No Taylor Swift?

[conspiracykiller]

I came to this site to look at what the last part of "Rain", by The Fab Four is actually trying to say. After surfing the site--which, admittedly, is quite cool--I came across the "Best of 2015" (both songs and albums).

Perusing the list I notice that not a single entry for Taylor Swift's albums nor any of her songs are listed on your "best of". To that I say that if you guys want to pass yourselves off as the musical experts that you claim to be (and I thought you were), I'd rethink that strategy. Let me start by saying that I'm neither a teenage girl, nor a man in love with her for sex appeal. I don't care about any of the frills, who she dates or any of the other rubbish associated with her or any other superstar. I only care about the music and music is the only thing I care about. And I'm here to say to you that any way you slice it, no matter how much you dislike her, she has revolutionized music and thrown the music industry a giant lifeline. Appreciation for her should fall into two categories:

1. Business Savvy: Prior to Taylor Swift it was just assumed that the album was going to go the way of the buggy whip or embarrassment in taking welfare as a totem from a bygone era. However, the album 1989 as a whole, was something that she put an enormous amount of energy into. This is saying something because she has spent a decade making albums that give her fans a better bang for than their buck than any other artist today. But her she went all in. She doubled down. 1989 could have been a flop, mind you. Her country fans could have hated her Emo and rebelled at the thought of seeing their apple pie sweet girl become the mega-diva with pop anthems. She could have failed. But she didn't. Bare in mind this a girl that has pretty much owned the music industry for the better part of a decade and she's only 26. She has created a persona (again, not always fun to watch, but interesting to her fans nonetheless), and she has ridden it all the way to the bank. She continues to use her business model to give her fans so much more than the average musician does. Think of the an album around 2000--Sugar Ray or something. The millennium saw musicians slap a few songs on the bookends of a CD with a moderate hit, and then play it to death on the radio whilst complaining about piracy on the internet. Taylor Swift changed all that. She embraced people listening to her music--even if it was pirated. She put everything into the album concept because you can't pirate a WHOLE album--the photos in it, the lyrics contained in them. It's all packaged to make her fans want to BUY it--not steal it. That's a key distinction in an industry where stars will do anything for one hit and then guard the rights to it. She essentially made the album concept relevant again by packaging HERSELF with the album. She says to her fans, "I'm your friend, this mix-tape I made for you will cheer you up". Now, again, it's probably not something we all enjoy. But you can't deny the importance of a musician selling herself to her fans. She has a way of staying both aloof and homespun that is absolutely fascinating to watch from purely a business angle (I'm a financier, so I'm biased). Her albums continue to break records and that's saying something today where you can get Heinz 57 flavors on the radio or in your car. You can love her or you can hate her, but you simply can't call yourselves musical critics if you ignore the way in which she seamlessly transitioned her business angle from country girl to pop diva. Carrie Underwood can't do it. Kelly Clarkson wouldn't do it. This is the era of the most creative freedom for women in the history of music. And who stands on top of the flagpole? It's a laydown. Whether you like her music or not is irrelevant through that prism. If we're going to give KISS credit for selling a ton albums in 1979, then we need to give Taylor even more credit for blowing KISS out of the water.

2. Musical Appreciation: I was weened on a steady diet of the old classics as a kid. Sam Cooke, Buddy Holly, Elvis, The Beatles and then, later in my own time, Nirvana. What did they all have in common? They were not just great songwriters or artists, they were also immensely popular in their own time. All of you sneering and aghast at the thought that Taylor Swift deserves to be in the same sentence as The Beatles need to ask yourselves this question: don't you think in the Beatles time there were people just like you who laughed, sneered and snickered at the thought of some mop haired boys from England in duck's-ass haircuts, running around like a couple of pansies, giggling like a bunch of gaylords, being considered as good as Sinatra or Mozart or Bach? Of course there were. You aren't unique. Someone in 1965 was saying, "Those girls are so pathetic." My grandfather, a world war two vet, still scoffs at the idea that any of the songs we think of as classics as being anything half as good as Vivaldi's Four Seasons or the Bach's Brandenburg Concerto. My dad was a tough old hot racing, red blooded bad ass in the 1960s and while liking the Beatles, he would never admit it to his friends who were all tougher than a coffin nail.

