair poll is "yes" "No" and "I don't care". And furthermore a poll on such a question is inherently biased toward those in favor. They want the new subforum and will happily vote for it. Who's to say how many of those who vote "I don't care" actually would be in opposition if they took a moment to think it through? I haven't voted yet, but still think if you're going to separate classical music out of the miscellaneous music forum, you should separate all the other "categories" of music too. Why doesn't "miscellaneous music" adequately cover classical music? I still don't understand that. If I'm searching for a historical thread on King Crimson, I search for King Crimson. Likewise if I'm searching for a Peer Gynt (to use a current topic) thread, I would search for Peer Gynt. I wouldn't care which forum the results come from. I agree with both Dan and Erik (Aggie), and in view of what Jim said (post #100) I think we should give it a rest Edited June 3, 2007 by J.A.W. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aggie87 Posted June 3, 2007 Report Share Posted June 3, 2007 the argument for subdividing blues/r&b/boogaloo etc is specious; while there back & forth between jass, them other musics, there are ALSO other places on the interweb to blather about that & really, except for the dudes who came up in r&b contexts... there's no resaon not to dump 'em in artsists or wherever. The fact that there are other places to talk about blues/rock/etc on the web isn't a valid argument. All sorts of non-jazz topics exist on this board - classical, rock, pop, non-music, politics, religion, etc. Heck, there are quite a few board members who almost exclusively post and argue in the politics forum, and there are plenty of other places on the web for that to be done as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bright Moments Posted June 3, 2007 Author Report Share Posted June 3, 2007 there are ALSO other places on the interweb to blather about that sure there are but i want to blather with the folk who frequent THIS board! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bright Moments Posted June 3, 2007 Author Report Share Posted June 3, 2007 if someone has the jones to type about Rubinstein or Richter, why not give 'em their own grotto? amen bro Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bright Moments Posted June 3, 2007 Author Report Share Posted June 3, 2007 (edited) i'm cool w/no action but the anti- people are pretty damn insecure about "the threat" (ooooooooh) TRUTH!!! to me this is the most facinating part. i could accept Jim A saying hey guys its a lot of work and i don't have the time. BUT the folk that are anti are FREAKED OUT by the possibility it might happen!!! i cant figure that one out. Edited June 3, 2007 by Bright Moments Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guy Berger Posted June 3, 2007 Report Share Posted June 3, 2007 dude, it's TOTALLY valid bc there's no mass, critical or otherwise, clamoring for blues/r&b/etc etc... almost all of those threads devolve into Catalog of Ships anyway, which is probably why nobody is jonesing for it. as for the "rock" threads here... by & large they're a fucking embarassment: not bc i think the music is any greater/lesser but jokers are arguing w/the slimmest knowledge of the form... Clem, from what I've seen of the classical music threads on this forum, they are +90% comparison of different recordings. Actual discussion of the music is more rare. I don't think they're of any higher quality than the popular music threads. Guy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Epithet Posted June 3, 2007 Report Share Posted June 3, 2007 dude, it's TOTALLY valid bc there's no mass, critical or otherwise, clamoring for blues/r&b/etc etc... almost all of those threads devolve into Catalog of Ships anyway, which is probably why nobody is jonesing for it. as for the "rock" threads here... by & large they're a fucking embarassment: not bc i think the music is any greater/lesser but jokers are arguing w/the slimmest knowledge of the form... Clem, from what I've seen of the classical music threads on this forum, they are +90% comparison of different recordings. Actual discussion of the music is more rare. I don't think they're of any higher quality than the popular music threads. Guy Hey, no need to make this personal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
porcy62 Posted June 3, 2007 Report Share Posted June 3, 2007 dude, it's TOTALLY valid bc there's no mass, critical or otherwise, clamoring for blues/r&b/etc etc... almost all of those threads devolve into Catalog of Ships anyway, which is probably why nobody is jonesing for it. as for the "rock" threads here... by & large they're a fucking embarassment: not bc i think the music is any greater/lesser but jokers are arguing w/the slimmest knowledge of the form... Clem, from what I've seen of the classical music threads on this forum, they are +90% comparison of different recordings. Actual discussion of the music is more rare. I don't think they're of any higher quality than the popular music threads. Guy I think I agree with you, (if I understood you ) A discussion on a supposed "higher" subject, SHOSTAKOVITCH (or whatever you write it) instead of Neil Young, doesn't make it more profound only because of the general aknowledge that the damn unwritable russian composer is better then the naive canadian. Personally, since I am not a musician, nor an expert, I can't read music, I feel myself out of place in a lot of these threads. I asked for suggestions, but music for me is an inextricable knot of personal history and deeply unconscious feelings. At the end I found the above russian composer boring and Neil Young exciting. Said that, I really don't care: if some of you wish a classical music thread go on. Nothing anti or personal against it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clifford_thornton Posted June 3, 2007 Report Share Posted June 3, 2007 Apropos of nothing, when I once mentioned to a friend I liked "classical" music, he was like "oh, like Led Zeppelin and stuff?", totally being serious on the confusion front... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_forumlogo.png.a607ef20a6e0c299ab2aa6443aa1f32e.png)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.