Jump to content

herograw

Members
  • Posts

    295
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by herograw

  1. made some links. might make more later. http://arnoldascher.com/Ender/ He also did a piano version of this but it's gone now. I don't know why he took it down but unless he gives the go-ahead I will not rehost it.
  2. What a good idea for a thread!!
  3. Frequency of removal requests is relevant because you have said that it is a lot of work to remove a song from the site and while I understand that it is, especially considering all of this is done without monetary compensation, you make it sound as though removal requests would be springing up with such a frequency that fulfilling such requests would be all you'd end up having time to do. If it's a rare occurance, as i've been lead to believe by larry, then it isn't any more of a hassle than the sort of spring cleaning that this site already goes thru. Do you fear that officially giving remixers the right to request their mixes be removed would cause it to happen with greater frequency? EDIT: this is more of a curiosity than anything else. I've said all I intend to.
  4. been asking the same thing for a while now. perhaps when he says "covered this" he means "been around this" what I gather from this is that a lot of people don't care either way, so they vote YES. It's not as though they have to explain themselves so it's a pretty easy vote to make. If the rules were in favor of dhsu's ideas they'd probably still vote YES. I also gather that in terms of those who say NO it looks something like this: while you raise some valid points I have to respectfully disagree Your argument is fueled by personal distaste of myself and the judges, and has little to do with the policy. feel free to correct me if this doesn't sound quite right. because when two people are saying the same thing, it looks to me as though they mean the same thing.
  5. I like to take others seriously when in serious situations, such as this. When I make an argument based on reason I expect only my reason to be criticized, and not my character in other, unrelated situations. While I still think we're not seeing on the same level on some points, I believe this disparity of opinion occurs at a deeper level, and further explanation isn't going to give my point the equivalent further clarity. As for your other points about restricting removal rights granted to ocr, that sounds much better and overall more fair to me than previous discussion. If such actions are taken as reflect your current line of thinking I would wholeheartedly give my support. Not that you need by support, but it would be there nevertheless. Thank you for responding civilly, regardless of whatever opinions you might have about my character. -rob P.S. Perhaps you could give a reason for the remixer needing a reason
  6. Apologies for the belated post. Had I been able to I would have made it sooner. there might be some repetition in here from my post in the poll thread. I'm relatively certain the policy would please nearly everyone if you allowed remixers to take down their mixes by request. A lot of people in agreement aren't especially hung up on the issue we've been discussing and they would probably still agree with the draft if it were changed to allow removal. Perhaps you should do a poll for this and see which policy turns out more popular, instead of going all-or-none like you are. We don't have a say in those other policies. Are you (zircon) trying to say that we should have as bad a policy as others? As dave stated, we don't want to be like another site. As we have been given the choice to look over the policy and suggest changes, that's exactly what we're doing. Dave wouldn't want us to look over it if he didn't expect modifications and disagreements. Straw-man? lemme see.... ahh, wikipedia is always there for me: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man. I have to mention right now that I don't believe it is relevant what reason the mixer has for wanting his mix removed. Why should we have to mention why? Dave doesn't. remixes can be removed by djp for any or no reason at all but the actual remixer is supposed to give a good reason to get his or her own mix removed? These lockdowns were generally done by the judges and not the actual mixers. I think fans would understand better if the mix's actual creator wanted it removed. Can someone who actually knows give us an idea of how often this sort of thing happens? because it appears that those arguing for the contract (generalized) believe people will want their mixes taken down all the time, and those against believe it happens scarcely. random notes: Those of us on the 'against' side have not only offered our reasons but offered several alternatives. dave and others offer no compromise whatsoever. They stubbornly stick to the original. Why is this? It's obvious that a significant portion of the community (and SURPRISE, this includes remixers) take issue with this part of the