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!!
1) Only acts that have performed at Coachella before can be drafted. List of draftable acts is available in this link and also alphabetized below (OP will be updated after each round). This list does not include names that performed in DoLab, Heineken, or any other sponsor tents as they are not part of the official lineup poster. If an artist showed up in more than one Coachella lineup under the same name, they are not eligible to be picked more than once (i.e. Radiohead showed up in three Coachella lineups, but they are eligible to be drafted only once). If an artist has played under different monikers (i.e. Caribou/Daphni, Plastikman/Richie Hawtin, etc.), they are both eligible to be drafted. If a producer played a DJ and a live set under the same name but in separate lineups/occasions, you can only pick them once (no need to specify when picking).
sorry, are you saying you're going to post a big list of acts we can draft? if so, that's a bad idea. a big part of the draft is research.
I respectfully disagree Why do you think it's bad?
This is to make things much easier for anyone, and prevent any possible disputes. There are so many acts that have played Coachella, you still need to do plenty of research to come up with a strategy.
Right, but we're going off of previous Coachella lineups which is, if anything, more prescriptive since the list of possible acts to draft is finite. Not knowing how much each act is valued is fun for sure, but publishing an alphabetical list doesn't change that aspect at all. Plus, there's no way to think of any truly unique undercard gems because we have easy access to all possible undercard acts. You can't pick any left-field act no one's thought of by the rules of the game
you can't think of one but digging through these undercards isn't easy work and part of the fun. hard research work should be rewarded.
I think that's a valid perspective. I think it definitely benefits those who have the free time necessary to spend on the research work (which I'd call more time-intensive than "hard"), but I think it's a moot point regardless since it sounds like they'll be publishing the full list anyway!
sorry, are you saying you're going to post a big list of acts we can draft? if so, that's a bad idea. a big part of the draft is research.
I respectfully disagree Why do you think it's bad?
This is to make things much easier for anyone, and prevent any possible disputes. There are so many acts that have played Coachella, you still need to do plenty of research to come up with a strategy.
This way it'll proceed much faster too.
this is why I don't like it. keeping banger picks and doing research is essential to the drafts imo. for example, Bing taking Against All Logic last time was great because he worked harder and got rewarded. I don't see any dispute that would come of this. Either the act was on a lineup or they weren't.
I don't think it should be allowed since it hasn't happened yet, and we don't know the new lineup.
We will also be going over all the previous lineups to determine who showed up and who didn't. I know that some acts couldn't perform in 2010 because of a volcano.
I don't think it should be allowed since it hasn't happened yet, and we don't know the new lineup.
We will also be going over all the previous lineups to determine who showed up and who didn't. I know that some acts couldn't perform in 2010 because of a volcano.
it should be allowed, the pool is small enough we can't restrict another year
I don't think it should be allowed since it hasn't happened yet, and we don't know the new lineup.
We will also be going over all the previous lineups to determine who showed up and who didn't. I know that some acts couldn't perform in 2010 because of a volcano.
I missed the sign up, but I don't think there should be a list and I like the idea of acts being available for the amount of times they played. A list makes this less competitive, and the later adds an interesting twist.
If there is a dispute of someone playing it's pretty easy to say, "2014, Saturday, 3rd line" then there ya go, you've validated your selection.
I missed the sign up, but I don't think there should be a list and I like the idea of acts being available for the amount of times they played. A list makes this less competitive, and the later adds an interesting twist.
If there is a dispute of someone playing it's pretty easy to say, "2014, Saturday, 3rd line" then there ya go, you've validated your selection.
I don't think it should be allowed since it hasn't happened yet, and we don't know the new lineup.
We will also be going over all the previous lineups to determine who showed up and who didn't. I know that some acts couldn't perform in 2010 because of a volcano.
I missed the sign up, but I don't think there should be a list and I like the idea of acts being available for the amount of times they played. A list makes this less competitive, and the later adds an interesting twist.
If there is a dispute of someone playing it's pretty easy to say, "2014, Saturday, 3rd line" then there ya go, you've validated your selection.
You haven't! we have two more spots.
Well then shit, sign me up. The fuck else am I doing?
I respectfully disagree Why do you think it's bad?
This is to make things much easier for anyone, and prevent any possible disputes. There are so many acts that have played Coachella, you still need to do plenty of research to come up with a strategy.
This way it'll proceed much faster too.
this is why I don't like it. keeping banger picks and doing research is essential to the drafts imo. for example, Bing taking Against All Logic last time was great because he worked harder and got rewarded. I don't see any dispute that would come of this. Either the act was on a lineup or they weren't.
The Bing pick was dope for sure. But it could never happen in this game because eligibility is concretely defined and instead of a (functionally) infinite number of possible acts, there's only a couple thousand tops.
"keeping banger picks and doing research" in this draft would just be reading over the exact same 20 lineups as everyone else. Very little room for innovation there, so I'm fine with having that task done just once instead of everyone involved replicating the labor
I don't think it should be allowed since it hasn't happened yet, and we don't know the new lineup.
We will also be going over all the previous lineups to determine who showed up and who didn't. I know that some acts couldn't perform in 2010 because of a volcano.
Agreed. We don't know what the 2020 lineup is.
I imagine we'd just work off the line up that was already announced pre-corona cancellation.
I mean, if there isn't a posted list of eligible acts I'm willing to collaborate with anybody else interested in having one and we can just share it privately.
