Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Nirvana's place in the world of music....

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: Nirvana's place in the world of music....

    I'm not a fan of either and I can name at least five Green Day songs and one Nirvana song, Ditto for my wife, my three kids, and my oldest daughter's boyfriend. I don't know theband members' names, but their songs are a whole lot more memorable.

    Yes, a tiny, anecdotal, 6 person survey. Unscientific for sure. I just have a hard time gauging the supposed brilliance of a band with the same number of commercially popular songs (1) as Dexy's Midnight Runners, Kartrina and the Waves, and Madness (our house... in the middle of the street)
    Last edited by Slick Pinkham; 08-03-2011, 11:24 PM.
    The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

    Comment


    • Re: Nirvana's place in the world of music....

      I'm not a fan of either. I'd say the band's were equal, but Cobain's a bigger name.

      I don't really know what the argument is.

      Saying Cobain is the 90s Lennon is like saying Katy Perry is today's Bette Middler. Sure, you can make that analogy. You can cite similarities. But the impact that Cobain had on music is an inch to Lennon's mile.

      Comment


      • Re: Nirvana's place in the world of music....

        I remember I was really into Jane's Addiction back when Nirvana made it big and I have always thought Jane's Addiction was a MUCH better band.

        There were a few good songs on Nevermind, but I hated "Smells Like Teen Spirit". What was worse was that every garage band in central Indiana HAD to cover that damned song during every performance for years and years. To this day probably. I like some of Nirvanas other songs now, but that was such a turn off it made me dislike the band.

        Same thing happened to me with Radiohead. That damned song Creep totally ruined my appreciation for them. It wasn't till years later when I heard OK Computer that I realized how brilliant they were.

        Comment


        • Re: Nirvana's place in the world of music....

          Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
          I'm not a fan of either and I can name at least five Green Day songs and one Nirvana song, Ditto for my wife, my three kids, and my oldest daughter's boyfriend. I don't know theband members' names, but their songs are a whole lot more memorable.

          Yes, a tiny, anecdotal, 6 person survey. Unscientific for sure. I just have a hard time gauging the supposed brilliance of a band with the same number of commercially popular songs (1) as Dexy's Midnight Runners, Kartrina and the Waves, and Madness (our house... in the middle of the street)
          I can name more Third Eye Blind or Creed songs than Coltrane. I hate both of the first two bands and I have none of their albums, I have all of Coltrane's work and just press play. How educated I am on these artists and their work does not change TEB and Creed being nothing and Coltrane being one of the most influential and important musicians ever.

          Originally posted by Sookie View Post
          I'm not a fan of either. I'd say the band's were equal, but Cobain's a bigger name.

          I don't really know what the argument is.

          Saying Cobain is the 90s Lennon is like saying Katy Perry is today's Bette Middler. Sure, you can make that analogy. You can cite similarities. But the impact that Cobain had on music is an inch to Lennon's mile.
          I'm just explaining that Cobain is remembered as a voice of a generation. I completely agree that The Beatles had way more of an impact on music than Nirvana, likewise for Lennon/Cobain.

          Comment


          • Re: Nirvana's place in the world of music....

            top recording artists of the 1990s:

            1.Garth Brooks - With more than 45 million albums sold in the 90s, and three of the top 10 selling albums of the decade, this country superstar had the decade on lockdown.
            2.Mariah Carey - The winner of the Billboard Artist of the Decade (given to Billboard's top-selling chart performer for the decade) sold more than 30 million albums in the 90s. This has her topping their list of 10 Best-Selling Artists of the 90's even though according to SoundScan Brooks sold more titles.3.Shania Twain - Her "Come on Over" was the best-selling album of the decade, putting her very high up on the list.
            4.Whitney Houston - Whitney's soundtrack to the film "The Bodyguard" was the second-biggest seller of the decade.
            5.Elton John - His "Candle in the Wind 1997," a tribute to Princess Diana, was the biggest-selling single of the decade, placing him high on the 10 Best-Selling artists of the 90's list.
            6.Backstreet Boys - With two albums in the decade selling more than 10 million copies each, this boy band ushered in a new era of big sellers.
            7.Alanis Morissette - Her "Jagged Little Pill," which sold nearly 20 million copies, ensured her position on the 10 Best-Selling Artists of the 90's list.
            8.Hootie & The Blowfish - It seemed every household in America had a copy of their "Cracked Rear View."
            9.Celine Dion - Another artist with multiple albums selling more than 10 million copies a-piece.
            10.Metallica - Their huge-selling self-titled "Black Album" combined with sales from the subsequent "Load" and "Reload," puts them on the 10 Best-Selling Artists of the 90's list.

