Annual rant by your friend dhs...

[DHS]

Sometime they comes back, as this thread.

What i desired (but of course, i'm a fool, i can't pretend that) is a bit more of competence, that's all. And maybe, no foolish lies, due maybe to, dunno what can it be...

let's say you did your last unzy remix. Then you receive a comment like this:

"Solid dance remix, but too Unz-y for my taste. Furthermore, tries too much to sound like Instant Remedy but isn't even half as good."

Here the shouter says various things:

-That the tune may be good, even if he doesn't dig the kind of music (wich is perfecly fair).
-That the tune isn't half good of a Instant Remedy one (and this may even be fair, for his tastes).
-That the tune tries too much to sound like IR (wich is a lie, and even an irritating one).

Why should it sound like IR? Because it has a 4/4 bassdrum?

The shout is on DJ Unz's Foreign Girl remix.
Now, someone should *teach me* why the tune would "try to sound like IR". There's no point of contact between this and any work by Martin, beside the fact that both are dancey and in 4/4.
Approach, development, sound (and maybe even targets), are very different.

Not that i have anything against IR: i love his work and i respect him. It's not about that. It's about speculating in something that is not true, just because you *can* do it.

It would be like me saying "hey, this remix by makke tries hard to sound like powertrace but it's not half as good". Or vice versa. Do you spot any sense in it, beside the will to be unpleasant?

But, as i said i can't pretend that anyone use some sort of common sense, i can't pretend that some people stop to act as unpleasant as they want just because they can and because, in their interpretation of things, one musician who submits music here does it to become the target of their childish behaviour.

LMan: just for the record, the reason why i don't release on RKO isn't to avoid shouts. In fact, my next works will (should) be voteable and shoutable again. It's not my duty (o interest, anymore) to avoid people to act in a childish way. I will grant them a lot of fun in the future.

Ciao.

[Romeo Knight]

I can understand Trons point as well as DHSs.
What I still don't get is: While it's absolutly ok to give any comment s/o likes, no matter if it's constructive or absolutely useless and plain wrong, why shouldn't it be allowed to react to those comments if I find them idiotic?

"I hereby agree that my tune's being rated and promise I won't blame the voters if they don't like my music because I had the chance to uncheck this option but didn't do it"

This idea is even more nonsense than

"I want to publish my music, but I don't want to know what they think of it, so I can pretend they love it."

1. I release music on the internet, so I want feedback.
2. I get feedback of any kind
3. I'm glad about good feedback
4. I'm not so glad about bad feedback but I can live with it.
5. Feedback I find senseless or even offensive I give feedback back.

Now, please anyone tell me, why should 5. not be allowed if 2. is allowed?
If I miss a point, please instruct me.
(Ah and of course in a perfect world I give feedback to good feedback, too )

[Tron]

True, Romeo: Giving feedback on feedback is the basis of a good discussion. Innit?
True, DHS: Just because ppl have the ability to rate/shout/review doesn't mean that they should do so without a dash of politeness or tactfulness.

There will always be ppl who write in a tactless fashion sometimes. Intentional, unintentional or perhaps they lack the subtilty in a not-native-to-them language. It's a matter of how we deal with it.

1) Complain.
2) Start a discussion about it.
3) Say "Well, I didn't try to make it sound like Instant Remedy at all, but I understand what you mean. Thanx!"
4) Track down the writer, rip out his heart and feed it to the dogz.

I'm a No.3 kinda guy. True, it was a kinda tactless remark, but given to me I'd interpret it as "It sounds a lot like IR. Compared to that, I like IR better." and worry about my next cup of coffee. Or cigarette. Which reminds me that I'll never be able to go to London again! I've heard that from the 1st of july onward, you cannot smoke anywhere in London except @ home. Not even on the streets! After 2 days of not smoking, I get sleepless nights and servere digestion problems! Imagine how much fun that would be with the next BIT Live. I suggest a location outside London for the next BIT. Who's with me?!?

-"Why don't you just give up smoking?"

*sigh*

(Sleek topic change)

[DHS]

True, Romeo: Giving feedback on feedback is the basis of a good discussion. Innit?

RK point is absolutely right. But mainstream thinking seems that if we expose ourself to public, we *must* accept everything that comes back, cream and shit. Someone seems to think about us as those human targets for pies in lunaparks.

3) Say "Well, I didn't try to make it sound like Instant Remedy at all, but I understand what you mean. Thanx!"

I'm a No.3 kinda guy. True, it was a kinda tactless remark, but given to me I'd interpret it as "It sounds a lot like IR. Compared to that, I like IR better."

Ok, but i can't stand false assumptions or accusations: if someone writes something like that he has to explain how it sounds like someone else work (or worse, *try* to sound). It's easy to make public accusations (because that's an accusation enclosed in a criticism) without carrying any evidence.

Which reminds me that I'll never be able to go to London again! I've heard that from the 1st of july onward, you cannot smoke anywhere in London except @ home. Not even on the streets!

