Long fights

Caravan Ray · Post by **Caravan Ray** » Tue Oct 26, 2004 6:03 pm

Just for the record - I think Jim's ideas are good ones. I see promoting collaborations and attracting new competitors as being positive outcomes.

Generally though, I enjoy the challenge of the whole 'song from go-to-whoa in a week' thing and see it as intrinsic part of the SF experience.

If Jim's ideas can be implemented without impacting negatively on the SF 'main game" - then I'd be more than happy to see them introduced.

erik · Post by **erik** » Tue Oct 26, 2004 6:04 pm

Lunkhead wrote:I would be frustrated too if I wanted to actually discuss an idea, and all I got in response were attempts at witty putdowns and opinions given with little to no explanation for the rationale behind them. Or people who basically say that since some people can enter a good song in a week, everyone can. That's some pretty poor reasoning, because everyone is in a different situation and has different amounts of inspiration, time, etc.

I'd also be frustrated if I just wanted to talk about the SongFight! format (even though I knew full well that it wasn't up to me to make any decisions about it) and people told me to basically shut up. Sure, it's just farting in the wind, but who is it hurting? If you don't like it, don't read the thread. I don't post into every thread that I'm not interested in and tell everybody they should stop posting because it's a waste of time. I just don't read those threads.

It's not hurting anyone, but neither are the words of people who disagree with Jim. I pointed out the fact that only two people will ulitmately decide any SF change not to tell Jim to shut up, but to point out that getting frustrated over people whose opinions carry no weight whatsoever is just unnecessary frustration. I don't get into the rationale of why I don't like Jim's idea because ultimately, this discussion boils down to "What should be the mission statement of Songfight?" and that is something that people just fundamentally disagree on. Ultimately, the idea is now floating around, and it may be used or not. Any number of songfight messageboard users with differing opinions will not stop that.

Post by **Lunkhead** » Tue Oct 26, 2004 6:41 pm

Jim explicitly said the words of the people who disagreed with him were in fact pissing him off and frustrating him. But anyway, Erik, your point about what the discussion ultimately boils down to, etc. is totally valid, and written in a completely clear non-flammable way. Why didn't you just say that in the first place?

The "weekly" bit is indeed in the FAQ as a core premise. I had forgotten about that, and had only been thinking of it as a "very short term" competition.

Still, though, fights have stretched to longer periods in the past without SF facing an existential crisis (except when Narbotic disappeared). I didn't really see where Jim was saying he was entitled to participate, or that he expected everybody to make big changes to accomodate him. I just heard someone expressing their desire to participate, and a plea to maybe once in a while slightly reduce one of the barriers to entry. I don't see any reason to make fun of that even if I were to think it wasn't a realistic thing to hope for.

JonPorobil · Post by **JonPorobil** » Tue Oct 26, 2004 7:00 pm

My one and only take on it.

I like that people are talking about this idea. I think the idea itself is a good one, though it wouldn't matter to me either way. I would be happy if it happened.

But. Whether or not it happens is at the sole discretion of the Fightmasters, who might be reading this thread now, and might either agree or disagree with the idae. Until then, nothing anyone says here can have a major impact on Songfight itself.

Therefore, keep talking, and don't tell each other to shut up.

tonetripper · Post by **tonetripper** » Tue Oct 26, 2004 7:44 pm

I just want it to go on record that I think Jim's views are valid, but there is that old Aesop fable of the boy who cried wolf. I think the issue, in my head ofcourse, is that I see an awful lot of posting from a songfighter who I greatly respect musically but who posts more than enters (which isn't a bad thing until they drag the concept through the mud that they are the only one who feels this way).

There is nothing wrong with Jim's idea. In fact, in a prior post I stated that I thought it was a good notion and I still do (not that my opinion means shit in the grand scheme of things). It's a great idea, but the gentleman who moderates the site has voiced that it would be extra work for the FM. And it's a priveledge to be a part of something that someone puts out through the generosity of their heart. That considered, dialogue is good in terms of this, but maybe we should keep to dialogue and leave the frustrations at the door; in addition, a little ear-bending from our fellow SFers. Obviously Jim has high standards that he sets for himself and life is a little difficult in participating in the regular fight set week by week for him (and I'm sure he's not alone). Hearing him out is fine. Sorry if I offended you Jim. I was actually trying to be a cheerleader.

Every tune I've been a part of and submitted, and there haven't been really that many compared to some, has always been difficult to finish in a week. And even when it's done I always want to fix some little thing or rewrite the whole damn thing or yank it cuz it sucks. That, to me, is the nature of Songfight!!

