yep. i'm still working on that mefi amp skin... February 16, 2002 10:57 PM   Subscribe

yep. i'm still working on that mefi amp skin...
posted by jcterminal to MetaFilter-Related at 10:57 PM (56 comments total)



if you've got ideas, throw them.
posted by jcterminal at 10:57 PM on February 16, 2002


A MF icon in the bottom right corner may look nice. Also the Filter part isn't clearly visiblie because of the arch. Good job though :)
posted by riffola at 11:00 PM on February 16, 2002


Tori Amos?
Yeah, jcterminal, my suggestion would be to go listen to some man's musi-

Oh, wait, I can't do that, since I up loaded some Tori to filepile last month.
Damn that Torres and his incriminating, wuss-music revealing archives.

That skin is coming along quite nicely, by the way.
posted by dong_resin at 11:20 PM on February 16, 2002


Nice work so far jcterminal. You may consider choosing one of the random site taglines and adding that to the top.. can't think of anything else, though, which is probably a good sign.
posted by Hildago at 11:57 PM on February 16, 2002


Sure, make it usable?

Honestly, this is the first time I have to put my foot down on anything metafilter-related, but I'm not comfortable with you putting the name "metafilter" on something I didn't design. I'd like to design my own winamp skin one day, and the focus would be on improving the usability of winamp, giving appropriate feedback to users, clearing displaying pertinent information, and optimizing the workflow of the program (how often does anyone actually touch the speaker balance? never? I thought so. So why is it the same size as the volume control, which I personally use frequently?). So, I hate to give this project the kiss of death, but I'm not comfortable giving it my stamp of approval.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 1:00 AM on February 17, 2002


I hate to ask...but why would you want a MeFi WinAmp skin? Designed by jcterminal, Matt or anyone? I just dont get it. I'm not casting aspersions, just...really don't see the correlation.
posted by Kafkaesque at 1:08 AM on February 17, 2002


how often does anyone actually touch the speaker balance? never?

*cries*

Winamp design has some fundamental usability issues, that I have doubt about any skin's ability to solve (I'm one to talk, of course, being that I'm using Fossil 2002 for my skin).

Well, jcterminal, time for a Motafulter skin. Just like these VASA cards that came in my wallet.
posted by j.edwards at 2:40 AM on February 17, 2002


That's Ori Amos, Tori's unknown sister who's in a Tori Amos cover band.
posted by alan at 2:56 AM on February 17, 2002


...the focus would be on improving the usability of winamp, giving appropriate feedback to users, clearing displaying pertinent information, and optimizing the workflow of the program.

I have an easy solution: iTunes 2
posted by evanizer at 3:15 AM on February 17, 2002


Yep, and iTunes is even free!
After you drop the money for a Mac.
Gee thanks, Evanizer.
posted by Su at 4:11 AM on February 17, 2002


WinAmp is even free after you drop the money for a PC.
Gee thanks, Su.
posted by nedrichards at 4:52 AM on February 17, 2002


*sigh*

nedrichards, Su was responded to evanzier's suggestion that people who were already using WinAmp switch to iTunes, for which they would have to buy a Mac. Since they already were presumably already using a PC, they would have already dropped the money for one.

Winamp's design is dubious at best, but the near-ubiquity of the program (and thus common knowledge of it and accessorization for it) make it a better choice than most others. The plethora of Winamp skins is evidence of this.

If Matt would rather make his own MeFi Winamp skin, that is his perogative. Jcterminal, e-mail me when you're done with yours, I'd love a copy.
posted by j.edwards at 5:02 AM on February 17, 2002


yeah, me too, if you're giving them away. I'll even take it with the big speaker button.


posted by ashbury at 8:02 AM on February 17, 2002


mathowie, way harsh :(
posted by kv at 9:17 AM on February 17, 2002


That's what prison life will do to you.
posted by ColdChef at 9:59 AM on February 17, 2002


mathowie, way harsh :(

Um, he built the place. It's on his resume. It's his most visible advertisement and best asset on the job market. The MeFi brand is one of the most recognizable on the web, and that's to Matt's credit.

jcterminal's design is nice, but apparently not up to Matt's standards for what a design should be if it's going to represent MetaFilter. Respect that.
posted by gleuschk at 10:15 AM on February 17, 2002


I hope that's just an early beta version (no offense), because it looks almost exactly like the base skin, but with a different logo and different colors.

There's a lot you could do with a MeFi winamp skin.

Instead of the ADD button on the playlist, it could read POST.