So finally americans conquered UK. Sad day.

I suggest a location outside London for the next BIT. Who's with me?!?

I am. What about turkey?

[xo]

DHS, there is no way you can single-handedly educate people to your school of thought. And you have to admit that whatever the listenter interprets, is the truth to the listener. If he interprets that it tries to sound like Instant Remedy, well you may fault his interpretation skills, but that's just his suspision - how's he to know the true intent of the remixer after all. Of course he can have good or bad ("incompetent") judgments. That doesn't make his utterings lies, it may make them untruths. A lie is a conscious act to deceive, that is strong and offensive wording. Even if his interpretation may be untrue, you should keep a balanced view of it.

As for reviews. Well you simply have to filter those you find useful and those you don't. If not, then you must get your own distribution mechanism with invite-only reviews or something like that...

[xo]

DHS, what do you mean about "accepting everything that comes back"? What do you want to do about the comments you don't accept? Delete them? I don't get it.

I think that if you publish your remix for listinging on a site with built in voting and commenting and reviews, I think you've set yourself up for comments. Now of course not all comments are going to be equally true or helpful. C'est la vie.

You really make it sound like you have been assaulted by a reviewer. Now, I can understand it must be annoying being told that one is trying to immitate someone else, but still.

About not being able to smoke on streets. Wow! That's overregulation when it's worst. A society where lawyers have gone to town on rights. Indoor regulations OK, well to some extent. It should be possible to run smoking places I think. If you visit these it's your own responsibility.

Just as it's your own responsibility to deal with unfair comments when you release to public.

[DHS]

Just as it's your own responsibility to deal with unfair comments when you release to public.

exoskeleton, the way you write you try hard to seem like me, but you're not half as good.

Live with it. And don't even think to say anything about that because:

a) That's what i think you do, and even if it's bullshit is what i perceive and you can't comment on that.
b) Since you posted in a public forum, i can say whatever i want about what you wrote and you have no right to do anything about that, because if you do it:
1) it means you can't stand criticisms.
2) you'd better post your writings somewhere else where everyone complies with what you say.
c) It's a free world and everyone has the right to express himself.

Nice, uh?

Have a nice day.

[Tonka]

I like the idea of the remixer being able to respond (only once, mind you - wouldn't want slanging matches) to any given shout.

Not only would it give the remixer a chance to defend something that *may* have been misinterpreted, it would also give them a chance to say 'Thanks - that comment really made my day' to some of the good comments!

[xo]

I like the idea of the remixer being able to respond (only once, mind you - wouldn't want slanging matches) to any given shout.

Not only would it give the remixer a chance to defend something that *may* have been misinterpreted, it would also give them a chance to say 'Thanks - that comment really made my day' to some of the good comments!

I agree Tonka. That would remedy what appears to be DHS' main objection - the inability to respond.

But again, we're back to shouting vs reviewing. But if someone has the time to implement shout comments, well then by all means. It doesn't strike me as incredibly important, but it does for some obviously...

[xo]

Nice, uh?

Have a nice day.

Part of this place is that you can respond back. But what you seem to want, is to be able to respond to shouts directly.

[Romeo Knight]

I like the idea of the remixer being able to respond (only once, mind you - wouldn't want slanging matches) to any given shout.

Me, too.
To me this seems to be a very reasonable idea.
Just look what ebay did - they invented this responding feature for their rating system, too, and they knew why.

Well, I can be a happy man without it, just in case L. Man reads this. He shouldn't feel forced to do anything.

[DHS]

Part of this place is that you can respond back. But what you seem to want, is to be able to respond to shouts directly.

Not exactly.

I'd like (knowing it's not possible) that some people stop thinking that we are here just to eat their frustation or to boost their ego.

You start from the assumption that who writes certain things does it in good faith. Could be, but another possibility is that some of them does that for other reasons.

In that particular case, to me it sounds like:

"Hey people, i *do* know about music. And, look, i spotted this moron who wants to copy someone else. Now, am i cool or what?"

Yes, you may say that he's making out a fool of himself, right, if that's the case (well, he showed us in other occasions his attitude, so it wouldn't surprise me at all).

Nonetheless, i get very bored to see such things. and not only when they hit me.

Whatever. If such people feel realized trolling this way, let them do it. Everyone has the right to choose how to waste his time.

[Chris Abbott]

"Shoutback". Cool idea.

Chris

[xo]

"Shoutback". Cool idea.

Chris

Yet another feature brought to you by the Pissing Contest Community. I see a ping-pong of edited shouts and shoutbacks comming up. Seriously, I like the feature as well.

DHS, as you realize, what you're asking for is for people to behave, be competent, etc. It's okay to ask for, but don't expect it.

[xo]

Well, I can be a happy man without it, just in case L. Man reads this. He shouldn't feel forced to do anything.

Sure, let's all put pressure on LMan to do all our little pet projects.