#musicbrainz

you want the real definition or the mb one?

i know what's in the dictionary

the term as used by musicbrainz has a specific meaning associated with it

well, if you're not satisfied with how we use things, why don't you email mb-users or something

if people agree with you, it'll hopefully get changed, if they don't, it won't

with collaboration, you can understand it to mean X and Y collaborated on work released as Z

i don't see what's so bad about that

or X,Y...

whats so bad about 2 members of a group?

because it's artist X and artist Y performing together

collaborations are more for one-offs

and things along those lines

its not a one off

artist X and artist Y being members of artist Z would imply that they do *more* than perform together

what's the mod id

like write songs

no

see you have the definition backwards

collaboration should be used for writing songs since thats what the word MEANS

roll your eyes all you want

ok, dictionary, do what you fucking like.

what a baby

im not doing anything but chatting

'group' is hazy

it's mostly a common sense thing

i don't think mb defines it specifically

it's not hazy

well they should

ok, then what does 'group' mean

two or more people that tour together and release albums together

that's not how most people would define it ^^

what do you mean release albums together

collaboration is more of a one off.. but the poeple in question are not a one off

what happen sif the "group" doesn't tour

I can think of at least 2 groups with only 1 member

say they only release studio works

condition 1 fails

the and fails

it's not a group

fine

it's hard to do

butthere is something wrong

because mos definition makes it so that MB has 2 optionis for the same thing

i asked what a collaboration is and im told its 2 people and a thingy

i think collaboration is more appropriate when what you think of as a group is unnamed

what is MBs definitions of Group and COllaboration.. whats the MB difference between the two

and appears in the db as Person1 &|and Person2

there are bands without names, are those collaborations too?

i don't know, i think you have to go case-by-case

what are some of the bands you're thinking of

well in thsi case they're not collaborating

dave and tim are a group that plays songs by dave

they do not collaborate to write new music

so they tour together?

yes

but don't release albums together?

they have released live albums together

collaboration should be used when creation or writing is involved

and not performance?

what kind of justification can you give for that?

not i f it's a band that only plays live

maybe it's not a band at all, then

because that is what the word collaborate means

what about the definition of 'collaborate' excludes that

what is MBs definitions of Group and COllaboration.. whats the MB difference between the two

mb doesn't specifically define the terms

mrneil_ is now known as mrneil

wellt hey should if it's going to be something voted on and talked about

forces}, {cooperate}, {get together}]

i don't think you have a leg to stand on here

even the dictionary doesn't agree with you

it certainlyu doesn't rule out what you think it does

whats the definition of group?

whose definition

what's the definition of bald?

samme place you got the collaboration definitioin

too much to paste

do it

i'll flood off

just look it up yourself

3. A number of individuals or things considered together because of similarities: a small group of supporters across the country.

so what's your point, walter

i'm pretty sure dave and tim are two or more figures

we're talking about a musical group

the point is MB has two options that mean the same thing

i'd guess they would object to being called figures.

that definition is too general to be practically useful in this context

we're talking abuot a musical collaboration

for what it's worth, I don't appreciate being called names.

fwiw i dont care

you ran out like a baby

i know, but you were saying 'collaboration', as it's defined, has a meaning that conflicts with the way mb uses it

I just don't see the point in arguing with someone who is already convinced they're right and everyone else is wrong.

you could have just ignored me

which isn't true

thank dont

you can make cases that both are appropriate

than

no, I closed the ibook because I was sick of being told that you're right, I'm wrong when you can't prove it.

so you need to pick one

i think collaboration is more appropriate

apparently, most people do

judging by the vote

sorry im not recapping on your account

yes, I was ignoring you by leaving for my dinner.

i dont care

no I didn't, I read the chatlogs.

and this client is always connected.

well i don't understand how no one can tell me the difference between the MB definitions of group and collaboration

if its used to replaces "featured" than maybe it should be CALLED featured and not collaboration

i just told you, there are no cut and dry guidelines

im not replacing collaboration

can they not be members and collaborators?

i said i believe in the case where it's an unnamed entity consisting of person1 (& person2)+ then it's likely a collaboration

ok

so this case of dave and tim

what are they collaborating on?

the body of work produced by dave and tim

there is none

its daves work

apparently there is

so they perform it together

what about covers

do they not exist?

waht about them?

rarely

can they not be members and collaborators?

yeah, possibily, but in this case, i think you're wrong

why? and how?

we're going in circles

no not really

ok, well, i've said all i have to say about it

you just say im wrong but don't really say why

ok then

no, i told you when i think something is a collaboration

you said all you had to say

i stated it fairly clearly

you said all you had to say

im playing a robot typing game while listening to music...

one of the robots had the word laziest

im listening to the laziest men on mars

move zig move zig

...for great justice