Whether it's your first Bonnaroo or you’re a music festival veteran, we welcome you to Inforoo.
Here you'll find info about artists, rumors, camping tips, and the infamous Roo Clues. Have a look around then create an account and join in the fun. See you at Bonnaroo!!
im confident that if we just all agree to the rules and follow them that we can get through this much cleaner than last time.
that means no one fucking try Sade.
I'm not even playing but... Sade is not done. They take very long, like 10 year breaks and then bam, new album and tour. How do you know this won't be the year?
Post by Pepe Silvia on Feb 6, 2018 16:10:23 GMT -5
also can we change the "Previously ruled inelligable" acts to just all inelligable acts and have it fully updated with Tribe, Moderat, ect by the time we start this thing.
Sade is already ruled out from last time. It was a great pick that was even OKd by the ref and y'all still didn't let me have it.
That kinda thing is why I'm not playing again. YYY ruled out, then later in the year they came back. It's rarely ever a never again situation, even when a band says it is. I believe Byrne when he says no Talking Heads and I believe there won't be The Smiths reunion, but not much other than that.
Sade is already ruled out from last time. It was a great pick that was even OKd by the ref and y'all still didn't let me have it.
That kinda thing is why I'm not playing again. YYY ruled out, then later in the year they came back. It's rarely ever a never again situation, even when a band says it is. I believe Byrne when he says no Talking Heads and I believe there won't be The Smiths reunion, but not much other than that.
Well I appreciate you agreeing with me but any band that's actually broken up should be off the table, even if you think they'll probably be back some day.
Well, I find the "not-picking-anyone-that-hasn't-played-three-years-etc" rule a bit nonsense. And here is my reasoning.
Don't we, as the bookers of this festival, have an infinite amount of budget for booking whichever act we want? Also, don't we assume that our booking team has excellent capabilities of convincing acts that are on hiatus or not touring for a while to play our festival?
So, if the answer to the both questions are yes, why shouldn't we able to pick any acts then? Does this draft have to be this serious? Isn't the reason we're doing this is to have fun, and fantasize about an ideal festival?
Of course, some acts (The Smiths and Talking Heads are the first two examples that I can think of right now) should not be eligible as they said they have no interest in uniting regardless of the money. A referee can decide about this after doing some research whenever someone has picked a "controversial" act.
Having said that, spending enough money from your budget, you should be able to convince and book Moderat, Sade, Darkside, or etc. even though they said they are on hiatus or not touring for a while. Let people pick these acts as it's gonna be a more fun draft.
I am serious about this proposal. Let me know what y'all think.
Last Edit: Feb 6, 2018 17:03:48 GMT -5 by Fred - Back to Top
Post by piggy pablo on Feb 6, 2018 17:02:17 GMT -5
When it comes to most of the acts that we're talking about here, I don't think money is the problem. Rage Against the Machine could probably make half a billion dollars on a reunion tour. Zach just doesn't care.
When it comes to most of the acts that we're talking about here, I don't think money is the problem. Rage Against the Machine could probably make half a billion dollars on a reunion tour. Zach just doesn't care.
And you can add RATM next to the The Smiths and Talking Heads in this case. As long as you have enough reference that says "Zach doesn't care about the money."
When it comes to most of the acts that we're talking about here, I don't think money is the problem. Rage Against the Machine could probably make half a billion dollars on a reunion tour. Zach just doesn't care.
And you can add RATM next to the The Smiths and Talking Heads in this case. As long as you have enough reference that says "Zach doesn't care about the money."
this is the problem though, then we spend weeks debating who needs money, etc.
So, I am proposing that as long as an act clearly hasn't stated that they have no interest in a reunion no matter how much money you spend on them, they should be eligible for drafting.
And you can add RATM next to the The Smiths and Talking Heads in this case. As long as you have enough reference that says "Zach doesn't care about the money."
this is the problem though, then we spend weeks debating who needs money, etc.
Weeks? A basic google search should be able to tell you the answer for that question very quickly. And that's why we will have referees?
this is the problem though, then we spend weeks debating who needs money, etc.
Weeks? A basic google search should be able to tell you the answer for that question very quickly. And that's why we will have referees?
Google search: "Does Morissey need money?" doesn't really work well. Also you must have missed the last time we did this, weeks is not an exaggeration.
Post by piggy pablo on Feb 6, 2018 17:14:04 GMT -5
I also think Daft Punk is similar to RATM. I said this during the last draft, but Daft Punk put out a very high-profile, AOTY-winning album, and they didn't play a single show behind it. It's pretty clear that, until further notice, they aren't playing shows. And again, the money is there. It's not like it's going to get any bigger and better than it would have been in 2013 (or for Alive 2017, etc).
I can see where you might want to draw the line between might-come-back and have-no-interest. In my opinion, that's really messy. I understand YYYs came back. I told krisp at the time that if and when they did it would be advertised as a reunion, comeback, "these guys haven't played a show in however many years" type of deal. And that's what happened. The rule was no reunions. That was a reunion. Just because one thing like that happened doesn't mean we need to go changing the rules.
Every poll had results consistent with what made sense to me. That's myopic, I'll admit, but I was perfectly satisfied with the wisdom of the crowd while we were using that.
Post by Pepe Silvia on Feb 6, 2018 17:14:30 GMT -5
3 years is fine. keeps it balanced and somewhat realistic. we should have a specific date though. Should we just say they have to of played by Jan 1 2015?
Weeks? A basic google search should be able to tell you the answer for that question very quickly. And that's why we will have referees?
Google search: "Does Morissey need money?" doesn't really work well. Also you must have missed the last time we did this, weeks is not an exaggeration.
Weeks is absolutely an exaggeration.
One person requests a poll. No reason that should take longer than, say, three hours. Poll stays open for six hours. It's less than half a day to resolve these disputes. We spend longer waiting on people to get out of bed or get off of work.
Weeks? A basic google search should be able to tell you the answer for that question very quickly. And that's why we will have referees?
Google search: "Does Morissey need money?" doesn't really work well. Also you must have missed the last time we did this, weeks is not an exaggeration.
Yeah, I am not talking about just searching that question. Of course that won't work very well. But these kind of stuff should not be very hard to find if you know how to look for it. And if the referee can't find enough evidence, one should be able to book it. Shouldn't be too hard.
And no, I didn't miss the last time, y'all were arguing about not-so-serious details on and on and that really sucked the fun out of it.
All I'm saying/proposing/suggesting is this draft shouldn't be so serious and we shouldn't be lost on super serious details.
I'm actually with Freddy Flint on this one. I think allowing bands that were previously ineligible will make this draft less of a rehash of the last one. Make it spicy. So it's not realistic, so what? Outlaw reunions and bands that have explicitly stated they won't be playing again. It'll be fun.
Of course, this opens the door for people to pick the bands that you all love that I've never heard of and don't give a fuck about, but oh well. I'm fine either way.
