Overrated, Overused, Overdone, underrated etc.

[Yagan Kiely]

Discuss all similar topic in here:
"Over-Used/Over-Done things in the world of music"
"Underrated rather than overrated?"
"Violincello, overrated?"
"Rachmaninov Piano Concertos, overrated?"
"Walter Piston, underrated?"
"Mahler, Overrated?"

Stickied because for whatever reason these topics are popular.

It would be helpful to use the "Subject:" when posting a message to link to a specific topic. Given that there is more than one topic, double posting is permitted in this thread only.

[sbeckmesser]

For what good, logical reason is a topic with fewer than a half dozen postings (i.e. Walter Piston, underrated?) being zapped? Perhaps if it were retitled to eliminate the "underrated" it woudl fulfill your peculiar tastes as to how to successfully run a forum?

--Sixtus

[Yagan Kiely]

I've said so countless times; it isn't the word, it's the topic – and the topic is the same. There are 6 threads on the same topic, this is not allowed on any forum (well, maybe 4chan), and it is standard to close all bar one. I have, however, stickied this which is more than any other forum would do. If you have any real qualms, PM me.

[allegroamabile]

I am the proud creator of all but two of those topics.

[tickle88]

A quick continuation of Underrated: Glazunov's Op. 72, Theme and Variatios for piano (from 1900) is as Russian as he or anyone else gets; as Pushkin might say, it "reeks of Russia" (Rusyu pachnet). The irregularity of the theme is probably because it is a folksong (one I don't know, sadly). And the finale! By the way, this is the sort of comment I would like to post, or read, on the discussion page of that piece. Can anyone tell me how to go about it, if it's possible? Thanks.

[allegroamabile]

Please do me a favor Tickle88 and listen to Glazunov's Symphony No. 3, especially the second movement. Oh, what the heck, all the movements and please private message me what you think.

[Leonard Vertighel]

I hope this doesn't escalate, but I have to agree with Sixtus on this one. The threads, albeit similar in spirit, were not about the same topic (unless "Violoncello" happens to be a synonym for "Mahler"), and they were on topic (Music Related). I don't think that shutting down threads just because the topic is not highly original and innovative will actually foster discussion at any level.

[Lyle Neff]

I hope this doesn't escalate, [...]

Escalating is overrated. It's much more dramatic for something to "spiral out of control."

[Yagan Kiely]

From my experience with several other forums, there is no way that the threads would be allowed all to be open at once. The alternative is creating a sub-forum, not completely sure if it is possible here, but if it is, I'm not willing to do that either. All threads are on the same topic: the status of a popular rating in regard to a work or an artist without any specific musical aspect in mind.*

Allowing all threads to be open at once creates a untidy (or even chaotic) forum. ??3 Is fine, ??4 is cluttering the forum. I believe that, given the popularity amongst the forum contributors of such threads, having a stickied thread for discussion is adequate. Use of post subjects allows easy reference† to which thread of topic that person is discussing, and it is kept above other threads so as it doesn't get lost and is easily accessible.

I'm willing to discuss creating another forum outside (within?) Music Related for lists and 'overrated'§ type threads, but allowing 6+ of one type of thread, and another 6 or so (haven't counted) of another, is chaotic to a forum, even of low-ish activity such as this — and many other forums are run in the same manner.

The threads, albeit similar in spirit, were not about the same topic (unless "Violoncello" happens to be a synonym for "Mahler"), and they were on topic (Music Related). I don't think that shutting down threads just because the topic is not highly original and innovative will actually foster discussion at any level.

I'd also like to note, none are shut down. They are readable, but post-able in this thread.

*The amount of poll/survey threads is also rather chaotic to the forum. 'What are you listening to know', 'top 5 pieces' 'Great composers' and 'List of Undiscovered Beauties' etc. for example, are all the same type of thread. Forum games, while they may be different from one another, are also not allowed (generally no more than two) in a forum, the same applies to other like-themed threads.
†I'll put in the title post the double posting is allowed in this thread so as to specify which threaded topic the poster is discussing.
§Example.

