[vorbis] TAG-mess

[Beni Cherniavksy]

On 2001-12-08, mike dillon wrote:

> begin Jonathan Walther quotation:
> > If you can't read the whole thread because there are too many posts,
> > what makes you think you have something unique and insightful to add
> > to the discussion?  You don't even know what was said or what we are
> > talking about.
> >
> > If you don't want to read the thread because its already too long,
> > think how much harder you are making it for everyone else who is
> > reading the thread when you add your own uninformed posts to it.
>
> You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.
>
> Even if you do have something worthwhile to say (and, before you rip
> into me, i _have_ read the entire thread), nobody is going to pay
> attention to you if you continue to be such a brusque, dismissive
> asshole. If they do pay attention to you, the likely result will be
> their impractical and unreasoned opposition to anything your propose,
> without regard to the actual merit of what you're saying.
>
Jonathan has spend lot's of time on this matter and I can understand that
he is sometimes angry at people.  I do find that to be unhelping but the
wording of your email is even worse.

> Don't you get it that nobody else is supporting the conclusion that
> you're the only one with a clue here?

I don't see him stating that.  He does have a clue IMHO because I support
most of his point (not all).

> Statements like "[y]ou don't even
> know what was said or what we are talking about" are ridiculously
> presumptuous when the person talking was obviously saying something
> apropos of the "discussion" (if you can even call your unilateral,
> closed-minded ranting a discussion).
>
> In the future, please think before you speak. And i don't mean thinking
> about your own self-concerned deal that you've apparently already spent
> too much time thinking on; i'm talking about thinking about the needs
> of the "Ogg community", i.e. users other than yourself, and about the
> social dynamics of the conversations you're ruining.
>
> -md
>
Jonathan - other users do have points too.  I agree with Mike that
listening more to them would progress the process more.

Now for my opinion - I support Jonathan's claim that the people saying
"these are too complicated, people will want simple tags" hardly make a
point.  There is no forcing.  This standard is a good contribution for
those that don't find the current tag set enough.  They need an agreed
standard (==recomenation)  on a detailed tagging scheme.  I listen to pop
music and I need most of these tags.  They are no way specific to
classical music (except few - there is a place for these with classical
ogg files).


-- 
Beni Cherniavsky <cben at tx.technion.ac.il>
                 (also scben at t2 in Technion)

<p><p>--- >8 ----
List archives:  http://www.xiph.org/archives/
Ogg project homepage: http://www.xiph.org/ogg/
To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'vorbis-request at xiph.org'
containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body.  No subject is needed.
Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered.