It was fun for as long as it lasted

[emdebe]

At least now I know what a "trumpery" is (I had to look it up though)...  

On a more serious note: I have been contributing to the Wiki to the best of my knowledge and with the best of intentions. It seems, however, that everyone (including myself) is "subjectively trying to be objective" when it comes to contributing to the Wiki.

And there’s a big chance that the Wiki will never be everything to everybody.

And maybe things will never settle down.

Most of the things you say about me are put in a rather "black & white" fashion, while I know you know better than that. Perhaps I even deserve better than that.

Anyway, since all of the time, and mostly for no reason at all, I seem to be the root of all evil – and everybody else seems to be "right" (not wrong) – maybe it is I who should stay away from the Wiki, temporarily or indefinitely.

Again.

[Bálint]

A week (or two) ago I just saw "Lord of the Flyes" in a theatre (!!!). It was amazing - just imagine 10-12 children (age 6-15) running-shouting up anfd down the stage... and finally aking a total mess.

It just came into my mind because here (it seems to me) is happening something that is a little bit close to that performance. ;-)

This wiki thing is a common property (is it the good word?), and that is the reason why its hard to maintain.

And (for emdebe): its not because of this or that guy's "evilness" or anything like that, but (I think) we should go on a more "planned" way.

MY suggestions: (should be criticized/corrected/hated/added)

- 1-2 things at a time
- no skeleton pages

well, that's it - not mouch, but can be useful - specially when it has some content. Moooore suggestions:

- lets's make projects! Let us separate them this otr that way, and while everyone could choose his/her part, and when something is "ready" (okay, we know that in wiki there is not such thing... but you understand), then we could make some celebration (hehe) - i only mean that Barry could make a post that "the discography from 66 to 72 is almost ready, come on guys, use it!" Or something like that.

two main projects could be:

Discography: lets make parts of it, someone sould complete the 66-70, someone the 70-73 period - and so on. As commplete as he can.

Biography: I still thonk it sould be a story. And I still think that the chronology is not a good point to start from. I'd think in other cathegories. Like:

- preface - who is this man, why are we talking about him (in short)
- childhood, schools
- early years, first groups.
- The Mothers - the "classic" years
- Flo & Eddie (Vaudeville years?...)
- from Roxy to rock'n'roll (with Napoleon :-) ): 73-76
- The Sheik band - 77-79
- the beginning of the 80th: 79-82
- deep in the 80th: albums, simphonic works, politics
- touring in the 80th: 84 and 88
- the final years - synclavier, the Eastern block, Ensemble Modern
- life after Zappa - ZFT, tribute bands, etc. etc...

*

But hey, that's just an idea, but a story-like biography should be much closer to this that the one we have I think. But: we could also have a chronology, yes - but that's another thing.

*

and my offer: I complete the ... (slight pause...)

Hm, I just wanted to make an offer, but simply cannot find a "normal" discography on that wiki page... Where is it? I wanted to coplete 3-4 albums, but now I cannot choose... Well, will back soon and choose.

So, what do you think about all this?

B

[Barry]

Balint,

As always, it's with a sigh of relief that I read your lucid take on the wiki proceedings. I couldn't have said it any better way, and agree with every point you've made:

- divide the project into smaller - attainable - subprojects and concentrate on completing them
- no skeleton pages - it's been rubbing me the wrong way as well
- 2 main projects that need focus right now: discog and biography (discog's been humming along nicely in its own peculiar way though)
- biography: it's supposed to be an engaging narrative - not a dry, mindnumbing collection of dates

Finally, with reference to the Lord Of The Flies: I've read the book
I'm not sure if the analogy is accurate though. In LOTF you had a bunch of kids either turn into bad guys or good guys, in a situation where a set of "moral standards" got challenged in the face of a lack of "peer pressure" (hey, I know it's a simplistic way to depict things, but gimme a moment!).

At the wiki, we're confronted with people who are passionate about the wiki's subject. I'm not going to say a single bad word about Emdebe, or Dunk, or anyone else putting in time and effort to build it up. There's no "good guy/bad guy" situation going on here. All of them have made contributions to the wiki that are no less than impressive. Where conflict has arisen is in the "how do we do this" - not ever in the "why do we do this".

That's why it saddens me a bit to see contributors actually leave the building over issues that, in the end, require nothing more but the online equivalent of "going to the pub, having a pint and talking things through". It's why I had attempted to get a wiki-chat session going some time ago. It didn't really take on then, but maybe it would now?

So here's a proposition: could we possibly get together in some chatroom, just to casually exchange thoughts on where we think the wiki should go? It's my experience that direct interaction like that eliminates many of the misunderstandings/wrongly taken remarks/etc.

Just a suggestion.
Far be it from me to impose this on anyone - but I think we need a good talk all of us - and I promise there will be no group hugs at the end of the session.