The Song Fight Bulletin Board

That's just mean.

This sentence has five words.

TWO DUMB QUESTIONS:

"what's a girl like you doing in a place like this?"

"Are those real?"

ANSWERS:

"Being hit on incessantly by losers."

"They're real. Real nice, but you're gonna hafta take my word for it."

15-16 puzzle wrote:This sentence has five words.

Uh...ok...

Now Jim. That was neither a sentence, nor did it contain five words.


Get with the program dude.



See?

This sentence has more than five words. Seven, in fact, and this one too.

Generic wrote: Seven, in fact, and this one too.

is that even a sentence?

If, like this thirty word sentence, it begins with a capital letter, consists of at least one actual word, and ends in a period, it's a sentence in my book.

One.

Life. That's a sentence.
-bill

It's a friggin' library.

fodroy wrote:

Generic wrote: This sentence has more than five words. Seven, in fact, and this one too.

is that even a sentence?

'This sentence has more than five words; ten, in fact.' That's a sentence. In this instance the semi-colon is inter-changeable with a colon, as the slight change in emphasis is not enough to alter the sense of the sentence.

Or maybe not. Which is not a sentence. Nor that. Or that. I could go on.

J$

Mostess wrote:2) What is wrong with banning or accepting instrumentals officially?

I would say that they are accepted "officially" since none has ever been rejected or not posted.

The reason not to ban them is that someone might actually submit a good one someday. Occasionally, there is a title that screams out instrumental (like "Crinkle Binkle," for instance. Or maybe "Martians Are Going to Eat Us). Maybe the Fightmaster will issue an optional challenge one day--that would be interesting.

jimtyrrell wrote: As for instrumentals... there have been exhaustive discussions on this. I'm surprised to hear that it's not at least mentioned in the FAQ. But I guess even if it WERE mentioned there, it might be an unsatisfying answer.

FBF: I know that instrumentals are accepted (in the sense that they are not rejected, and sometimes welcomed, and sometimes loved), but they are often spat on. And over and over, arguments break out about whether they are appropriate for SongFight! By "official" I mean: put in the FAQ "Instrumentals are considered songs here" or "instrumentals are not considered songs here." And be done with it. Whence this waffling wimpiness?

A tale of two worlds:

World one:
newbie: Are instrumentals songs?
oldbie: Oy! Here we go again!
[squabble]

World two:
newbie: Are instrumentals songs?
oldbie: People disagree, but here we consider them songs. Read the FAQ.
newbie: Thank you for your enlightened, principled stance. I now know explicitly the conventions of this forum and may participate fully without trepidation.

Oh, and how the heck did you make 5 times as many posts as me on this new board? I gotta get back on the ball!

Mostess wrote:A tale of two worlds.

I choose World One. It sounds like a whole bunch more fun.

J$

j$ wrote:...more fun.

Fun, schmun.

SongFight!

Jim of Seattle wrote:That's just mean.

That was mean. I'm with you, Jim. I think the only restrictions for submission should concern technical, computery issues (file length, kbps of mp3, etc.). The content of the file should be entirely free to vary.

Currently, the FAQ says "No covers are allowed, unless you are so creative with it that we can't tell it's a cover." I have no problem with that, either. It's a rule. This is a game. Makes sense.

My question is this: Why not put a similar clause about instrumentals in the FAQ?

The "are instrumentals songs?" discussion is useful and interesting, albeit repetitive and annoying. I'm not suggesting it stop. The premise of SongFight! assumes people play to win (though we old-timers know better, eh? And it's not just sour grapes, eh?). Anyone playing to win will want to know what the voters (mostly the posters on this board) like and dislike---it helps garner votes. The wimpy policy on instrumentals is useful for those folks.

But there is a constant, nagging stream of newbies who want to submit instrumentals but don't know if they're allowed. Why don't we put up a sign that tells them the answer? It's a frequently asked question; it belongs in the FAQ.

Why don't the Fightmasters weigh in on these issues? Why do we all have to ponder about whether a suggestion is a good or a bad idea? It's very frustrating. Fightmasters, you're great and everything, but if you'd answer some of these questions, it would help a lot.

Yep, it was mean. But the idea that anytime someone has an idea, it should be put into use immediately really bothers me, as does the stance that songfight should be doing everything it can to have as many possible entries.

I think the question that gets asked alot is not "Are instrumentals songs?" but rather "What is a song?", the difference being the first is more likely to be a question about whether their entry is appropriate and the second an attempt to start some deep Zen-like conversation, which unfortunately has played out before. It's not "Hey, is this song okay?". It's "Whoa, *inhale*, what even IS a song?"

Currently, instrumentals are accepted. Putting something in the FAQ about it wouldn't end fights, it would create them.

Member #38493894839: Here's my song.
Member #-1: gah, an instrumental, this is songfight
Member #38493894839: I read the FAQ and it said that instrumentals are okay
Member #-1: I don't care what the FAQ says, let's have a flame war

Jim of Seattle wrote:Why don't the Fightmasters weigh in on these issues? Why do we all have to ponder about whether a suggestion is a good or a bad idea? It's very frustrating. Fightmasters, you're great and everything, but if you'd answer some of these questions, it would help a lot.

I would like to think it's because doing it would be detrimental to the community aspect of things. Everyone likes a good discussion / sound of their 'voices'. Communication is good. And also, because really, despite the ferocity of the banter, it really isn't that important in the grand scheme of things.

You shouldn't take things so personally, Jim; I personally didn't think people were dissing on your idea. It sparked discussion, which as i remember was your stated intent in the first place. One of the great pleasures is seeing these standpoints comes round and round again. It reflects a deeper truth. SF wouldn't be what it is without newbs posting caustic reviews then chilling out, people arguing over what makes a song, people dissing succesful people then those successful people dissing back ... it would be a worse place without all that. Less exasperating, but worse - that's just my opinion.