Just because something is catchy to a teenage girl or cut with an eye to a younger demographic doesn't mean it "CAN NEVER BE GREAT". Taylor Swift is now the only woman in history to have won Album of the Year twice. Four of her five albums have been the highest sellers of their years, and three of them have been nominated for the Grammy for Album of the Year. You have to hand it to Swift: when "Red" lost, instead of complaining or whining about the decision, she is on record as saying that she said, "Maybe it wasn't as great as I thought it was. Maybe I need to work harder". Who says that today? Who says, "It's my fault" anymore? 1989 is a singer on the top of the world. There is nowhere for her to go but down from here the way John Lennon's solo stuff, while great, is not Abbey Road. It is the pinnacle of her career the way "Born in the USA" was to Springsteen. It's her at her absolute peak defiantly saying she doesn't give a shit what you think of her music. She has reinvented herself and her music has gone from catchy accoustic-country-pop to synth-pop so effortlessly that the result was astounding. 1989 is not just a mishmash of synth the way Carly Rae Jepsen's (critically acclaimed, I might add) album is. It is cohesive with a deft touch I've never before seen. The songs all belong on that album and they feel like they belong in the order they are in much the same way Sgt. Pepper's is. She has created a whole new genre of music with one eye towards the 1980s pop anthems and another towards empowerment. I believe there has been no finer song in that genre than Blank Space. It is an absolute masterpiece of musicianship. She seems to say, "Here's who you think I am, I'll go ahead and be that thing you all want me to be", in a defiant voice that reminds me of Debbie Harry saying, "So, you think I'm just a Playboy model?" I'm sorry, but if you have a list of the best Albums of 2015, and you have Tame Impala on there but not Blank Space...is that a joke? Is that supposed to be funny? You guys are a great musical audience--at least try and act like it.

I'm sorry if you're a cool Emo or Goth, or you if hate Taylor because (admittedly) she's a pain in the ass with her, "I'm so awesome" shtick. I'm sorry if you can't appreciate the incredible joy she brings her fans. I'm happy for them, because for them she's the poet laureate of pubescent teens of 2015, and they discovered her the same way a generation of screaming women we now call grandma discovered the Beatles. You don't have to like her--but you do have to respect her. And if you can't respect 1989, then I'm sorry, but you shouldn't listen to music.

[BleuPanda]

...but that album came out in 2014 and it's already on the list...some musical expert. And we're not the ones who make the list...

[Nick]

9.3/10

Best New Troll

[spiritualized]

hahaha Bleu swiftly swipes the unbelievers. Be afraid I can't believe that someone took the time to register, post such a lengthy post with a totally false premise.
Well done, Bleu, I couldn't have put it more succinctly and efficiently Moving on !

(which makes me comment though that I don't like Taylor Swift, but my daughter and my wife do)

[Nick]

...but that album came out in 2014 and it's already on the list...some musical expert. And we're not the ones who make the list...

I interpreted our trolls comment to be in reference to our forum poll. And yes, you won't find Taylor Swift on our 2015 forum poll. Because "1989" came out in 2014...

[Harold]

...but that album came out in 2014 and it's already on the list...some musical expert. And we're not the ones who make the list...

I interpreted our trolls comment to be in reference to our forum poll. And yes, you won't find Taylor Swift on our 2015 forum poll. Because "1989" came out in 2014...

But, dude, it won Album Of The Year for 2015! Taylor Swift transcends our conventional notions of time!

[luney6]

To be fair though, just because an artist gets commercial success and respect, doesn't mean that they are good. I think that this article is a very good explanation: http://www.scaruffi.com/music/criteria.html.

[BleuPanda]

I'm just curious about the 'emo and goth' thing going on in that post. Is that what the AMF forum consists of? Have I been reading us wrong?

[Nick]

I'm just curious about the 'emo and goth' thing going on in that post. Is that what the AMF forum consists of? Have I been reading us wrong?

When were the last time "emo" and "goth" were even culturally relevant? 2008?