I mean, if there isn't a posted list of eligible acts I'm willing to collaborate with anybody else interested in having one and we can just share it privately.
this is why I don't like it. keeping banger picks and doing research is essential to the drafts imo. for example, Bing taking Against All Logic last time was great because he worked harder and got rewarded. I don't see any dispute that would come of this. Either the act was on a lineup or they weren't.
The Bing pick was dope for sure. But it could never happen in this game because eligibility is concretely defined and instead of a (functionally) infinite number of possible acts, there's only a couple thousand tops.
"keeping banger picks and doing research" in this draft would just be reading over the exact same 20 lineups as everyone else. Very little room for innovation there, so I'm fine with having that task done just once instead of everyone involved replicating the labor
Literally picking off a list tho is a lot less fun and challenging. We're all going to be looking at the same lineup, but if I miss a name you don't when looking at one, that should be my issue and your reward.
I think it's dumb to have a list that we all see. If the draft mod wants to compile a list for the off chance of disputes or something then that's fine, but I don't think it should be available to everyone.
The Bing pick was dope for sure. But it could never happen in this game because eligibility is concretely defined and instead of a (functionally) infinite number of possible acts, there's only a couple thousand tops.
"keeping banger picks and doing research" in this draft would just be reading over the exact same 20 lineups as everyone else. Very little room for innovation there, so I'm fine with having that task done just once instead of everyone involved replicating the labor
Literally picking off a list tho is a lot less fun and challenging. We're all going to be looking at the same lineup, but if I miss a name you don't when looking at one, that should be my issue and your reward.
I think it's dumb to have a list that we all see. If the draft mod wants to compile a list for the off chance of disputes or something then that's fine, but I don't think it should be available to everyone.
I imagine we'd just work off the line up that was already announced pre-corona cancellation.
The justification for this draft is that that festival is not happening. There might be one this year but that original lineup is just theoretical at this point.
this is why I don't like it. keeping banger picks and doing research is essential to the drafts imo. for example, Bing taking Against All Logic last time was great because he worked harder and got rewarded. I don't see any dispute that would come of this. Either the act was on a lineup or they weren't.
The Bing pick was dope for sure. But it could never happen in this game because eligibility is concretely defined and instead of a (functionally) infinite number of possible acts, there's only a couple thousand tops.
"keeping banger picks and doing research" in this draft would just be reading over the exact same 20 lineups as everyone else. Very little room for innovation there, so I'm fine with having that task done just once instead of everyone involved replicating the labor
This is what I'm leaning towards to be honest. We're basically making things slightly easier for everyone.
Especially given the short notice and that we will start this in a week or so, I think it would be fair if I did the homework for everyone.
I imagine we'd just work off the line up that was already announced pre-corona cancellation.
The justification for this draft is that that festival is not happening. There might be one this year but that original lineup is just theoretical at this point.
I get that view. Though this is just a fantasy game, so I think it'd be ok to use the announced line up. I'm fairly indifferent on this, though there were some Coachella-debuts this year that I would've wanted. I'm easy tho.
I don't think it should be allowed since it hasn't happened yet, and we don't know the new lineup.
We will also be going over all the previous lineups to determine who showed up and who didn't. I know that some acts couldn't perform in 2010 because of a volcano.
Damn was hoping for a Cocteau Twins sneaky pick
lol I thought of the same thing when I started thinking about this draft
Post by Cookin' Mama on Apr 2, 2020 22:33:23 GMT -5
The only thing I feel really strongly about is public voting. Voting always is a little boring imo and hearing people's reasoning about why they picked one line up over another will generates conversation. Also gives us an idea of what people value and don't, which I think is always fun to see.
The Bing pick was dope for sure. But it could never happen in this game because eligibility is concretely defined and instead of a (functionally) infinite number of possible acts, there's only a couple thousand tops.
"keeping banger picks and doing research" in this draft would just be reading over the exact same 20 lineups as everyone else. Very little room for innovation there, so I'm fine with having that task done just once instead of everyone involved replicating the labor
This is what I'm leaning towards to be honest. We're basically making things slightly easier for everyone.
Especially given the short notice and that we will start this in a week or so, I think it would be fair if I did the homework for everyone.
The Bing pick was dope for sure. But it could never happen in this game because eligibility is concretely defined and instead of a (functionally) infinite number of possible acts, there's only a couple thousand tops.
"keeping banger picks and doing research" in this draft would just be reading over the exact same 20 lineups as everyone else. Very little room for innovation there, so I'm fine with having that task done just once instead of everyone involved replicating the labor
Literally picking off a list tho is a lot less fun and challenging. We're all going to be looking at the same lineup, but if I miss a name you don't when looking at one, that should be my issue and your reward.
I think it's dumb to have a list that we all see. If the draft mod wants to compile a list for the off chance of disputes or something then that's fine, but I don't think it should be available to everyone.
I don't think there's much of a functional difference between picking off of one giant list and picking off of twenty smaller lists with the exact same bands on them. If you don't think that sounds very fun or challenging (which is totally valid!), that's more an issue with the game design than anything
Would be just as easy to miss a name on the big list as it would on an individual lineup poster. If working harder or being more clever gave some sort of competitive advantage here, I'd understand not wanting to tilt the field... but since I don't think there is, I'd rather save the time it would require
Why do you think it's bad?
:format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/12414833/Nathan_Fielder_AMA_Cool_Band.0.png)
