I agree with what you say about discogs, you can only upload 3 items and then you need votes before you can upload any more and
its a nightmare because everyone seems to have an opinion on whats right before you get a vote.
Apart from that it is a good database.

From: Antti Lavio <antti.lavio@possu.org>
To: All bound for Mu-Mu Land. <klf@mailman.xmission.com>
Sent: Tuesday, 21 February 2012, 12:36
Subject: Re: [KLF] New discography - updates


On 21.2.2012 14:20, tto@klf.de wrote:

> The one thing I don't like about Discogs is that too many people try to
> force-choke their understanding of the guidelines down other members'
> throats and you end up with a KLF page that makes no sense.

In my dream world, we maybe would have a wiki-style approach where we could have everything we know, from discography to timeline and even the smallest details.

As some of the list members have been in direct contact with B&J and their friends, or have worked with pressing plants, studios and record stores associated to them, we have tons on stories that we all like to hear.

Also I personally, and pretty sure that others are too, am interested about history of certain release or bootleg. Where did it come from, where did it surface first an so on. And that's why I think wiki would most suitable for this. One example would be path Orbs Mummie Don't -> Eternal Space Cadets (Orbital Hum) -> 3AM, but there's much more.

Of course, this would demand quite heavy participation from "senior" members of the list, and I of course understand that this could be impossible.

But just my thoughts :)

-- anttil.

_______________________________________________
KLF mailing list
KLF@mailman.xmission.com
http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/klf
Report list abuse to list-abuse at studio-nibble.com