[BleuPanda]

Goths will always be relevant, but everyone should know by now that 'hipster' replaced 'emo' as the go-to term to undermine people who don't appreciate pop music.

[Harold]

I'm just curious about the 'emo and goth' thing going on in that post. Is that what the AMF forum consists of? Have I been reading us wrong?

When were the last time "emo" and "goth" were even culturally relevant? 2008?

This should cheer you up for sure - see, I've got your old I.D., and you're all dressed up like The Cure.

[Romain]

I stop to read here : " pass yourselves off as the musical experts that you claim to be.." and I laught!

Where did Bruce conspiracykiller have found this idear?

[prosecutorgodot]

I guess I'll just reiterate the fact that we are not the ones making the lists, the critics do...
But interesting sidetrack I suppose, albeit based on many false premises...

[luney6]

Goths will always be relevant, but everyone should know by now that 'hipster' replaced 'emo' as the go-to term to undermine people who don't appreciate pop music.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't these terms more like fads? Perhaps like hippies?

[BleuPanda]

Goths will always be relevant, but everyone should know by now that 'hipster' replaced 'emo' as the go-to term to undermine people who don't appreciate pop music.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't these terms more like fads? Perhaps like hippies?

I definitely think there are groups known as goths, emos, and hipsters, but there's also the outsider fad insult. 'Emo' is a style of music, but it also represents this idea of a teenager who's simultaneously pseudo-suicidal and narcissistic, with appropriate downer music to fit the image (thus anti-pop). Hipster, meanwhile, has become a catch-all term for anyone who actually listens to the music found on this site, but with the idea that anyone who listens to acts like Animal Collective or LCD Soundsystem are doing it out of irony or a sense of superiority instead of legitimately enjoying the music itself. Both terms got to the point of being entirely meaningless, since hipster is literally hurled at anyone who listens to modern music that isn't top 40. Now that 'hipster' is losing meaning, expect another term to inexplicably take its place; 'neckbeard' has been a fun one of late, since I've seen it used as an insult against anyone who disagrees with someone on either side. It used to refer exclusively to misogynist trolls (because implying all men with a certain physical feature are sexist is apparently acceptable...), but now I see it in all sorts of discussions. Luckily, that one seems stuck in internet culture and unrelated to music.

[luney6]

Goths will always be relevant, but everyone should know by now that 'hipster' replaced 'emo' as the go-to term to undermine people who don't appreciate pop music.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't these terms more like fads? Perhaps like hippies?

I definitely think there are groups known as goths, emos, and hipsters, but there's also the outsider fad insult. 'Emo' is a style of music, but it also represents this idea of a teenager who's simultaneously pseudo-suicidal and narcissistic, with appropriate downer music to fit the image (thus anti-pop). Hipster, meanwhile, has become a catch-all term for anyone who actually listens to the music found on this site, but with the idea that anyone who listens to acts like Animal Collective or LCD Soundsystem are doing it out of irony or a sense of superiority instead of legitimately enjoying the music itself. Both terms got to the point of being entirely meaningless, since hipster is literally hurled at anyone who listens to modern music that isn't top 40. Now that 'hipster' is losing meaning, expect another term to inexplicably take its place; 'neckbeard' has been a fun one of late, since I've seen it used as an insult against anyone who disagrees with someone on either side. It used to refer exclusively to misogynist trolls (because implying all men with a certain physical feature are sexist is apparently acceptable...), but now I see it in all sorts of discussions. Luckily, that one seems stuck in internet culture and unrelated to music.

I see. Thanks for the explanation. 'Neckbeard'.... I wonder how that came up. Also, do you guys believe that these terms will last long enough to not seem like a 'fad'?

[BleuPanda]

Well, goth has been around for a while, and emo does have a genre associated with it. "Hipster" has also been around longer than its fad phase (for example, "Cherub Rock" by Smashing Pumpkins uses the word), but I'm not sure how much longer the insult side of any will live.