[Leonard Vertighel]

From my experience with several other forums, there is no way that the threads would be allowed all to be open at once.

What other forums do is irrelevant to us (unless you can provide a specific example where half a dozen similar threads have significantly damaged a forum or its community).

Allowing all threads to be open at once creates a untidy (or even chaotic) forum.

What's wrong with that? Creativity is chaotic by nature. It's not like the Bug Report forum where we need to keep track of the issues in an efficient manner.

[Lyle Neff]

[...] Forum games, while they may be different from one another, are also not allowed (generally no more than two) in a forum, the same applies to other like-themed threads. [...]

While I admit to having little interest in threads of the type addressed here, I'm more concerned with the Big-Brother-style (or evasive) use of the passive voice above to justify the limitation.

One might as well conflate all topics of the type "I love composer/compositions/national schools/genres/etc. X" as well.

[Yagan Kiely]

What other forums do is irrelevant to us (unless you can provide a specific example where half a dozen similar threads have significantly damaged a forum or its community).

We are still a forum, the same type of forum as all others. Others use this rule for a reason, to keep the forums moving smoothly and effectively, allowing several threads on the same topic is not an effective use of a forum.

What's wrong with that? Creativity is chaotic by nature. It's not like the Bug Report forum where we need to keep track of the issues in an efficient manner.

Forums may be creative, but their primary role is communication. Chaotic forums hinder communication. Good threads will be lost amongst these threads, all on the same topic (which don't need 6 separate threads).

I'm more concerned with the Big-Brother-style (or evasive) use of the passive voice above to justify the limitation.

There's nothing here about suppressing points of view, or opinions or speech at all. None of the threads have been closed, they have been relocated. The fact the I've stickied the threads gives the topics more voice, while still effectively using the forum without clutter. As I said, if a new forum could be justified (I see these threads as a fad, not something that will be here next year) I should definitely be created.

[Leonard Vertighel]

We are still a forum, the same type of forum as all others.

Not all forums are the same. They range from the likes of the BBC forums to the likes of 4chan, and they are managed in entirely different ways. Besides, if we were here to do what everybody does, then we should be listening to Britney Spears, as was recently suggested by one of our beloved spammers.

several threads on the same topic

The problem is that there seems to be quite some disagreement about this assessment. In fact, so far I haven't seen anyone speak up to agree with it. It seems to me that the prevailing opinion is that the threads, albeit based on a similar premise, had evolved in distinct directions.

None of the threads have been closed, they have been relocated.

Dumping several popular threads that were evolving in different ways into a single one is a prime recipe for utter chaos. I expect the result to be that those topics effectively grind to a halt. We'll see what happens in the next few weeks.

if a new forum could be justified

Maybe that's exactly what we should do: split the 'Music Related' forum into an 'In-depth Music Discussion' and a 'Music Chat' forum. That way, music amateurs could freely chat about what they do or don't like, in as many threads as they want, without disturbing the serious musicians in their discussions about the quasi-Viennese flavor imparted to Bruno Heinz Jaja's Punkt Contrapunkt by the middle bar of silence in 3/4.

[allegroamabile]

I think that the groundskeeper, Leonard Vertighel, opposing your (Yagan) decision to combine the threads shows that some reforms should be made. Just because one person opposes the idea that these are on separate topics (which I feel are) does not mean you have to combine them. It would be choatic having to discuss all these topics on the same thread. I am pretty sure you will try to refute this, but it is worth a try.

[allegroamabile]

Maybe that's exactly what we should do: split the 'Music Related' forum into an 'In-depth Music Discussion' and a 'Music Chat' forum. That way, music amateurs could freely chat about what they do or don't like, in as many threads as they want, without disturbing the serious musicians in their discussions about the quasi-Viennese flavor imparted to Bruno Heinz Jaja's Punkt Contrapunkt by the middle bar of silence in 3/4.

I do like taking part in both "In-depth Music Discussion" and "Music Chat" topics. Just because I like to make contributions in the Music Chat field does not make me an amatuer and not a serious musician. I would just like to justify that.

Regards