The only person with the power of deadline changes is the FM himself. I would more than welcome the longer deadline cuz it's real hard to get three people to collaborate on a project for SF, especially when they have families, jobs, wives, kids, and lives of their own that impede the SF concept. We've still done it and the pride in completing it is unequalled to anything I've ever done in my life. Let's be fair to our good brother Jim. I'm sure there are others here who feel as he, but who are not posting cuz they think their opinions may be construed as invalid. I think we should keep the dialogue going.

- Pablo

jack · Post by **jack** » Tue Oct 26, 2004 8:05 pm

jim and sam, you know i like you guys and have alot of respect not only for your opinion but for your music as well. i just think there's alot of dead-horse beating going on here and as TT mentioned, tis time that could be less wasted by working on this weeks songs (and their pending deadlines) if one felt so inclined...

dialogue is good. so is dissent. but neither necessarily brings change.

Eric Y. · Post by **Eric Y.** » Tue Oct 26, 2004 10:59 pm

Hoblit wrote:we are a large community that continues to grow. This may lead to some more exposure...which can lead to employment options and success to those who take this thing seriously.

where do i sign up for the 401(k)?

j$ · Post by j$ » Wed Oct 27, 2004 1:43 am

jack shite wrote:dialogue is good. so is dissent. but neither necessarily brings change.

Agreed. Dialogue for dialogue's sake is not always a bad thing, though. And dissent, if not aggresively offensive, can be entertaining.

The thread is called 'Suggestions'. So stating the obvious fact (it's the Fightmasters' website they do what they want) is moot. They wanted a 'Suggestions' thread. That's all Jim did, when you get down to it, so donnez-lui un break already.

Having said that, when people came back to him, not all in favour, which was hardly unexpected. I can't see anything to explain why it upset him as it did (seeing as he is a long-time poster, he has experience of this kind of discussion) but he said his piece in defence. Not quite sure why Sam jumped to his defence either, other than he felt no-one else was.

I've enjoyed reading these posts so far because they show people here are passionate about the site. I knew this already but it's good to see it confirmed so directly. Sattamassagana, indeed.

j$

Post by jb » Wed Oct 27, 2004 2:03 am

Hey, there's a sign on the wall over there that you should all read.

*points at sign*

"NO STAIRWAY TO HEAVEN"

Wait, not that sign. The other sign.

*points slightly to the right*

"NO WHINY BICKERING"

Take it to PM for crying out loud.

erik · Post by **erik** » Wed Oct 27, 2004 2:09 am

*whew*

*plays Stairway*

Leaf · Post by **Leaf** » Wed Oct 27, 2004 9:17 am

This can't be pm'ed at my convenience so here goes:

All the talking is good, the suggestions are good, and raggin Jim a little about more posts than music doesn't take into account the fact that one can post from work (if one is lucky) but I don't think the office would tolerate a drum session.... so that's not super valid.

Hey, we could just occasionally do a sidefight "collab" fight where a title is chosen, collabs are formed, etc.... self-hosted, no pain for the fightmasters, hell, then they'd have time to enter the damn thing!!!

So many ideas... we are a creative bunch.

erik · Post by **erik** » Wed Oct 27, 2004 9:53 am

*continues playing Stairway*

Post by jb » Wed Oct 27, 2004 10:01 am

15-16 puzzle wrote:*continues playing Stairway*

dude, there are TWO signs.

joshw · Post by **joshw** » Wed Oct 27, 2004 10:04 am

I'll throw my 2 cents in strongly in support of the idea. The real point of this site, to me, is to write good music. I write better songs when I have more time to develop ideas. Re-adding the third fight with a 2-3 week deadline would be completely killer.

And don't feel bad about your idea being dismissed, Jim - the same thing happened when I brought it up eons ago. Yeah, SongFight rocks, and change for change's sake is no good. But to be so resistant to good change just because "that's not the way we do things" reminds me of a certain politician..

Leaf · Post by **Leaf** » Wed Oct 27, 2004 11:07 am

joshw wrote:I'll throw my 2 cents in strongly in support of the idea. The real point of this site, to me, is to write good music. I write better songs when I have more time to develop ideas. Re-adding the third fight with a 2-3 week deadline would be completely killer.

And don't feel bad about your idea being dismissed, Jim - the same thing happened when I brought it up eons ago. Yeah, SongFight rocks, and change for change's sake is no good. But to be so resistant to good change just because "that's not the way we do things" reminds me of a certain politician..

Ah yes, Alderman Cushing....

Post by jb » Wed Oct 27, 2004 11:27 am

Hey, guys, if you want longer to write a song, take longer. It just won't be in the fight. Nothing is stopping anybody at any time from taking as long as they want to write a song, even using a Song Fight title.