And neckbeard simply comes from the idea of the stereotypical internet troll: male, obese, unable to groom himself (thus allowing a beard to grow on his neck). It of course ignores the fact that a) there are people who look like that who are actually very nice and b) it gives a pass to well-groomed, fit trolls. It's especially annoying because it appears to come from feminist circles, when actual feminism would be fighting against the idea of judging someone based on their appearance.

[Nick]

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't these terms more like fads? Perhaps like hippies?

I definitely think there are groups known as goths, emos, and hipsters, but there's also the outsider fad insult. 'Emo' is a style of music, but it also represents this idea of a teenager who's simultaneously pseudo-suicidal and narcissistic, with appropriate downer music to fit the image (thus anti-pop). Hipster, meanwhile, has become a catch-all term for anyone who actually listens to the music found on this site, but with the idea that anyone who listens to acts like Animal Collective or LCD Soundsystem are doing it out of irony or a sense of superiority instead of legitimately enjoying the music itself. Both terms got to the point of being entirely meaningless, since hipster is literally hurled at anyone who listens to modern music that isn't top 40. Now that 'hipster' is losing meaning, expect another term to inexplicably take its place; 'neckbeard' has been a fun one of late, since I've seen it used as an insult against anyone who disagrees with someone on either side. It used to refer exclusively to misogynist trolls (because implying all men with a certain physical feature are sexist is apparently acceptable...), but now I see it in all sorts of discussions. Luckily, that one seems stuck in internet culture and unrelated to music.

I see. Thanks for the explanation. 'Neckbeard'.... I wonder how that came up. Also, do you guys believe that these terms will last long enough to not seem like a 'fad'?

I can't say whether emos, hipsters, or neckbeards will be around for the next generation to experience. Goths on the other hand, have been around for thousands of years. I don't see them going anywhere.

[luney6]

Hmm..yeah. That makes sense. Thanks.

[PlasticRam]

I definitely think there are groups known as goths, emos, and hipsters, but there's also the outsider fad insult. 'Emo' is a style of music, but it also represents this idea of a teenager who's simultaneously pseudo-suicidal and narcissistic, with appropriate downer music to fit the image (thus anti-pop). Hipster, meanwhile, has become a catch-all term for anyone who actually listens to the music found on this site, but with the idea that anyone who listens to acts like Animal Collective or LCD Soundsystem are doing it out of irony or a sense of superiority instead of legitimately enjoying the music itself. Both terms got to the point of being entirely meaningless, since hipster is literally hurled at anyone who listens to modern music that isn't top 40. Now that 'hipster' is losing meaning, expect another term to inexplicably take its place; 'neckbeard' has been a fun one of late, since I've seen it used as an insult against anyone who disagrees with someone on either side. It used to refer exclusively to misogynist trolls (because implying all men with a certain physical feature are sexist is apparently acceptable...), but now I see it in all sorts of discussions. Luckily, that one seems stuck in internet culture and unrelated to music.

I see. Thanks for the explanation. 'Neckbeard'.... I wonder how that came up. Also, do you guys believe that these terms will last long enough to not seem like a 'fad'?

I can't say whether emos, hipsters, or neckbeards will be around for the next generation to experience. Goths on the other hand, have been around for thousands of years. I don't see them going anywhere.

Yeah, but the goth subculture started in the 1980s.

[BleuPanda]

I think the difference is that goths (the subculture) choose that label; it's a fashion statement. The others all became labels given to certain groups (emo is about 50/50). No one chooses to be called a neckbeard.

[luney6]

No one chooses to be called a neckbeard.

LOL

[BleuPanda]

And this, my friends, is how we completely derail a troll post.

[acroamor]

Honestly, I'm astounded we don't get more trolls here than we do. AMF is quite literally the only Internet forum / website-in-general that I've seen with a small, polite, and generally serious userbase. Even Bruce, despite his rudeness, never intentionally trolled.

[jamieW]

I just got a kick out of how someone who goes by "conspiracykiller" writes a lengthy post about how we "music experts" don't appreciate Taylor Swift for numerous reasons and are purposefully keeping her off our lists. (Which isn't so, as others have pointed out, but it sure sounds like a conspiracy to me!) I'm assuming the post wasn't written by Taylor herself, who also is no longer a teenage girl or a male attracted to her (though I'm very, very sure she's quite pleased with her looks).

