The Song Fight Bulletin Board

Like Tom, I am grateful that Spin directed me to SongFight. I love it here and it makes me a better musician and a better person. I've tried to give back what I can to both communities, sadly feeling a little guilty on behalf of people on each side during conversations such as this because I have received so much benefit from all of it.

OK this is the last that I'll post about this, as it really isn't my deal at this point (haven't Songfought in one million years, etc) but I want to explain from whence the negative perception.

Spin, I'm glad you responded to this thread, and your reassurances that you aren't involved in some sort of SEO bullshit are heartening.

So what happened? Why are Spud and I having this visceral bad reaction to your efforts? I'm willing to take your motivations at face-value, but for future reference, here's what soured my perception.

(I am making a big assumption here that others were similarly offended -- I suppose it's possible that Spud and I are the loan cats up this particular tree)

I was expecting this poll/outrage from the very beginning -- looking back it appears you joined us in 2009? So yes, the fact that it took Spud 4 years to freak out shows, I think, that he is slow to rile and a Reasonable Man. If it were my site, I'd have had it out with you much earlier (because I'm neither reasonable nor a man.)

Here was the first post from you guys. (Plural guys!)

Hi, um I normally don't post here, and I'm not a musician. I do however follow Song Fight closely, and I run a blog about music & dance content that originates from the internet. I've been voting & reviewing each round of Song Fight for a little while now. My review of this round will be up on Saturday, but I had a guest blogger post his review today. He's pretty harsh, I tend to just mention things I like, and he's the opposite. But if you're interested in feedback about your music good & bad you might want to check it out. I always post my own review, but sometimes I allow a guest blogger such as Sammy since he's actually a musician. I'm not a musician, so my feedback probably isn't very helpful.

http://spintown79.blogspot.com/2010/01/ ... eview.html

Where's the beef? The first problem, for me, was that you were posting these reviews off-site. This is transparently a technique to get people to wander over and check out YOUR site. This is what I mean when I say you were trolling for page hits.

As I say, I'm willing to accept that you were hoping to drive traffic to your site out of the goodness of your heart, and for the good of the community that you hoped to create, but there is no question that you were soliciting.

Then there's the business about "I'm not a musician." Spud knows how much work it is to run this kind of show. To do it, you have to be crazy. To do it, and not play music seems DOUBLY crazy. Again, I'm willing to accept that you are genuinely excited about amateur Internet music to the point that you want to immerse yourself in site administration (and all its accompanying rewards!) but you'll have to understand that this is an Unusual Hobby, and this wont be the first time that people question your motives. But hey, people have weird hobbies. Ask the Internet.

Finally, there is your Sidekick. Maybe he isn’t your actually your sidekick, and perhaps you weren’t actually functioning as a team, but you introduced yourselves to us in one throw. You can understand our confusion.

I stand by the assertion that Sammy’s “negative reinforcement” was deeply odd. I did not read a ton of his reviews, as I did not find them particularly scathing or entertaining, but it was certainly my impression that he was striving to convey an attitude of deep disdain for Songfight generally. I say “striving” because religiously listening to, and subsequently reviewing each fight betrays a completely contradictory level of interest in Songfight. Reviewing songs is work! Just look at the review threads. Songfight has no beef with negative reviews – it’s a big reason a lot of us are here. When we get too few reviews, we whinge about the lack in the review threads.

When someone puts a lot of work into obsessively denigrating something, it is natural to question his/her motives. (Think: Evangelical preachers with hate-boners for all things LGBT.) I have no idea what Sammy’s motive might have been, but it sure LOOKS like you guys were trolling for views.

If you WEREN’T, then it would have made sense for you and Sammy to, you know, actually participate in the community. Part of the value of reviews on Songfight is context and dialogue. Hearing each other’s music and getting a consistent picture of participants' tastes allows us to “weight” our reviews. If someone whose music I adore and opinion I respect tells me my music sucks, that feedback is going to carry a lot more weight than, say, some anonymous Youtube troll. (YOUR GAY.) But hey – if Sammy’s thing is delivering a lonely one-way stream of vitriol from against a community of amateur musicians, I’m not going to say that it’s a waste of time. As I say, people have weird hobbies.

