From Mikhail Zabaluev Sent Thu, Sep 9th 1999, 17:36
From Mikhail Zabaluev Sent Thu, Sep 9th 1999, 17:36
Hi david, david turgeon wrote: > > > Why if we put it another way? Not a chain, but an open project. Every > > participant may remix anything that's been contributed. This implies > > setting up a repository somewhere on the net, where every participant > > might store his version/add-ons/updates. After some time, when it's > > become enough stuff, items for the release will be selected by some > > democratic procedure. > > sorry to burst your bubble, but _that_ sounds like the ultimate recipe > for disaster. people will procrastinate when you tell them what to do. > imagine if they have to _choose_ what they want to remix on top of it. The race factor might play here: if you're late, you may get lost as other people submit the satisfactory amount of tracks. > (not only that, but a few songs may be left unremixed, not because > they're not good, but because the chain members aren't familiar with the > artists involved & won't bother downloading the file. To make compact preview versions isn't a big problem, I think. > so you'll end up > with 10 remixes of the same song, & 10 unremixed songs. might as well > just make it an open compilation & that's it.) The open compilations usually just collect tracks without an interaction between authors. Here the opportunity of collaboration is introduced. Of course, the complete anarchy and half-bakedness shouldn't be accepted; it needs a careful handling and a feeling when to stop. Oh well. -- Stay tuned, MhZ