            http://www.mademan.com/mm/10-best-se...tists-90s.html

            I would suppose a few of these have a more worthy claim to "voice of a generation"

            top albums of the 1990s:
            1. Shania Twain- Come on Over (22 Million Sales)
            2. Whitney Houston- The Bodyguard: Original Soundtrack Album (19.1 Million Sales)
            3. Alanis Morissette- Jagged Little Pill (19 Million Sales)
            4. Hootie & the Blowfish- Cracked Rear View (16.1 Million Sales)
            5. Garth Brooks- No Fences (16 Million Sales)
            6. Garth Brooks (lol)- Double Live (15 Million Sales)
            7. Santana- Supernatural (14.6 Million Sales)
            8. Backstreet Boys- Backstreet Boys [ENHANCED CD] (14.1 Million Sales)
            9. Garth Brooks- Ropin the Wind (14 Million Sales)
            10. Britney Spears- ...Baby One More Time [ENHANCED CD] (13.9 Million Sales)
            11. Backstreet Boys- Millennium (13.3 Million Sales)
            12. Metallica- Metallica (13.3 Million Sales)
            13. Celine Dion- Falling Into You (13.1 Million Sales)
            14. Shania Twain- Woman in Me (12.3 Million Sales)
            15. Dixie Chicks- Wide Open Spaces (12.1 Million Sales)
            16. Forest Gump Soundtrack- Forrest Gump (12.1 Million Sales)
            17. Kenny G- Breathless (12.1 Million Sales)
            18. Pearl Jam- Ten (12.1 Million Sales)
            19. Matchbox 20- Yourself Or Someone Like You (12 Million Sales)
            20. Boyz II Men- II (12 Million Sales)
            21. Titanic Soundtrack- Titanic: Music from the Motion Picture (11.9 Million Sales)
            22. Celine Dion (lol again!)- Let's Talk About Love (11.8 Million Sales)
            23. Mariah Carey- Music Box (11.5 Million Sales)
            24. TLC- Crazysexycool (11.3 Million Sales)
            25. Kid Rock- Devil Without a Cause (11 Million Sales)
            26. Jewel- Pieces of You (11 Million Sales)
            27. Eric Clapton- Unplugged (10.9 Million Sales)
            28. Mariah Carey- Daydream (10.6 Million Sales)
            29. Nirvana- Nevermind (10.6 Million Sales)

            http://www.amazon.com/gp/richpub/syl.../1S0SYHCCVKIAM
            Last edited by Slick Pinkham; 08-04-2011, 12:04 AM.
            The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

            Comment


            • Re: Nirvana's place in the world of music....

              Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
              top recording artists of the 1990s:

              1.Garth Brooks - With more than 45 million albums sold in the 90s, and three of the top 10 selling albums of the decade, this country superstar had the decade on lockdown.
              2.Mariah Carey - The winner of the Billboard Artist of the Decade (given to Billboard's top-selling chart performer for the decade) sold more than 30 million albums in the 90s. This has her topping their list of 10 Best-Selling Artists of the 90's even though according to SoundScan Brooks sold more titles.3.Shania Twain - Her "Come on Over" was the best-selling album of the decade, putting her very high up on the list.
              4.Whitney Houston - Whitney's soundtrack to the film "The Bodyguard" was the second-biggest seller of the decade.
              5.Elton John - His "Candle in the Wind 1997," a tribute to Princess Diana, was the biggest-selling single of the decade, placing him high on the 10 Best-Selling artists of the 90's list.
              6.Backstreet Boys - With two albums in the decade selling more than 10 million copies each, this boy band ushered in a new era of big sellers.
              7.Alanis Morissette - Her "Jagged Little Pill," which sold nearly 20 million copies, ensured her position on the 10 Best-Selling Artists of the 90's list.
              8.Hootie & The Blowfish - It seemed every household in America had a copy of their "Cracked Rear View."
              9.Celine Dion - Another artist with multiple albums selling more than 10 million copies a-piece.
              10.Metallica - Their huge-selling self-titled "Black Album" combined with sales from the subsequent "Load" and "Reload," puts them on the 10 Best-Selling Artists of the 90's list.

