Minor board reorganization and Songcrafters' philosophy/direction.

[64Guitars]

Several people have asked why there's a need to separate member work from non-member work and I replied yesterday with a well-considered message giving my reasons. Would someone care to post a well-considered message explaining why there should not be this separation? All the reasons I've heard so far seem to boil down to a perceived exclusion based on views/comments, or a sense that we're saying anything that's not entirely member-performed is crap (of course we're not). I've tried many times to reassure the doubters that their fears of exclusion and judgement are unwarranted. Is it that you don't believe me? Or is there another reason which you've not yet mentioned why you think member-performed recordings should not have their own place in the site?

[Saijinn Maas]

Several people have asked why there's a need to separate member work from non-member work and I replied yesterday with a well-considered message giving my reasons. Would someone care to post a well-considered message explaining why there should not be this separation? All the reasons I've heard so far seem to boil down to a perceived exclusion based on views/comments, or a sense that we're saying anything that's not entirely member-performed is crap (of course we're not). I've tried many times to reassure the doubters that their fears of exclusion and judgement are unwarranted. Is it that you don't believe me? Or is there another reason which you've not yet mentioned why you think member-performed recordings should not have their own place in the site?

Funny you should ask...

[Oldrottenhead]

Funny you should ask...

https://songcrafters.org/community/index.php?topic=11426.0;msg=152956

[Saijinn Maas]

Funny you should ask...

https://songcrafters.org/community/index.php?topic=11426.0;msg=152956

Am i missing something? That was not what he asked. Actually, that would be the opposite of what was asked.

[AndyR]

Andy: Thanks for your comments. You've made some good points in all of your posts and I'd like to reply to all of them but I just don't have time.

No worries - you've actually addressed all the points that I had in my mind through other posts you've made anyway.

The only reason you'd need to reply to any of them directly now is if you think anything that I've written might have raised issues for others who might need clearer answers/conclusions than I've reached (if that makes sense). Otherwise, you've got enough to do already!

Various EDITS: (You guys keep posting while I'm typing!)

Watch out for those board names though (the new suggestions) - I know you're saying the names can be hammered out, but when you're doing it bear in mind there are folk like me who think of a "song" as the song itself, not the recorded version of it (be it written out on paper or a recording you can listen to).

At first glance, when I saw "Non-member Songs" that automatically meant a cover to me ("a member must have posted it, and he's saying it's a non-member song" !), and so finding boards inside called "Originals" and "Covers" was initially confusing.

Maybe the categories could be Member Recordings and Non-Member Recordings? Not ideal, I know (You'd have to make sure there was some way people understood that this did not mean "post your favourite Coldplay/wotever recording"!! )

Actually, the stuff I said earlier about a personal desire to post in General would disappear immediately then, I'd head straight for Member Recordings and its boards to post my stuff, feeling no superiority over those who were posting in Non-member Recordings. Also, for some reason I feel more inclined to make an effort to prowl both categories named in that way (more than I would with the General and DIY - I can see me getting into a General or DIY mindset and sticking there for a while).

EDIT - and then you posted this:

Several people have asked why there's a need to separate member work from non-member work and I replied yesterday with a well-considered message giving my reasons. Would someone care to post a well-considered message explaining why there should not be this separation? All the reasons I've heard so far seem to boil down to a perceived exclusion based on views/comments, or a sense that we're saying anything that's not entirely member-performed is crap (of course we're not). I've tried many times to reassure the doubters that their fears of exclusion and judgement are unwarranted. Is it that you don't believe me? Or is there another reason which you've not yet mentioned why you think member-performed recordings should not have their own place in the site?

I can only speak for me. The reason I was uncomfortable was because of this personal distinction I have between Songs and Recordings. I don't know how many other people have it though.

While we're calling these posts "Songs" I have reservations about segregation of any sort based on who's performing on the recording posted. But if we call them "Recordings" (or something similar), my reservations disappear. (I have to go now - the missus is hungry, she's been very patient -I hope that was clear enough, and I hope it helps, otherwise I can clarify tomorrow if necessary)

[Oldrottenhead]

i was referring you to the post 64guitars mentioned

Several people have asked why there's a need to separate member work from non-member work and I replied yesterday with a well-considered message giving my reasons.

where he believes he already answered those questions, if you read that then perhaps you can answer his query.

Funny you should ask...

https://songcrafters.org/community/index.php?topic=11426.0;msg=152956

Am i missing something? That was not what he asked. Actually, that would be the opposite of what was asked.

