Can we please get multiple titles again?

fluffy · Post by **fluffy** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 1:24 pm

Of course if reviews are primarily comprised of the people who entered into a fight, the total review count (meaning reviews of the whole fight, not of individual entries) will be lower on a smaller fight, BUT the number of reviews per entry should be higher.

Also, on the opposite end of the spectrum, people don't tend to bother to review the ultra-tiny fights (for example, I recall Rule Of Thump not getting any reviews at all). There's a definite balancing act. Have 100 1-song fights and you'd might as well just be posting on somesongs instead.

Rabid Garfunkel · Post by **Rabid Garfunkel** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 1:26 pm

jack wrote:...i'll call the "rabid" demographic...

Oh my.

Give it time, agreed. A couple of rounds ain't that telling of a sample.

frankie big face · Post by **frankie big face** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 2:05 pm

LMNOP wrote: I like the multiple titles because it enables the creation of better songs.

and

Multiple titles does the opposite. It expands one’s options instead of removing them.

No it doesn't and not really.

Billy's Little Trip · Post by **Billy's Little Trip** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 2:21 pm

frankie big face wrote:
LMNOP wrote: I like the multiple titles because it enables the creation of better songs.

and

Multiple titles does the opposite. It expands one’s options instead of removing them.
No it doesn't and not really.

In my opinion, the only way to create better songs, is with more time and musicians that care about making better songs.

I still like the idea of multiple time frame fights. The front page would look really cool with the weekly fight voting, and a monthly fight voting.

jack · Post by **jack** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 2:47 pm

to me, the way to make better songs is self discipline. this means not relying on songfight to write good songs. if they happen as a result, thats great, but if you're not inspired to write a good song for a songfight title(s), then don't.

you could always make your own title up and write one accordingly.

LMNOP · Post by **LMNOP** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 3:21 pm

frankie big face wrote:
LMNOP wrote: I like the multiple titles because it enables the creation of better songs.

and

Multiple titles does the opposite. It expands one’s options instead of removing them.
No it doesn't and not really.

Hmm, I see your point and I stand corrected. Well, no.

All I'm saying is that if you flip two coins repeatedly, at least one of them will come up heads 75% of the time while if you flip one coin repeatedly, it will come up heads 50% of the time and that 75% is greater than 50%.

Not saying there aren't folks around here with double-tailed coins but still...

Anyway, I'm not much on internet bickering and I apologize for any offended sensibilities and will gladly take my two cents back and go home.

Billy's Little Trip · Post by **Billy's Little Trip** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 5:15 pm

jack wrote: you could always make your own title up and write one accordingly.

..yeah, and the next thing that you're going to tell me is that the world isn't flat...cha!

Adam! · Post by **Adam!** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 5:52 pm

I reviewed one of the fights this week specifically out of appreciation for the Fightmasters' willingness to try out the two-title thing, but sadly didn't see many other multi-fight supporters doing the same.

Which is too bad.

fluffy · Post by **fluffy** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 6:10 pm

I'm not going to go out of my way to prove a point. Even when fights are small I generally don't review them unless I'm in it.

Post by **Spud** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 6:12 pm

I, on the other hand, will go to any lengths to make a point.

jack · Post by **jack** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 6:30 pm

fluffy wrote:I'm not going to go out of my way to prove a point.

are you kidding me? i hope so.

fluffy · Post by **fluffy** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 6:36 pm

obscurity wrote:(or, less obscurely: If you want to accurately measure something, it might be best to not try to influence it at the same time.)

What obs said.

bz£ · Post by **bz£** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 6:46 pm

Can we please get single titles again? The multiple choices are confusing me.

Post by **Spud** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 6:59 pm

Start your own thread, bzl. This thread is specifically for requesting multiple titles. Don't confuse us.

bz£ · Post by **bz£** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 7:02 pm

Multiple threads confuse me. Can we please have single threads again?

Caravan Ray · Post by **Caravan Ray** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 9:41 pm

bzl confuses me. Can we please have Poor June again?

Billy's Little Trip · Sat Jan 05, 2008 10:37 pm

fluffy · Post by **fluffy** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 10:39 pm

This whole thread's reaction is confusing me. Could someone please lock it?

frankie big face · Post by **frankie big face** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 9:09 am

LMNOP wrote:
frankie big face wrote:
LMNOP wrote: I like the multiple titles because it enables the creation of better songs.

and

Multiple titles does the opposite. It expands one’s options instead of removing them.
No it doesn't and not really.
Hmm, I see your point and I stand corrected. Well, no.

All I'm saying is that if you flip two coins repeatedly, at least one of them will come up heads 75% of the time while if you flip one coin repeatedly, it will come up heads 50% of the time and that 75% is greater than 50%.

Not saying there aren't folks around here with double-tailed coins but still...

Anyway, I'm not much on internet bickering and I apologize for any offended sensibilities and will gladly take my two cents back and go home.

If writing a song was the equivalent of flipping a coin, then you would be right, but it's not, so you're not. By your logic, if we have 1000 titles per week, we should start churning out some of the greatest songs ever written! Spud, can we please have 1000 titles next week?

Regarding "exapanding one's options," I suppose it's pretty hard to argue that more titles doesn't give you more options. But more options doesn't necessarily lead to more creativity. Some of my most popular songs (e.g. Tracks for Future Practice, Crinkle Binkle, Floating Bridge) came from titles I would likely NOT have chosen if I had another option. Sometimes constraint breeds creativity by forcing you to think in a different way. Igor Stravinsky placed all kinds of limitations on his harmonic language while writing The Rite of Spring and it turned out to be a revolutionary work. It it's more options you want, use any combination of two or three words from this post for your title and start writing songs. You should be busy for some time with all this inspiration!

Having said all this, for the record, I, like Jack, support the return to multiple titles despite my previous objections. I can't really argue with the problems inherent in 30+-size fights and the changes I had hoped to see upon returning to one title didn't happen. Plus, no matter how childish he was being with his "ban," any change that produces new material from Johnny Cashpoint is all right with me.

Now, if we could just get JB to stop working on the site so much and write a few songs... (Spud, you can keep working on the site.

)

LMNOP · Post by **LMNOP** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:05 pm

Frankie, I apologize if I’ve somehow led you into Straw Man Fallacy Land.

Spud, thanks for trying the two-title thing again. It makes it more likely that I’ll participate from time to time.

frankie big face · Post by **frankie big face** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 7:07 pm

LMNOP wrote:...Straw Man Fallacy Land.

I'm seeing next week's title...(!)

king_arthur · Post by **king_arthur** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 9:04 pm

And fer whatever it's worth, I found that my "first pass to narrow down 30 entries to 10" thing didn't really work in terms of getting me to write reviews. Once I'd eliminated the songs I didn't like, I didn't have a whole lot to say about the rest of 'em, not enough for a respectable set of reviews, anyway.

But I'm gonna try to get back into reviewing in the new year... and making new music and maybe even some cover art.

Charles (KA)