Maybe you'll get a longer deadline some time, but I don't see a pressing need to make such a big alteration to the system. In my opinion it would be an unnecessary complication.

We treat the Song Fight system kind of like the constitution. There has to be a very important, pressing need or desire for us to even contemplate changing it. And then we'll mull our options for a few weeks.

Keep presenting your ideas and arguments for things, but you should know that whining about change and bickering about who is censoring who is NOT helpful.

Just because it's your idea doesn't mean the fightmasters have to agree that it's a good one. Even if they do, it's likely that the first time you'll find out is when a change appears on songfight.org.

So please, I beg you, stop with the whining and bitching and bickering. It serves no purpose whatsoever except to make fightmaster ignore the thread containing your precious ideas.

Adam! · Post by **Adam!** » Wed Oct 27, 2004 12:58 pm

I like the idea, and not just because I have the same problem as Jim. I was amazed at how good all the CoverFight! entries were; if that jump in quality is partly because of the longer deadline then I personally would like to listen to a 2-3 week fight. Also note that when SongFight! had 2 fights per week there were too many entries, but when we had 3 fights per week there were too few. Maybe having 2 1/2 (or 2 1/3) fights per week would balance that out. Lastly I don't think the LongFight! would necessarily be gargantuan: I'd shy away from it if possible because the competition could be stiff. But I'm sure it would make a great listen.

frankie big face · Post by **frankie big face** » Thu Oct 28, 2004 5:58 am

[Most of post deleted, but....] i think ten days between fights is the perfect interval. you may resume your complainting and suggesting.

j$ · Post by j$ » Thu Oct 28, 2004 6:21 am

Puce wrote:. Also note that when SongFight! had 2 fights per week there were too many entries, but when we had 3 fights per week there were too few.

It's highly possible that we had the optimum number of fighters we were going to get in any given week, whether there were two or three fights. i don't think people arrive, go oh there are three fights, I won't bother to do any, then go away again. If anything drove people away it is the decreasing number of reviews per fight.

Also I don't think there were too few fghters in the three fights period. I am more likely to review a five-10 song fight than I am to review a 15-20 song fight.

Also I feel the quality (signal to noise ratio whatever you want to call it) has improved over the last year. I'd rather hear 7 good to great songs than that number of good to great songs swamped with 10 dollops of shite. (the matter, not Jack!)

j$

Adam! · Post by **Adam!** » Thu Oct 28, 2004 9:09 am

j$ wrote:
Puce wrote:. Also note that when SongFight! had 2 fights per week there were too many entries, but when we had 3 fights per week there were too few.
It's highly possible that we had the optimum number of fighters we were going to get in any given week, whether there were two or three fights. i don't think people arrive, go oh there are three fights, I won't bother to do any, then go away again. If anything drove people away it is the decreasing number of reviews per fight.

I'm talking about the number of entries <i>per fight</i>.

j$ wrote:Also I don't think there were too few fghters in the three fights period.

The fightmasters did. Hence the return of the two fight format.

j$ · Post by j$ » Thu Oct 28, 2004 10:25 am

Puce wrote:
j$ wrote:It's highly possible that we had the optimum number of fighters we were going to get in any given week, whether there were two or three fights. i don't think people arrive, go oh there are three fights, I won't bother to do any, then go away again.
I'm talking about the number of entries <i>per fight</i>.

Ah, but don't you see the number of fighters in a single fight is only ever going to be the number of fighters divided by 2 or 3. Your argument seems to hinge on the idea that somehow having three fights put people off coming to/returning to Songfight. I don't see that. I could be wrong.

Puce wrote:
j$ wrote:Also I don't think there were too few fghters in the three fights period.
The fightmasters did. Hence the return of the two fight format.

Do you know this as fact? Have JB or Spud said as much somewhere that I missed? Or to you directly? It's reasonable to postulate this from the data, but it can only be postulation. it may be that it was too much work for not enough return, which is a subtly different point.

Anyway, you miss my point. I said 'I don't think...'. My opinion, expressed. Unless you're saying my opinion doesn't count, in which case it may well be this attitude which is losing us fighters.

:p

j$

Leaf · Post by **Leaf** » Thu Oct 28, 2004 10:33 am

I don't think we're losing fighters. The communitee has 179+ registered members on the message board... but everyone has different life circumstances... like ... where's Blue at these days? Probably has things on the go..

Still, I support the concept of having a different deadline time frame, especially for the purpose of collabs, and the improved sound quality... although I also think that the current format has a charm to it.. all those that can get it done in a week have achieved something unique and special... let's not lose sight of that fact! It takes a special person with drive and determination, not mention talent etc... to pull this off... even the entries that , in my opinion, suck, deserve kudos for getting it done.

ah... the flip flop.