As for being too cool to appreciate "1989," I'm someone who admits my love of Nightwish and Evanescence, as well as "Mr. Roboto" and (gasp) even the dreaded "Heartbeat" by Don Johnson, thanks to its connection with fond high school memories. I'm pretty sure I'm not too cool to appreciate anything (nor would I ever pretend to be). Although I don't truly appreciate "1989" as much as some (I love "Style," and really like "Blank Space," the rest, I'm afraid, just doesn't connect with me personally), I will continue to listen to ALL music, despite conspiracykiller telling me that I shouldn't.

[Nick]

I see. Thanks for the explanation. 'Neckbeard'.... I wonder how that came up. Also, do you guys believe that these terms will last long enough to not seem like a 'fad'?

I can't say whether emos, hipsters, or neckbeards will be around for the next generation to experience. Goths on the other hand, have been around for thousands of years. I don't see them going anywhere.

Yeah, but the goth subculture started in the 1980s.

I don't know, man. I sure saw a lot of Marilyn Manson and Slipknot shirts during the sacking of Rome.

[Rob]

Of course this accusation is undeserved, but I don't think it is necessarily trolling if someone really believes in Taylor Swift. I can't help myself:

1. Business Savvy: Prior to Taylor Swift it was just assumed that the album was going to go the way of the buggy whip or embarrassment in taking welfare as a totem from a bygone era. However, the album 1989 as a whole, was something that she put an enormous amount of energy into. This is saying something because she has spent a decade making albums that give her fans a better bang for than their buck than any other artist today. But her she went all in. She doubled down. 1989 could have been a flop, mind you. Her country fans could have hated her Emo and rebelled at the thought of seeing their apple pie sweet girl become the mega-diva with pop anthems. She could have failed. But she didn't. Bare in mind this a girl that has pretty much owned the music industry for the better part of a decade and she's only 26. She has created a persona (again, not always fun to watch, but interesting to her fans nonetheless), and she has ridden it all the way to the bank. She continues to use her business model to give her fans so much more than the average musician does. Think of the an album around 2000--Sugar Ray or something. The millennium saw musicians slap a few songs on the bookends of a CD with a moderate hit, and then play it to death on the radio whilst complaining about piracy on the internet. Taylor Swift changed all that. She embraced people listening to her music--even if it was pirated. She put everything into the album concept because you can't pirate a WHOLE album--the photos in it, the lyrics contained in them. It's all packaged to make her fans want to BUY it--not steal it. That's a key distinction in an industry where stars will do anything for one hit and then guard the rights to it. She essentially made the album concept relevant again by packaging HERSELF with the album. She says to her fans, "I'm your friend, this mix-tape I made for you will cheer you up". Now, again, it's probably not something we all enjoy. But you can't deny the importance of a musician selling herself to her fans. She has a way of staying both aloof and homespun that is absolutely fascinating to watch from purely a business angle (I'm a financier, so I'm biased). Her albums continue to break records and that's saying something today where you can get Heinz 57 flavors on the radio or in your car. You can love her or you can hate her, but you simply can't call yourselves musical critics if you ignore the way in which she seamlessly transitioned her business angle from country girl to pop diva. Carrie Underwood can't do it. Kelly Clarkson wouldn't do it. This is the era of the most creative freedom for women in the history of music. And who stands on top of the flagpole? It's a laydown. Whether you like her music or not is irrelevant through that prism. If we're going to give KISS credit for selling a ton albums in 1979, then we need to give Taylor even more credit for blowing KISS out of the water.

There is not a thing said here that doesn't also go for Adele, Beyoncé or Lady Gaga, to just limit it to female pop stars that are Swift's contemporaries. They all did it before Swift released 1989 too.

1989 is not just a mishmash of synth the way Carly Rae Jepsen's (critically acclaimed, I might add) album is. It is cohesive with a deft touch I've never before seen. The songs all belong on that album and they feel like they belong in the order they are in much the same way Sgt. Pepper's is. She has created a whole new genre of music with one eye towards the 1980s pop anthems and another towards empowerment. I believe there has been no finer song in that genre than Blank Space. It is an absolute masterpiece of musicianship. She seems to say, "Here's who you think I am, I'll go ahead and be that thing you all want me to be", in a defiant voice that reminds me of Debbie Harry saying, "So, you think I'm just a Playboy model?"