[Saijinn Maas]

Several people have asked why there's a need to separate member work from non-member work and I replied yesterday with a well-considered message giving my reasons. Would someone care to post a well-considered message explaining why there should not be this separation? All the reasons I've heard so far seem to boil down to a perceived exclusion based on views/comments, or a sense that we're saying anything that's not entirely member-performed is crap (of course we're not). I've tried many times to reassure the doubters that their fears of exclusion and judgement are unwarranted. Is it that you don't believe me? Or is there another reason which you've not yet mentioned why you think member-performed recordings should not have their own place in the site?

I thought you might have mis-linked is all...

[Tony W]

I know I stepped out of this conversation, but I thought I could add something relevant again. Here's a snapshot of what child boards look like, and it should define why I don't like them, if they are intended for daily use. Mine are strictly archival.

This illustrates how the child boards appear when the "group" isn't selected.

[Saijinn Maas]

This is in response to what 64g asked. This has nothing to do with excluding groups, backers, etc.
This is intended to be about why the change should be about streamlining and there being no need to change the focus.



Currently, there is a known imbalance for certain boards. As previously stated, this is probably not fixable at this point.

What we have found out so far in this discussion, is that the majority of regular posters will fall into the "member only" (referred to as DIY from now on) board.

Using the information avilable to us, the breakdown of the current posts are as follows:

51% Original Songs   
17% General Discussion   
15% Cover Songs      
7% Multitrack Recorders   
3% Collaborations      
2% Introduce Yourself!   
2% Just for Laughs      
1% Backing Track Jams   
1% Guitars and Basses   
1% Songcrafter Tributes   

The sections that pertain to the restructure of the Post Your Work board specifically, are as follows:

Original Songs...      
46% *DIY         
5% *General      
Cover Songs...
12% *DIY          
3% *General      
3% Collaborations      
1% Backing Track Jams   
1% Songcrafter Tributes   

*Since we have no real numbers for this, a guess was made based on the posts found within the first couple of pages of each other sections.

This means that:

DIY Board =
46% DIY Originals     
12% DIY Covers       
1% Tributes
3% Collaborations    
---------------------------
62% Total

General Board =    
5% General Originals
3% General Covers
1% Backing Tracks
---------------------------
9% Total

(Totals run around a +/-2% margin of error, which is not enough to significantly change the conclusions)

The backers and non-members will now be relegated to a low active board, while those who make up the majority still constitute the more active board, by quite a bit.

At this point, it really has nothing to do with being fair or otherwise, but it does show that the restructure will not really achieve much more than it is currently, the only thing that changes is that some members will no longer be able to post in the higher traffic'd area the members they previously interacted with.

However, if we restructure in a manner that emphasizes streamlining, we can do something like:

General Discussion
   General Discussion
   Introduce Yourself
   Just for Laughs
   Gear

Post Your Work
   Originals
   Covers
   Backer/Loops/Midi

Songwriting
   General
   Collaborations
   Lyrics

Recording
   General
   Multitrack Recorders


This cuts down a few of the extraneous boards while still giving keeping the traffic for people who are the biggest part of the community.

If anything I said either doesn't make sense, or you just do not agree, then please discuss it. Otherwise, what was the point?
   
This concludes this part of the program. I apologize for the length. I usually feel that is even more important to be concise when talking on a forum or text, more so, than in person.

[64Guitars]

Just have a question about non-member collabs? Isn't this criteria the reason they'd be in general board anyway? I mean, if they had collab'd with other members, they'd be in the member board anyway? Might have just confused myself.

Yeah, you're probably right. I didn't give that much thought as I was only trying to illustrate how the idea of two categories would work.

What about that Collabs in general are not a Post Your Work board? Since it is a board to discuss and set up collaborations in order to get a final version posted under the qualifying (original or cover) board. Also, since to the only reason to post lyrics is for feedback or to find a collab, do lyrics necessarily qualify as a "Post Your Work"? Lyrics without music is just poetry... nothing wrong with that mind you. Just thought it could be condensed is all.

When I first read that, I thought you might be right. Discussions belong in the General Discussion category, not Post Your Work. But then I realized that discussion is not enough if you've written an original song and you want to collaborate. Just saying, for example, "I've written a song and need someone to do the vocals. Anyone interested?" would not be enough. You'd need to post a recording of what you've done so far so that people can decide whether they're interested or not. So I think collaborations still belong in Post Your Work because they will often have recordings attached.

Not sure why people are against child boards either, but if you named them similar to what I had:

Member Orginals
Member Covers
General Originals
General Covers
Backer/Loops/Midi

They wouldn't need to be child boards.

Yes, and that's fine. It's just that I noticed the repetition of Originals and Covers and thought that using two categories might be better for that. But it's not important to me. Either way is fine. I just wondered if anyone preferred the use of two categories.