So, to review. My introduction to you guys (plural) was:

1. Here are two guys not actively participating in the community but
2. Putting a fair amount of effort into bashing the community
3. Making a lot of posts directing folks to, hey! This other very similar community!

Surely you can understand how this introduction was not exactly wine, roses, building bridges, etc?

There is no reason why there can’t be other Songfight-esque sites out there, and I think it’s great that you are providing another venue for people to create stuff. Your diplomatic approach could just use a little refinement.

[edits for grammar -- always -- jeez]

I don't think he's a monster, just an insensitive jerk. I have made it clear on these forums that I don't think his continuous recruitment and advertising here is cool. Nevertheless, he asked me to be a judge for the current competition. I assumed that the idea was to bring me around, and I thought that it was pretty damned transparent. That's not how I swing. Now this. I never cease to be amazed at how far asshattery can be taken.

Billy, for the record there are people who were driven off of this site by Negative Reinforcement reviews. I'll give him funny. Humor is in the ear of the beholder. But helpful? No. Hurtful? Yes.

RangerDenni wrote:sadly feeling a little guilty on behalf of people on each side during conversations such as this because I have received so much benefit from all of it.

The children are always the ones that suffer the most when mom and dad fight.

....I mean




But I really mean.

Billy's Little Trip wrote:

RangerDenni wrote:sadly feeling a little guilty on behalf of people on each side during conversations such as this because I have received so much benefit from all of it.

The children are always the ones that suffer the most when mom and dad fight.

....I mean




But I really mean.

tank ewe.

may I also go to the movies and have a lollipop?

Spud wrote:Billy, for the record there are people who were driven off of this site by Negative Reinforcement reviews. I'll give him funny. Humor is in the ear of the beholder. But helpful? No. Hurtful? Yes.

Well, that's not good. I hope they didn't blame SF for that and return.

On another note, the internet is a big world wide judgmental web. I'll just leave it at that.

No one asked me, but not having a trademark for Song Fight is probably a bad thing.

We can all revel in the not-for-profit, bootstrap, DIY thing, which is great, but sites like Song Fight and Spin are for better or worse, a big part of the future of music, and sites like these are only going to proliferate as the traditional recording industry crumbles, fragments and morphs from the outdated business model of the last century. We are steadily returning to the days of very short distances between performers and ears, with very little or no money changing hands, the way it's been for most of human history EXCEPT for the years 1920-2000 or thereabouts. And even if I'm wrong, the value of the Song Fight archive will only increase as the years of songs pile up ever taller. (Try and picture what Song Fight would feel like if the archive went back to 1960, for example.) It's lived for 13 years now with almost no change and astonishing consistency in the number of participants, there's no reason to believe that will change anytime soon.

For this reason, Spud, I think a certain degree of protection of the "brand" is in order. Maybe you, or us, don't see it as something in need of such protections, but as the years go on and the value of what we have hear steadily increases, someone else is bound to. There are plenty of existing models out there of peer network organizations that have become large and almost institutions of themselves while never seriously degrading their original peer network intent (Wikipedia, Kickstarter, Craigslist, etc., etc.).

Point well taken, JoS. I have been approached over the years by several people wanting to help "monitize" the site, and I (and JB) have always turned them down. Its only a matter of time before another Spin comes along with more base intents.

I think we're in an environment, like what Jim is describing, where other songwriting competition communities like Song Fight! are bound to appear. It's not that unique of an idea frankly. Some people will think "Has this been done?" and for those people we should be trying to make sure that when they search they find Song Fight! as #1 result and they come join us. There will be people who don't think to look for similar ideas, though, or maybe they're like some of the SpinTunes folks, or Nur Einers, who don't find the Song Fight! format as compelling as some other variant. Maybe it could be good for Song Fight! to embrace those other communities? Maybe reach out, try to take a leadership role based on longevity/tenure/seniority, try to become the hub for similar sites? I think being defensive and/or isolationist or something like that could in the long run maybe be more harmful to Song Fight! in terms of keeping it relevant in a potential ecosystem of songwriting communities.

