#musicbrainz

stupid me, problem solved.

hi

hm, i'd really like to vote no on http://musicbrainz.org/mod/search/results.html?...

was there some discussion about converting roman numbers?

and also "Applies to songs that have been split across multiple tracks." - Oxygene is not one song, but 6 completely different songs

afaik. yes on disc # no on volume #

so those are wrong as they are covered by volumenumberstyle

they are probably intentionally roman

probably not

but...

stupid style guidelines :)

is it whats on the cover?

then ding

but replace them with , part#

part #

yes, and that's what i don't like

hmm!

someone could edit PartNumberStyle

and remove that "Applies to songs that have been split across multiple tracks."

:p

because now oxygene is not covered by PartNumberStyle, imho

as it's not one song

you know. thats true

its a song *name*

damn, but i can't vote no :p

oh?

I did

bordercases lie kthis is what the voting system is for

go ahead and vote no rightnow thers 2 yes and 1 no

problem is, oxygene was released on many compilations with many variations - oxygene 2, oxygene II, oxygene (part 2), ...

then those soudl be changed. not the album ones omho

imho even

another problem - oxygen's 1-6 are numbered as "Oxygene (Part #)" and 7-13 as "Oxygene #"

o_O

to bad we cant ask him...

consistency consistency consistency...

:(

i hate it!

:p

on the café del mar albums we also do not care about the covers :)

but I think the roman numerals sould stay

but that are compilations

not albums

they are VA comps even

so?

makes a huge difference imho

for the title of the work? not for me

i was talking aabout over writing whats on the cover..

yes

then imho comps are less important than albums

for the track titles yes, because it is not the artist who decides how they are written on the cover. but not for the album title because that is selected by some mixer dude and no artists intent is to overwrite it

but that'æs what we're talking about!

tracktitles!

one stupid question: it's ok to change songs from http://musicbrainz.org/album/708795f1-bf23-443f... to Oxygene, Part # ?

you mean. the two differnt styles are o ntwo different albums?

hmm

yes, but oxygene was released in 1978, oxygene 7-13 in 1997

sp? no need to change it then obviusly

wel I wouldn't

hm, but they shoud be changed (if it's valid change oxygene (part #) -> oxygene, part #)

why ssould they?

what's difference between "oxygene (part 1)" and "oxygene 10"?

two completely differnt songs?

yes

so why have the same name format?

[Global Notice] Hi all. John Reeves Hall, a community hacker mentioned here previously, passed away on September 17. ( http://overcode.yak.net/ ) He'll be missed. I know he would want to thank all of you who contributed to his drive for the American Cancer Society.

because of PartNumberStyle? they are just a parts without "Part" written on the cover

but not accordign to yoursefl, (or me imho) because the 'part' bit is just a fancyname because he was lazy and couldnt coem up with anything

:)

:)

i hate PartNumberStyle! i hate MB style guidelines!

hm, and i'm automod? :D

lol its good!

we need contes and not blind followers

some votes? http://musicbrainz.org/showmod.html?modid=3405526

thanks luks

also I would apreaciate imput on http://musicbrainz.org/showmod.html?modid=3405521

why are you merging an artist without any albums?

for the alias. as stupid as I am .p

it *had* albums

wow, just saw. i have 3 days wort of music

o_O

i also hate when people are trying to add homebrew compilations into the db :/ http://musicbrainz.org/showmod.html?modid=3408723

I have a homebrew that 4 people have

wih instructions of copying at will and give to people

what's the min amount of peoepl before its booleg?

anyone know? care?

imho, it's a bootleg when it's publicly available

good definition

So, does a rare bootleg become something else? ;)

lols

I got one of those

revolutionary!

Shepard, fuchs: seid ihr da?

ich schon :)

hi!

hi

ich bin da ein bisschen verwirrt von der wahl...

nicht nur du *g*

vielleicht koenntest dur mir ein paar fragen beantworten?

wie fuchs so schön sagte: wir haben's vermasselt

klar

lol

_mo: should we speak english?

no I just wish I understod...

wikipedia says that the chancellor will be chosen from the strongest party.

which was CDU, by a margin.

what fuchs scön sagte?

so no clear chancellor until Oct 6th, at least.

schön

but why is Merkely getting kicked in the balls so badly?

so is not out, yet is she?

s/Merkely/Merkel

atleast norwqays ellection went well ^^

s/so/she

_mo: no unprecendented happenings?

what? o I meant

we finally get the red greens again

moin ruaok!

from the strongest party.. well the strongest party has the "job" to build a government.. but i think it is possible that this government can be under another cancellor as the candidate of the strongest party

no more of this blue stuff

moin nikki_.

and strongest party will be determined after the coalition is built?

hei nikki

the strongest party i mean is the party with the most votes

I wonder, what are the rules for building a coalition? Who can say what? Who starts the negotiations?

ok, so there is no confusion about that -- we just have to wait until all votes are counted to know for sure.

some time after Oct 6th then.

ruaok: the chancellor is elected by the parliament, and there she has no majority, because the PDS will never vote for her, but the PDS might vote for Schröder as the lesser evil

AH HA!

Danke -- das war mir nicht klar!

you might as well be talkign germna stil..

uh lol

you're up early

have to go now, bbl :)

hey hey