djpretzel

Looks like they contacted you. Looks potentially bogus. Starr consulting? Is there a way to verify the current owner of the domain via WHOIS or other means?

I'm stuck here

I unlocked the thread so Jimmy could reply, and everything he said made sense to me... not much more to add, but we've kinda morphed the conversation into a larger & very valid/relevant topic, so perhaps more people want to chime in outside the context of just this one event. :nicework::nicework:

I just wanted to weigh in quickly (last-word freak on a thread I wasn't even INVOLVED in??) with a couple thoughts/sentiments. Firstly, I'm hugely appreciative of & grateful for everything Jimmy's done for this community - way beyond the call of duty, heroic contributions, and even if he quit cold turkey and never did anything else EVAR, it would still be awesome work. It bears mentioning that Brandon has done a ton for the community as well, and perhaps feels slighted in some sense because he's still more active whereas Jimmy has "moved on"... I'd like to speak to this point, because I think it's a false Boolean. You don't need to "move on" from OCR to do separate, commercial, or original work. This is NOT a linear progression of stages... Hell, look what Jake did for B&R - a masterpiece on every level, and he's a super-pro game composer extraordinaire. If there's one thing I really want to emphasize, it's that I don't want people to feel like they have to "move on" just to work on other music, break into the industry, or explore ANY other hobby or art form that catches their interest. Participating in OC ReMix should never be at the explicit exclusion of pursuing other goals, and everyone has their own priorities. I want this community - myself, staff, album directors, artists, and visitors alike - to be as open as possible, and not hold grudges against anyone for not being a "diehard" or for spending time elsewhere, whether it be for commercial pursuits or just something different entirely. That being said, obviously I *DO* appreciate active participation, contribution, and presence... they DO make a difference, it's just not a difference that should be used to justify animus or grudges or anything of that sort. It's something I should hope said individuals are proud of, and not something that generates any sense of entitlement or superiority. I think (hope) you can have the pride without the prejudice, in this case. I agree with the majority of what Jimmy's contributed to this thread, but I did want to point out this sentence, because I think it's unfortunate phrasing/word choice. If people want to think of things in terms of "levels" - i.e. hierarchical - I can't really stop them, but I just honestly think it's a problematic & unnecessary way to think about music, and art in general. I don't think there are different levels of this variety, I've NEVER been convinced that music being commercial was any guarantor of its quality (or vice versa!!), and I've never been persuaded by any arguments that artists can't successfully straddle the world of fan-driven, free expression and work-for-hire or commercialized music simultaneously. I'm thus very uncomfortable with the phrases "moved on" and "next level" as used in this context. I DO think that deciding to make music for a living is taking a VERY brave step, don't get me wrong... I just don't think it needs to be a mutually exclusive "level," or that it represents an evolution/progression so much as a life decision, or that it necessarily speaks to the comparative characteristics or quality of the music itself. Hopefully that makes sense. I guess I just want to encourage everyone to think less categorically... e.g. "active" community members vs. "inactive"... "levels" of music... "moving on"... the only constant is change, but that doesn't mean that making free music is one level beneath selling it, or that you can't (or shouldn't) do both quite happily. As Jimmy says, we should be happy his original work is being met with such acclaim, and I sure as hell am, and if you listen to it, I think you'll see that he earned it and isn't riding coattails or leveraging OCR unjustly. I don't feel that way at all, and I'd like to think I'm the person best informed to make that determination.

What did you think? Post your opinion of this ReMix.

RNS0203 - SGX & Navi - Right Back Up (Hy Bound Mix) http://reunion.sgxmusic.com/203%20-%...und%20Mix).mp3 Sick track, love it.

What did you think? Post your opinion of this ReMix.

See there, you just undermined my entire elaborate reaction with a zinger... My bad, tomato remarks rescinded.