policy. Why not seek alternatives? I said this in the poll thread, but it's worth restating. Those in agreement with the site at a particular time who submit mixes might want nothing to do with the site at a later date, due to whatever changes might occur. Now, if I want nothing to do with a group i've formerly been involved with I really mean "nothing." Having my mix on a site I no longer want anything to do with associates me unfairly. Fine, people downloaded the song thousands of time. There's a difference between being "previously" associated to a site and "currently" associated. Just because you can't scurry around and change the ID3 tags on every downloaded file doesn't mean you can't do anything about it. Keeping the song on the site is analogous to continuing to use freon because it has done so much damage already. Yeah, it's a pain that we can no longer use freon. But we don't use it, do we? As far as protecting the listeners by keeping songs on the site, you guys aren't protecting listeners by scaring away new and old talent with this policy. It's a trend that remixers tend to get better with experience. I'd rather get better new stuff than cling on to less impressive old stuff. I could probably keep babbling but this should be enough. -rob
  7. I had every intention of voting "no" but it just so happened that I was banned at the time. oops... anywho I'll say now what I intended to say a week ago. there's nothing I need to mention here that braincells and others haven't mentioned before. However, i'll speak a bit regardless. dave and co(horts) expects a good explanation while at the same time stating that he can do whatever regardless of his own reason. while this isn't fair, this is the truth. it's his site, his community. but how enjoyable is a community in which one feels as though he has no control over his own property? I suppose the only choice we have is whether or not we want to contribute in the first place. Zircon can't seem to wrap his mind around the idea of association. That is to say, whether or not one wants to be associated to this site. At one point a mixer might submit his mix, hoping to get it on the site and proud to be a part of ocremix. at a later point he might dislike the direction the site is heading and no longer want to be a part of it. by having a mix up, he would still be associated with ocr. It doesn't matter how many people downloaded this mix previously. zircon responds to this with a "wut to do" attitude analogous, in my opinion, to an american slave owner saying "well it was right for the past x years, so it must be right still." I think ocremix at many points in the past was a much better place. had I submitted a mix in 2004 and had it accepted, i'd be asking it to get taken down around now, because regardless of how much I liked the site back then I perhaps wouldn't want my name attached to it now. And once again, if 2309524906724 people already downloaded [random mix] so it's pointless to take it down, why do we have lockdowns? the mixes ocr removed during both lockdowns are in the possession of plenty of people. So in all futility I vote NO. had I been able to before the deadline I would have. -rob
  8. Just parroting others' agreement that the "once it's gone, it's gone" policy seems a lot more fair. It's dave's site but it's not his music (for the most part) so while he should be able to remove mixes for any or no reason at all, the opposite does not apply. I think we also need to actively search for whoever is providing the endless supply of sand that ends up in dave's vagina, because it makes him emotional. The incident this rule is trying to protect the site from is isolated and almost never happens.
  9. To modify ones behavior in the face of stupidity is to buy into it.
  10. since when was Siamey a "new listener?" and really, allegedly. people who hate prot saying that he hacked them isn't the best evidence.
  11. no, but I've been approached by several people. Some knew about ocr and others were curious. then there was this one guy in the in-n-out drive-thru that yelled "OCR ROCKS!!" when he saw me in the parking lot.
  12. SomaFM Groove Salad and Secret Agent are my favorites.
  13. say it ain't so D:
  14. with unmod.org around I see no point to there being an unmod at ocr. thanks.
  15. I do agree with dave that the sidebar is reminiscent of something one would "cough up". Like phlegm but not as pleasant visually.
  16. note that overclocked.org is worth $1,587,040 oh, and herograw.org, herograw.net, and niggabro.com are $1,823, $424, $21 respectively
  17. People in jail like to watch shows such as Law & Order and movies on the lifetime channel having to do with stalkers and rapists. television for women RoFL
  18. Although I Do Not Know You I Wish You A Bright, Beautiful Future With Your Soon To Be Bride
  19. I got distracted while studying a couple minutes ago and wgetted kylejcrb's crud, so.... http://archive.niggabro.com/IMC/ email me if anything new needs to be updated afk
×
×
  • Create New...