[mb-users] Re: what's with the crusade against adding legit NATs?

[Chris Bransden]

On 28/08/06, Lauri Watts <krazykiwi at gmail.com> wrote:
> > would they be 'promo' then? as i don't think it's great to lump these
> > together with other 'true' net-released singles (with b-sides, and/or
> > a track that's not featured on any album) as i think it 'demeans'
> > them.
>
> Demean them? That's a little emotional :)
>
> In what way does it have any effect whatsoever on any other release?

in that there could potentially be a LOT of these releases - most
bands i follow promo albums on myspace, etc, and if i were to add
these as singles every time i think the MBz artist pages would quickly
become cluttered and non-intuitive ("artist A release random album
track B as a single?!")

> Especially if it we could decide a new kind of attribute to handle
> them?  "Net Releases" for instance, for things specifically released
> in a download only form, leaving NAT for things like live rips, random
> demos etc.

i think that's a different proposal entirely :) that i would be
interested in, for more than the example case. i guess this is all
coming with ReleaseGroups (or whatever it's called now)

> > well, it's perhaps wise not to consider the edit in question :) i
> > realise that the NAT in question will be sorted out fine when it comes
> > to release time, but generally i wouldn't think it would happen, and
>
> Why do you think it wouldn't happen?  There's even people who go
> around looking for this kind of thing to clean up.

absolutely, but i think the onus should be on those who add them, and
since the bulk of users use MBz once only (i'm sure i read this
somewhere, and it seems reasonable anyway), this wouldn't typically
happen. yes most things get sorted out eventually, but i guess you
could use the same logic for removing most of the guidlines :)

besides, the fact that people don't remove/look after NATs is why the
rules behind them have been typically stricter than most. i think NATs
get voted down more than any edit (mostly because no reason given for
addition, or random live track where full bootleg almost certainly
exists)

> Or from another
> point of view, how much damage does it do if it's left behind for a
> while? It _was_ a NAT, many times they are still available to download
> individually long after the album was released, it's really not the
> end of the world is it, if the entry is still there.

well, no. but try going to a random artists page and cleaning out the
NATs - it's very hard to tell what are legit and what are not unless
you are very familiar with the artist. i suppose the NATs don't 'need'
to be cleaned up, but i'm not sure that is a great cornerstone here.

> > > If it is, then we need to change the guideline
> > > so it doesn't happen.  How do you propose we reword the guideline that
> > > currently very clearly states these are acceptable (in fact, they're
> > > the very first thing on the list).
> >
> > i would ask whoever added that rule, because i don't remember it being
> > there before...
>
> It's been there since at least the wiki was moved to moinmoin, which
> makes it prehistoric in MB terms.

i guess that makes me primordial soup :) it just doesn't seem
intuitive to me, which is why i didn't think it was there, as it
strikes me as something i would have taken issue with.

> > well, i think there's a difference between "sometime" and "will be
> > available on forthcoming album [on forthcoming date]". obviously any
> > NAT 'might' be on a future album, but i don't think these are what we
> > are discussing here.
>
> But it is.  We have no proof at this time that this track is on the
> forthcoming album, because the artist has not released a track list.
> In this _specific_ case, it's a safe bet it will be, but still, "might
> be" is precisely the status it has right this very minute.

actually, the download has been billed as a single from the album -
http://www.weirdal.com/home.htm - so it will definitely be on it, and
a release date is available.

BTW, as it was billed as a "single" i think it shouldn't be a NAT in
the first place, but a single (though whether it should be promo or
official i'm not sure, as the download was free, but from the wording
{and the fact that a video exists} i presume that the full single will
be released at a later date)