Just work on the whole package, jcterminal, take off the logo, and let it be the unnofficial MeFi skin.
posted by insomnyuk at 10:41 AM on February 17, 2002

I have doubt about any skin's ability to solve (I'm one to talk, of course, being that I'm using Fossil 2002 for my skin).
Winamp 3 allows proper themes and not just skins. Versions prior do skins by breaking up an image and assuming that 5px down and right is the stop button which is 30px wide. You can only replace the graphics and not the layout.

FreeAMP has had themes for a while now.
posted by holloway at 2:24 PM on February 17, 2002


Um, he built the place. It's on his resume. It's his most visible advertisement and best asset on the job market.

So fair use applies to corporations you don't like but when it comes down to your on-line buddy no one can even borrow his color scheme? Hello double standard.

The problem I have with Matt's post is that he assumes that whoever sees this skin will think its his work. I've got the radiohead skin on winamp right now and I never imagined it to be created by the guys in radiohead or anyone they're affiliated with. I'm sure 99% of the people who are going to run into this are going to assume the same thing, this was made by a fan.

Matt could say 'don't use my trademark', and that would be fair. But he certainly can't control the blue and yellow scheme, regardless of how horrible the skin is. Actually I think it looks sharp, but I would never use it. Too rah-rah mefite fandom for me.
posted by skallas at 3:00 PM on February 17, 2002


The problem I have with Matt's post is that he assumes that whoever sees this skin will think its his work

It's a small site on the web if you want to compare it against a very well-known band in the world of music, and I would say most people seeing the skin would think it was created by someone that runs the site.

I just said I'd rather do my own skin if it will say "metafilter" on it anywhere. Usability is something I take very seriously and I wouldn't want something out there that was less than optimized and had the site's logo on it. To me, it's like you deciding tomorrow to print t-shirts with the site's name on it. I wouldn't feel comfortable with anyone else doing that besides myself.

But he certainly can't control the blue and yellow scheme

I never made such a claim. Did anyone say that? Use any two websafe hues you want. Go nuts, I don't care.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 4:14 PM on February 17, 2002


**sitting here wishing he had never brought up the idea in the first place**
posted by jonmc at 4:25 PM on February 17, 2002


To me, it's like you deciding tomorrow to print t-shirts with the site's name on it.

To be fair, I did say you have every right to your trademark which includes your logo. Whether or not someone will think you made it is arguable I guess. In the end each skin has an author's name attached to it.

So what if jcterminal releases a "Mamp" skin with the same design? Is it still wrong?
posted by skallas at 4:49 PM on February 17, 2002


Y'know when I first proposed that someone create a MeFi skin, I did it for the same reason I used to doodle the Twisted Sister logo on my notebooks in junior high, partly in tribute to something I'm proud to be a part of and partly to spread the word about this neat thing we've created. If that's "Too rah-rah mefite fandom," for some people, well, excuse me for being so gauche as to publicly declare that I actually like something.
Quite frankly, I think the abovementioned impulses are what motivate most skinners who do "tribute" skins to bands/movies/supermodels/whatever. I honestly figured Matt would make one himself or farm it out to one of the more graphically inclined members. Since it's his sites name on the skin, he should have the final say, just out of respect if nothing else.
I'm actually a little bummed that what seemed like a neat little idea has sown so much discord. Sorry everyone.
Obviously, skallas he can't stop jcterminal from using the color scheme any more than Morris Levy can copyright the words "rock and roll"(which he tried to do FYI).


posted by jonmc at 5:04 PM on February 17, 2002


skallas:
To be fair, I did say you have every right to your trademark which includes your logo.

I shouldn't have used t-shirts as an example, because it's not a trademark thing, it's that I know how to use photoshop, I know how to prepare silkscreens and I know how to imprint ink on t-shirts. I would have a problem with someone else making shirts in their own design because I have an idea of what a metafilter shirt is, and I doubt anyone else giving it a try will get close to it.

jonmc:
I'm actually a little bummed that what seemed like a neat little idea has sown so much discord

I didn't intend to shit on anyone's parade here. If you really want to make a metafilter-themed winamp skin in blue and yellowish green go ahead, I have no problem with that, but don't call it "metafilter" and I won't point others to it, because I'd prefer to create a skin that is as easy to use as the site.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 5:40 PM on February 17, 2002


ok. not worth my trouble. i'll stop now.

i'm not even going to talk about how pissed i am over this.
posted by jcterminal at 5:58 PM on February 17, 2002


i'm not even going to talk about how pissed i am over this.

Please enlighten me. I've never had a problem with anyone doing metafilter-related things because they've all asked me first. Stuff like "Can I do a metafilter book club?" "Can I make a metafilter service to keep track of people's bookmarks?" I've said yes to. If you would have emailed me, I would have explained why I'd rather do one myself, and if you really wanted to do it, go ahead and don't put the logo on the skin.