First of all: the 80's have had a revival for quite a few years now. Too much if you ask me. When 1989 hit in 2014 it was already a deep cliché. Empowerment, that other pillar of Swift, is also very prescient in female oriented pop since at least the nineties and has not gone away. You find it in anything from The Spice Girls, to Beyoncé (empowered in songs for almost twenty years now) to Lorde. Speaking of Lorde, Blank Space has been compared too the style Lorde had on her 2013 album a lot. The stance Swift takes in that song, ironically taking the position people expect her to, was basically what Lily Allen based her whole career on.

Mind you I like Swift and think Blank Space is pretty great (there are songs from 1989 that I can't stand though, like Style and especially Bad Blood), but I just don't think she is very original. She appropriates trends in pop music. So did The Beatles and David Bowie, but they at least picked trends that weren't all that visible in the mainstream, while Lorde, Lily Allen, Beyoncé and Lady Gaga all had hits. At her best, Swift has a great ear for a pop tune and in her genre she is definitely talented. I also thinks that she has shown character throughout all this. So yes, I like her, but I don't think she has earned the status of major artist yet. Though she might grow still.

[bootsy]

I didn't read all of what the OP typed but goodness gracious after a paragraph I couldn't take it anymore and you know if I can't take it anymore then something is definitely wrong. LOL.

[babydoll]

I stop to read here : " pass yourselves off as the musical experts that you claim to be.." and I laught!

Where did Bruce conspiracykiller have found this idear?

For a good laugh, let me direct you to Bruce's European commies post.
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1105&p=12540#p12540

And, conspiracykiller, Carrie Underwood had a HUGE pop hit with Before He Cheats.

[Live in Phoenix]

I stop to read here : " pass yourselves off as the musical experts that you claim to be.." and I laught!

Where did Bruce conspiracykiller have found this idear?

For a good laugh, let me direct you to Bruce's European commies post.
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1105&p=12540#p12540

And, conspiracykiller, Carrie Underwood had a HUGE pop hit with Before He Cheats.

And my sentiment in THAT thread was basically, Please familiarize yourself with this site before making some long-ass, hostile post.

Taylor Swift, nice musician.

[Nick]

I stop to read here : " pass yourselves off as the musical experts that you claim to be.." and I laught!

Where did Bruce conspiracykiller have found this idear?

For a good laugh, let me direct you to Bruce's European commies post.
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1105&p=12540#p12540

And, conspiracykiller, Carrie Underwood had a HUGE pop hit with Before He Cheats.

I propose that once you reach 3,000 posts, you get the title of "European Communist".

[Live in Phoenix]

We could also have a poll, "Should we listen to music?"

[luney6]

I stop to read here : " pass yourselves off as the musical experts that you claim to be.." and I laught!

Where did Bruce conspiracykiller have found this idear?

For a good laugh, let me direct you to Bruce's European commies post.
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1105&p=12540#p12540

And, conspiracykiller, Carrie Underwood had a HUGE pop hit with Before He Cheats.

I propose that once you reach 3,000 posts, you get the title of "European Communist".

This would actually be sick. I vote YES!

[Romain]

Hey guys!
I'm european and I actually vote for the communist in each elections!

Why I have to wait for obtain the famous title? it's scandalous!

[BleuPanda]

You must contribute more to the party to be a true communist.

[Romain]

"Camarade", what is your solution with this Taylor Swift problem?

[Listyguy]

I was avoiding this thread for a while because it seemed like a Bruce type thread...But I see the troll has left a comment and not returned since. Interesting. So it's probably not Bruce.

[Nick]

Taylor Swift's got an album out called "Red". Red is the de facto color of communism. Coincidence? I think not.

[babydoll]

I was avoiding this thread for a while because it seemed like a Bruce type thread...But I see the troll has left a comment and not returned since. Interesting. So it's probably not Bruce.