As I say, I'm willing to accept that you were hoping to drive traffic to your site out of the goodness of your heart, and for the good of the community that you hoped to create, but there is no question that you were soliciting.

Well I blogged about this type of stuff before I started reviewing here, and so when I wrote reviews I posted them on my blog. After a few people complained about my links I did in fact start copying & pasting the reviews here as well with just a link to the site with it. Soliciting? Yeah, but as a blogger, that's just my natural inclination. You write something...you put it on the blog...then you direct people that might be interested to the blog... I know I wrote reviews for MOFS & I probably did the same thing on their comments section. The reaction here was different, and yeah I can see how a negative opinion of me would be created based on your breakdown of the situation.

I did not read a ton of his reviews, as I did not find them particularly scathing or entertaining, but it was certainly my impression that he was striving to convey an attitude of deep disdain for Songfight generally.

Oh...it's not just Song Fight...Sammy comes across as having a deep disdain for most things. Sammy Kablam is a character, and it didn't even start out as a Song Fight thing. He started out reviewing MOSF I think. Now he mostly reviews SpinTunes & movies.

When someone puts a lot of work into obsessively denigrated something, it is natural to question their motives. (Think: Evangelical preachers with hate-boners for all things LGBT.) I have no idea what Sammy’s motive might have been, but it sure LOOKS like you guys were trolling for views.

His motives are his, NR isn't an official part of SpinTunes & Sammy doesn't have anything to do with the running of any of my sites. NR is for entertainment mostly, and since I find them funny I promote them. Does Sammy want views? Sure. I won't talk for Sammy and any other motivations he might have.

I don't think he's a monster, just an insensitive jerk.

I'm getting all warm & fuzzy on the inside.

he asked me to be a judge for the current competition. I assumed that the idea was to bring me around, and I thought that it was pretty damned transparent.

Had 2 reasons for asking you to be a guest judge this time around.
- You're respected in this community, you're a musician & since some SongFighers compete in SpinTunes I thought they would enjoy having you as a judge.
- AND YES you were correct in assuming I thought you might actually hate SpinTunes or me less if you got involved & learned more about it. Transparent? Sure, but I still don't see anything wrong with that. You're also still welcome to be a guest judge in the future. I'm so transparent that I kill at least 2 birds a day after they fly into me.

You're active here, you're active there, you have a contest called "Song Fight", I think you need to go above and beyond to make us ok with that-- not the other way 'round. Sorry. Probably would do a lot to calm nerves if you went the extra mile, rather than using this forum for what appears to be marketing for your own site.

That's just how I see it. It was tolerable, to me (not so much others) when you were simply promoting your own competition here-- so long as you also participated and listened and reviewed. After all, Niveous runs Nur Ein, which some people like better than the Song Fight format. But he's pretty careful to be clear that it's part of this community.

If you were Sammy Kablam and reviewing only to be mean and "funny", that's not cool and you should rethink that angle, because it's immature and aggravating. Critical assessment doesn't have to mean being a dick. This community passed the "only good feedback" threshold some time ago, so really blunt/mean criticism doesn't really have any positive effect.

If you're going to start blurring the identity of your competition and Song Fight, without any forethought or communication to this community, then I'm going to get suspicious and think that you are acting out a premeditated plan for taking over our turf, and I'm gonna be pissed at you.

Just go about things in a way that makes it seem more like you are trying to offer an alternative, not a replacement, and participate in the community, and you'll get a lot less shit from the community.

I don't want to have a beef with you, or anyone. It's way too much work. But you are making it almost impossible for me not to scowl and flame. (My new Irish pub, the Scowl and Flame, opens next week in Midtown.)

That's my $.04. (I get two extra because I'm important.)

JB

Oh, and if you have a TradeMark, you have to defend that TradeMark, or you lose it.

Nobody's really prepared to spend the money to trademark Song Fight, much less sue people who encroach. I mean, seriously. This is a hobby, not a moneymaking venture. A passionate avocation, not a remunerative vocation.