You're obviously harboring some pent-up issues, here, and it's not JUST about this FF4 mix. I'm definitely getting that, and the message was further conveyed by the use of dual tomato-face smileys. I think you're referring here to your track from the Teen Agent album? The context was, IIRC, we were evaluating potential mixes from the album for being included in the flood, yours came up, I thought it was badass but had a dealbreaking flaw. What am I supposed to do, ignore what I perceive as an issue? Just to check myself, Larry listened as well, he heard the same problem (independent of my pointing it out), and we determined that if it couldn't be addressed, then it could still be submitted to the judges panel, so there was an alternate route. You can be mad that the mix in question wasn't direct posted in a flood, but direct posting is intended as an EXCEPTION process, not the rule, and there was still a way to get the mix evaluated by the panel, which you yourself chose NOT to do. That's how I recall things... what part of that is inappropriate? If you're trying to threaten me with some kind of dirty laundry, I don't think it's working, because I'm completely cool with anyone intimately observing the cleanliness of this particular laundry... if, on the other hand, the policy/process is truly that unclear to you (I believe you used the word "convoluted"), and is the cause of this misunderstanding, perhaps we can actually take steps to make it more explicit in some way. I completely agree, except I think it's an "if" and not a "when" - I don't think we've done anything that can be characterized this way. If we did, however, you'd be right, and you're right regardless that this site isn't all about making it what I want, and you're right that there's a community much larger with lots of passion. I agree with both of those statements, and the degree to which I agree is precisely what's negated the implication itself from being accurate. In other words, no part of us not removing/replacing album tracks or posted mixes at an artist's ad hoc request involves a loss of respect, or trampling on passion. It simply represents the status quo since our Content Policy - which was revised extensively based on community feedback - went into effect. Our rationale for the policy is the same now as it was then, we continue to view it as reasonable, and we have had very few issues/objections with it since it was enacted, FWIW. I feel less like you're wanting to question this policy and more like you're wanting to question our character - i.e. character assassination. If you're genuinely interested in discussing the policy, we can do that, but I'm not getting the sense that's what you're actually interested in talking about, based on... well, every word you've written. That's... a complicated concept. I think you're giving me too much credit or reading into this too much. I'm not remotely that deviously inventive... stop throwing tomatoes at me. Cool Whatever else you do, you should always be moving forward, and you should always FEEL like you're moving forward, and I certainly can't fault you for that. It does mean a lot to me, by the way - getting to hear your very thoughtful, varied, & impressive arrangements means a lot. Your Monkey Island mix on HvV and your Evermore mix on Unsung Heroes are two of my favorite arrangements on the site. But I guess it doesn't mean so much that I would make exceptions or compromise site policies that I feel benefit everyone - the entire community. To change my mind on issues like that requires sound reasoning and pointing out things that we've missed in our Content Policy, not guilt-tripping us, lambasting us, or asking for special exceptions based on a perceived debt that we owe you. That feels more like a problematic sense of entitlement to me - I have to call it as I see it - and I don't know how to express that to you in such a public context without making it a bit embarrassing for everyone involved. But I guess I just tried...

What did you think? Post your opinion of this ReMix.

I think that with the passage of time it'll be this thread, and not your Echoes mix, that you'll be embarrassed of and want removed. I look forward to that day in some sense, but whether or not it comes, I'm obviously a big fan of your music and hope you continue doing your thing.

What did you think? Post your opinion of this ReMix.

What did you think? Post your opinion of this ReMix.

I didn't say that "feminism as a whole" created it, but I did assign ownership of it to feminism. There's a difference; I think the precision was there, really... It is largely feminism's problem to address, and it came from (and continues to come from) those identifying as operating under its banner...

You're confusing "a privileged position" with equality - actual parity - on a per-issue basis. Ironic then, to invoke straw-man...You need go no further than this thread's focus, and many of your own posts, to find sentiments exceeding the very reasonable Wiki definition of feminism that you yourself quoted. No part of "social rights" should encompass never being offended by art. We all get to be offended by art. We all get to objectify, and be objectified. That's equality. No aspect of social, political, or economic rights should require sanitized/uniform fictional depictions, or hinge on sterilization & de-sexualization. Those aren't rights, those are personal preferences, and they undermine & distract from some very real concerns. This is feminism's ultimate self-constructed straw-man, and while it diminished somewhat in the wake of second-wave feminism and advent of third-wave feminism, it keeps... being... resurrected... by those - possessing what I'm sure are good intentions - who are nonetheless unable to disentangle rights from taste. Informed by even a modicum of context, this isn't progress - it's regression.

That's a fantastic definition of what feminism should be... ...and often what it indeed is. But included in that collection of "movements & ideologies" are some elements that really don't fall under any sort of egalitarian umbrella. It's also worth mentioning that fictional characterizations (and the cultural theory involved in casting wide nets as to their implications) require a bit of a crowbar to truly fit into the enumerated "social rights" category... As quoted, it's a definition of feminism that represents the most ethical & pragmatic of principles, and a definition I would be proud to aspire to & label myself. Michael Crichton sometimes identified himself as an "Egalitarian Feminist" for a reason - the qualifier is necessary precisely because there is often more at play than equality, and more being asserted than the plainly observable inequalities we still need to address. As with all -isms & their legions of -ists, in practice there is a wide deviation & a signal-to-noise ratio does exist... the signal is equal pay, reproductive rights, domestic violence, the criminalization of rape, representation in government & religion, and working towards the reduction & elimination of bias in academia and culture at large. In the well-meaning but often overzealous & logicblind pursuit of this last category can be found almost all of the noise...

Contributing to this site, and especially to an album, ultimately means participating in something larger. Albums aren't versionable, mutating things - they represent what one or more artists were willing & able to express at that point in time. I'm sympathetic to being unsatisfied (or in my case, downright embarrassed) with past works, but have always held that using that dissatisfaction as fuel for future efforts makes a hell of a lot more sense than trying to rewrite history, esp. in the age of eternally cached, persisted memory. Given that the arrangement in question was never posted as a mix, the best action would be newly submitting any desired revisions to the site as a standalone arrangement.

What did you think? Post your opinion of this ReMix.

What did you think? Post your opinion of this ReMix.

What did you think? Post your opinion of this ReMix.

What did you think? Post your opinion of this ReMix.

What did you think? Post your opinion of this ReMix.

What did you think? Post your opinion of this ReMix.

What did you think? Post your opinion of this ReMix.

What did you think? Post your opinion of this ReMix.