Music Banter Hall Of Fame: Nominations Thread

[Janszoon]

Originally Posted by Piss Me Off

Probably not but you'll certainly hear it endlessly in arguments for why you should like them. Even that isn't a big issue for me because i'm guilty of that myself from time to time but the music comes first, hence why i said no here.

Well, it's one of the only concrete things you can say about a band that might make them worth a listen for someone. As far as reasons to give about a band's worth go it's a lot better than "I like them" don't you think?

[Piss Me Off]

Depends who's saying they like them

[boo boo]

Chuck Berry? Garbage? I'll refrain from mentioning Jesus & The Mary Chain....

OOPS!

Originally Posted by TheBig3KilledMyRainDog

Boo Boo, I feel your pain. Rezz voted against waits because a bunch of no-name muscians weren't voted in first. I've been rebelling against this voting system since them.

I asked a huge question that never got answered about why people aren't submitting smaller artists and it never got answered. There isn't a consistency, its the way it goes.

All I ask is that we make up our damn minds.

It's either "vote for who you like" or "vote for those that deserve it based on impact and influence". Not "pick whichever option you feel like choosing at any given time".

[Alfred]

Originally Posted by Piss Me Off

Probably not but you'll certainly hear it endlessly in arguments for why you should like them.

That's what I mean.

[sleepy jack]

Originally Posted by boo boo

Chuck Berry? Garbage? I'll refrain from mentioning Jesus & The Mary Chain....

OOPS!



All I ask is that we make up our damn minds.

It's either "vote for who you like" or "vote for those that deserve it based on impact and influence". Not "pick whichever option you feel like choosing at any given time".

I was under the impression that the voting criteria was subject to the voter; not some unwritten rule.

[Janszoon]

Originally Posted by Piss Me Off

Depends who's saying they like them

[dac]

Originally Posted by boo boo

Chuck Berry? Garbage? I'll refrain from mentioning Jesus & The Mary Chain....

OOPS!



All I ask is that we make up our damn minds.

It's either "vote for who you like" or "vote for those that deserve it based on impact and influence". Not "pick whichever option you feel like choosing at any given time".

Why not a combination of the two?

[The Music Watchtower]

That is really a kind of dumb question?!!

[boo boo]

Originally Posted by sleepy jack

I was under the impression that the voting criteria was subject to the voter; not some unwritten rule.

Yeah I know that, and I'm saying it's retarded and that's not how it should be.

Consistency anyone? If you're gonna have a hall of fame, have a freaking criteria.

Without one, it allows people to be hyporcrites, changing their own personal criteria whenever they see fit. It also makes the hall of film itself out to be too broad and random.

[sleepy jack]

I don't necessarily see it as hypocrisy. I think most people who seem (to you) to vote in a that manner do take both sides into account (even if they're not aware of it.) For instance, maybe you're not a fan of the Velvet Underground but you think they're okay. Now if this was all from a subjective point of view you'd vote no obviously. However since you don't think they're that bad and you listen to them now again you then take that, and their influence, into account and vote yes. Now you take an artist like Chuck Berry, you understand his influence but you don't like his music in the slightest - obviously you're going to vote no just because, even though he meets one criteria, he doesn't meet the other more subjective criteria. Basically I think you're being too quick to judge and I think people should be allowed to vote however they want. I don't believe it's nearly as flippant as you make it out to be.