Ugh, don't you remember? Bruce does not like anything that wasn't made by an artist who was making music pre-1967.

And I like to vote yes on the 3000 posts = European communist. It's a sick name.

[luney6]

I was avoiding this thread for a while because it seemed like a Bruce type thread...But I see the troll has left a comment and not returned since. Interesting. So it's probably not Bruce.

Ugh, don't you remember? Bruce does not like anything that wasn't made by an artist who was making music pre-1967.

And I like to vote yes on the 3000 posts = European communist. It's a sick name.

It would be sweeter if we came up with a bunch of other names like this too. Like you get one every 1000 or so? Or maybe you can choose, but only once.

[Maschine_Man]

[Henry]

I can understand why an outsider might find our approach to rigidly confining our discussion of each album and song to a specific years as a bit constraining because many albums and songs sell and have initial popularity for multiple years.

[BleuPanda]

I can understand why an outsider might find our approach to rigidly confining our discussion of each album and song to a specific years as a bit constraining because many albums and songs sell and have initial popularity for multiple years.

But it's the combined problem of
a) they could have done a little bit of research to find out why it wouldn't have appeared in our 2015 list (since why would we vote for Shake It Off in 2015 when we had already done so for the previous year?)
b) they immediately accuse us of hating on Taylor Swift and imply we know nothing about music

There's a difference in approach; if someone asked why we didn't have Taylor Swift on our list, we could have politely pointed them in the correct direction to show that we do, in fact. The problem comes in when your initial message in a community is entirely hostile.

[Henry]

I can understand why an outsider might find our approach to rigidly confining our discussion of each album and song to a specific years as a bit constraining because many albums and songs sell and have initial popularity for multiple years.

But it's the combined problem of
a) they could have done a little bit of research to find out why it wouldn't have appeared in our 2015 list (since why would we vote for Shake It Off in 2015 when we had already done so for the previous year?)
b) they immediately accuse us of hating on Taylor Swift and imply we know nothing about music

There's a difference in approach; if someone asked why we didn't have Taylor Swift on our list, we could have politely pointed them in the correct direction to show that we do, in fact. The problem comes in when your initial message in a community is entirely hostile.

I understand your point about the hostility of the initial poster and very much appreciate that this forum does not condone hostility generally. My vague recollection is that listyguy started off on this forum as a rather young teenager and came off initially as a tad hostile to some. But, look where listyguy is today

I approach initial hostility a bit differently than others because I want to learn from those who have opinions that differ from mine and I realize that the written word can come off in ways that are not clearly intended.

[luney6]

When someone posts like this, might as well have a bit of fun with it....

[jamieW]

I think I've been around long enough for everyone to know that I'm a very respectful, non-confrontational person. And my post to conspiracykiller was probably the most confrontational post (maybe my only confrontational post) since I've been on the forum. I think it was just the finality of his post (and maybe it's wrong to assume gender here) that got under my skin. If we don't "respect" "1989," then we shouldn't be listening to music at all (even the infamous Bruce never made such a comment). I wasn't just annoyed by the ridiculous generalization, but the lack of response after he was shown to be wrong was even worse. After BleuPanda's initial post pointing out his mistake, he could've just posted again to apologize for his aggressive remarks. Instead, he just disappears into thin air. Although not nearly as bad, it just reminded me of the internet cowards that post horrific remarks regarding political and social issues on Yahoo (aptly named), simply because they can remain anonymous. The world just seems to be overflowing with uninformed, hateful fools, and I made a connection that, perhaps, I shouldn't have. Thank God this forum seems to be a complete exception to that rule, since I may not always agree with everyone, but I could never accuse any of the regular posters in this forum of not being thoughtful.

[Dexter]

15 years from now Taylor Swift will be a first ballot Rock and Rock Hall of Fame inductee. She will be inducted by none other than President Kanye West (ruling under martial law since 2020) who recounted the moment he made her famous. In her speech, Taylor Swift made a swipe at those passing themselves off as musical experts circa 2015-2016 who failed to see how she revolutionized music, starting from her sublime self-titled debut to the industry saving 1989 album.