              http://www.mademan.com/mm/10-best-se...tists-90s.html

              I would suppose a few of these have a more worthy claim to "voice of a generation"
              Have any of these artists recorded an album that has been preserved by the Library of Congress? Have they been judged by music historians as one of the greatest artists of all time? Billy Ray Cyrus can sell millions of records, thats why the criteria extends beyond that (although it is part of it). But again, were any of these artists dubbed by anyone the voice of a generation, let alone the level of publications that I already cited?

              Comment


              • Re: Nirvana's place in the world of music....

                Originally posted by billbradley View Post
                I can name more Third Eye Blind or Creed songs than Coltrane. I hate both of the first two bands and I have none of their albums, I have all of Coltrane's work and just press play. How educated I am on these artists and their work does not change TEB and Creed being nothing and Coltrane being one of the most influential and important musicians ever.



                I'm just explaining that Cobain is remembered as a voice of a generation. I completely agree that The Beatles had way more of an impact on music than Nirvana, likewise for Lennon/Cobain.
                I think that would depend on how you were defining a "generation."

                Maybe if you were were a college kid during Nirvana's peak, they would define your generation. But I agree with others, Grunge/Rock wasn't even the biggest music movement in the 90s (Pop and Rap) So how can Nirvana possibly define the decade.

                And I also disagree with the idea that other musicians are "correct" when ranking artists and when deciding things like this. They may know more about music, but popularity and social impact is what defines a "voice of a generation." So what if 50 artists think Nirvana is awesome.

                Shania Twain's impact, for example, had a much bigger impact on music. She started the cross-over country genre. Which is much larger, and has lasted a lot longer than grunge. And it's currently the best selling genre in music. Then lets add in the fact that her album sold the most. And I'm sure you can take a look at culture and see what sort of impact that music had on our culture.

                People have mentioned Tupac, you could name a few more.

                Comment


                • Re: Nirvana's place in the world of music....

                  Originally posted by billbradley View Post
                  Have any of these artists recorded an album that has been preserved by the Library of Congress?
                  2Pac and Public Enemy from the 1990s, with no mention of Nirvana.

                  The National Recording Registry is a list of sound recordings that "are culturally, historically, or aesthetically important, and/or inform or reflect life in the United States." The registry was established by the National Recording Preservation Act of 2000,[1] which created the National Recording Preservation Board, whose members are appointed by the Librarian of Congress. The recordings preserved in the United States National Recording Registry form a registry of recordings selected yearly by the National Recording Preservation Board for preservation in the Library of Congress.[2]



                  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationa...rding_Registry
                  The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                  Comment


                  • Re: Nirvana's place in the world of music....

                    I would consider Britney Spears a far more influential recording artist who emerged in the 1990s. I'm not saying she was particularly influential in a good way.

                    More poeple of that same generation bought her music, talked about her, dressed like her (if they were girls), and then dozens of other somewhat succesful artists even have emulated her and that continues today.

                    I certainly attempt to switch radio stations when her songs come on, but the other stations have Britney imitators' songs playing, so it's a lost cause.
                    The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                    Comment


                    • Re: Nirvana's place in the world of music....

                      Originally posted by billbradley View Post
                      I can name more Third Eye Blind or Creed songs than Coltrane. I hate both of the first two bands and I have none of their albums, I have all of Coltrane's work and just press play. How educated I am on these artists and their work does not change TEB and Creed being nothing and Coltrane being one of the most influential and important musicians ever.
                      Third Eye Blind is probably one of the most underrated rock bands of the past 15 years and its all because people either loved or hated them based off the few hits that made it on to the radio. "Never let you go" ruined them for so many. But it was easily the weakest song on that entire Blue album, and Semi Charmed life is one genius of a song. Who would have thought a song about Oral sex and drugs would have become one of the most over played radio hits of the late 90's. Their debut album was a masterpiece in my opinion.
                      You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Nirvana's place in the world of music....

                        Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                        I think that would depend on how you were defining a "generation."