Not to mention that neither Spud nor I came up with it and therefore the rights are blurry. Narbotic doesn't seem terribly inclined to have conversations, being busy with his soldering iron and shit.

JB

jb wrote:Oh, and if you have a TradeMark, you have to defend that TradeMark, or you lose it.

Nobody's really prepared to spend the money to trademark Song Fight, much less sue people who encroach. I mean, seriously. This is a hobby, not a moneymaking venture. A passionate avocation, not a remunerative vocation.

Not to mention that neither Spud nor I came up with it and therefore the rights are blurry. Narbotic doesn't seem terribly inclined to have conversations, being busy with his soldering iron and shit.

JB

Gotta push back a bit, all it's going to take is for some ex-Song Fighter to mention Song Fight in a Grammy acceptance speech or something and suddenly you're going to wish you had solicited the community to pitch in for funds for a trademark, because you'll have 10 times the shit to deal with than this Spintunes thing. And all you really need is the protection, you don't need to wield it unless you need to wield it. Most of the time there's no need for suing. But it's good to have if that day comes.

RangerDenni wrote:I'm just a little cheesed off he didn't tweet me back about the SXSW thing, Tom. I have a tragic flaw in that I think I'm just the same as famous people and thusly not really beneath their notice, so I tend to get snotty when ignored .... He did tweet me after my epic WTF post during "new" Fu tho... go me, I guess.

oh, and I thought it was pretty funny that a certain Master wasn't able to keep up with the rigorous writing schedule. The Double Clicks and even more, the "unofficial" forum participants seemed just fine for a while!

I nudged him on that fact. We'll see if he's occupied or a total asshat.

And the 'Master' that wasn't able to keep up - i don't believe she committed to doing more than one song. I think it was Ken who did that for her, hoping she'd do more. Met her in person last summer. She's a good egg.

Jim of Seattle wrote:.. all it's going to take is for some ex-Song Fighter to mention Song Fight in a Grammy acceptance speech or something

I have several Grammy acceptence speeches already prepared. I'll just scratch out the ones that say "Songfight" and replace it with "Jesus".

Billy's Little Trip wrote:

Spud wrote:Billy, for the record there are people who were driven off of this site by Negative Reinforcement reviews. I'll give him funny. Humor is in the ear of the beholder. But helpful? No. Hurtful? Yes.

Well, that's not good. I hope they didn't blame SF for that and return.

On the Negative Reinforcement issue.

I think it's freaking hilarious. It's over the top, and meant to provoke a reaction in a humorous vein. It's Don Rickles shtick, but tries to be a little constructive while tweaking people. and he does it to everyone. or at least he tries to.

Is it everyone's cup of tea? No. But considering the way BYD got it in our first year of NurEin, it's much kinder and gentler than the boards were here to us. But we didn't look for validation from the boards to create music. And We also couldn't give a crap about Sammy's true opinion, but do laugh at him when he tries to 'motivate' us in his own way.

But if it had the opposite effect and deterred people form participating, that is a shame, The intent of it is the opposite. It's to challenge artists with literally giving them 'Negative Reinforcement'.
Prove Sammy's full of crap and write a better song next round. That's the gist of it in a nutshell. If people took it the wrong way and stopped writing, that is not why it was created.

...and for the record, I'm not involved with NR, it's creation, or the writing, I've just been on the receiving end numerous times. I look forward to the next one to see what he's going to come up with.

Tom

Tom, I want to answer your post simply to say thanks; and that you didn't and don't have to say anything to Ken about me.

I'd pitch in for a trademark, if it came/comes to that. Best website in the world, right here. I also voted to form a posse, so I'ma fixin' to sport me a Steston and hit the trail.

OK OK, I'm posting one last thing to say this:

I totally want to pound scotch at the Scowl and Flame.

That is all.

You do realise of course that this whole thread was just a cheap, transparent marketing ploy to get everybody thinking about "Starting A Witch Hunt".

Scowl and Flame, the name of my Wham! cover band.

anti-m wrote:OK OK, I'm posting one last thing to say this:

How can I ever believe you anymore?