                        Maybe if you were were a college kid during Nirvana's peak, they would define your generation. But I agree with others, Grunge/Rock wasn't even the biggest music movement in the 90s (Pop and Rap) So how can Nirvana possibly define the decade.

                        And I also disagree with the idea that other musicians are "correct" when ranking artists and when deciding things like this. They may know more about music, but popularity and social impact is what defines a "voice of a generation." So what if 50 artists think Nirvana is awesome.

                        Shania Twain's impact, for example, had a much bigger impact on music. She started the cross-over country genre. Which is much larger, and has lasted a lot longer than grunge. And it's currently the best selling genre in music. Then lets add in the fact that her album sold the most. And I'm sure you can take a look at culture and see what sort of impact that music had on our culture.

                        People have mentioned Tupac, you could name a few more.
                        This misunderstanding with genre is confusing to me. Saying grunge didn't last is like saying punk didn't last because it changes names (post punk, post punk revival, etc). Rock changes and people just give it a term like alternative, grunge, indie, punk and they overlap. It has nothing to do with the term, some bands sound grunge like Deerhoof or Yeah Yeah Yeahs, but the term is no longer used.

                        I understand Shania Twain did many things for music and cross over country, and I do believe country and rap have been the most popular genres of music since the compact disc. But thats why I used more criteria beyond that. Cobain was a more chronicled figure and has been coined the voice of a generation. I'm not just saying I think this makes more sense, I'm just dispensing what has been documented for the times. Are you guys just saying that TIME magazine, NY Times and so on were just wrong? All these writers, professionals and historians weren't able to accurately gauge what was actually happening?

                        Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
                        2Pac and Public Enemy from the 1990s, with no mention of Nirvana.

                        The National Recording Registry is a list of sound recordings that "are culturally, historically, or aesthetically important, and/or inform or reflect life in the United States." The registry was established by the National Recording Preservation Act of 2000,[1] which created the National Recording Preservation Board, whose members are appointed by the Librarian of Congress. The recordings preserved in the United States National Recording Registry form a registry of recordings selected yearly by the National Recording Preservation Board for preservation in the Library of Congress.[2]



                        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationa...rding_Registry
                        In 2005, the Library of Congress added Nevermind to the National Recording Registry, which collects "culturally, historically or aesthetically important" sound recordings from the 20th century
                        http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/149...ker-line.jhtml

                        That being said, Public Enemy, Tupac, and Nirvana are all in the same boat (that top tier I spoke of pages back).
                        Last edited by billbradley; 08-04-2011, 12:56 AM.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Nirvana's place in the world of music....

                          Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
                          Third Eye Blind is probably one of the most underrated rock bands of the past 15 years and its all because people either loved or hated them based off the few hits that made it on to the radio. "Never let you go" ruined them for so many. But it was easily the weakest song on that entire Blue album, and Semi Charmed life is one genius of a song. Who would have thought a song about Oral sex and drugs would have become one of the most over played radio hits of the late 90's. Their debut album was a masterpiece in my opinion.
                          Not gonna lie, 12 year old me loved that debut album.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Nirvana's place in the world of music....

                            Originally posted by billbradley View Post
                            I understand Shania Twain did many things for music and cross over country, and I do believe country and rap have been the most popular genres of music since the compact disc. But thats why I used more criteria beyond that. Cobain was a more chronicled figure and has been coined the voice of a generation. I'm not just saying I think this makes more sense, I'm just dispensing what has been documented for the times. Are you guys just saying that TIME magazine, NY Times and so on were just wrong? All these writers, professionals and historians weren't able to accurately gauge what was actually happening?
                            Peck kind of already alluded to this. I'm past the century mark so indeed it would be hard for me to voice an opinion on Nirvana's generation status since I'm at the edge of the Boomer generation and the start of Generation X.

                            Frankly if someone asked me the music that spoke for my time it would have been Kiss and Aerosmith. Love the bands but not much in the way of changing the world.
                            You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

                            Comment


                            • Re: Nirvana's place in the world of music....

                              I disagree with Time and the NYTimes just about every day on a lot more important issues than who is and who is not the voice of a generation.
                              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Nirvana's place in the world of music....

                                I listed many more things than that, it was basically a media consensus. I guess I don't know what else to tell ya besides I understand you don't agree, but the fact is Nirvana is considered to be one of greatest bands of all time and Cobain is considered to be the voice of a generation.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X