Anyone who knows me knows that I'm not the type of person who takes anything too seriously, I'm not going to start sending cease and desist letters to anyone linking to the site, and I don't have a big problem with people using my work as an inspiration for their designs (I do hate outright copy jobs though).

I'm sad to see anyone is pissed or angry or at all unhappy about this, I'd just rather do my own winamp skin, and I typically hate 99.9999% of winamp skins due to their decreased usability. Heck, jcterminal, we could work together on this if you wanted to. I would put a significant amount of work into it, so I wouldn't take on this project lightly. I've longed for a useful skin and have been meaning to create my own for over two years.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 6:14 PM on February 17, 2002


I've never used a skin for more than a day or two because they usually make things worse...
But this MeFi skin/color scheme doesn't make Winamp worse.
But can a new skin say, "MeFi"? Or "more addictive than crack"? I'd doubt you have copyright/trademark on those.

And Matt, how can you make a winamp skin to increase usability without changing Winamp to be unrecognizable?
And I realize that there aren't really copyrights on design and interface, but wouldn't that just be more trouble, possible legal trouble, than is worth? I don't want to say you should endorse jcterminal's, because I understand you wouldn't want it to say "Metafilter", but still...why is it any better if it says "MeFi/MeTa"?
posted by jacobw at 6:39 PM on February 17, 2002


But on a lighter note:
Matt, when can we expect the Official skin?
posted by jacobw at 6:41 PM on February 17, 2002


I'd doubt you have copyright/trademark on those

I don't have a trademark on anything, and I'm not going to go after anyone who uses the site's title in anything. I merely mentioned that I didn't like the proposed design and would prefer to do it myself. I probably should have said I'd like to have some significant input on it it anyone wants to do it.

Matt, how can you make a winamp skin to increase usability without changing Winamp to be unrecognizable?

I don't understand why a usable winamp would have to be unrecognizable, but I know how I'd start designing a winamp skin. The buttons to control playback would be large. The most often used buttons would be larger than lesser used buttons. Colors would be high contrast so it would be easy to hit the control buttons. The volume would be easy to grab and see, and the balance would be almost non-existant. The shuffle button would clearly indicate what state it was on (almost every skin gets this wrong) as well as the loop button. It's quite possible to meet those goals without drastically changing winamp to the point where it is unrecognizable.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 6:46 PM on February 17, 2002


mat, just because i SAID i was pissed, doesn't mean i was going to stay that way.

i wandered off, thought about it, and cooled down. i did vent over it, but i think i just over-reacted.

sorry, it was a sudden and unexpected kick in the balls after the last thread. my anger was due to shock i think.

but like i said, i'm over it, and i'd be quite happy to work with you on this. send me a note about what you see so far, and then we'll play tennis with it until we're both happy. how's that sound?
posted by jcterminal at 7:35 PM on February 17, 2002

It's quite possible to meet those goals without drastically changing winamp to the point where it is unrecognizable.
Not in pre Winamp 3. This skin is quite good considering the limitations.
posted by holloway at 8:43 PM on February 17, 2002


mathowie, it's a fan thing. it doesn't have to be an official skin. why stomp on people who are just enjoying the site and enjoying their enjoyment of it?! if I made Star Wars, I might think most of the fans' winamp skins were dumb, but it's just some fun. !
posted by kv at 8:53 PM on February 17, 2002


Being a Mac user, I know nothing of these 'skins' of which you speak, Captain, but may I offer a suggestion?

Why not call the skin "MusicFilter", which would give it it's own identity. You could use similar themes/colors of the 'Filter proper, but make it something really unique by ironing out the terrible design decisions of the standard skin. This way the skin would also have a conceptual connection to the site, being a place where you go to listen to music/filter out good tunes. Thus, while being an homage to MeFi, it would also be a cool accessory to boot.

Just a thought, making it something more than just a cool fan skin.
posted by evanizer at 9:29 PM on February 17, 2002


So fair use applies to corporations you don't like but when it comes down to your on-line buddy no one can even borrow his color scheme? Hello double standard.


How soon we forget the 123cheaphosting incident! I don't think there's a double standard.
posted by aaron at 11:55 PM on February 17, 2002


unfortunatley, as far as i know winamp has never had an official ui designer on staff. in fact winamp was made by a bunch of programmers who wanted to play their mp3's. the whole skinning "functionality" got tacked on later and it was met with a throng of pretty but not too functional skins. i'll admit i have a couple skins i use under winamp, and i tend to use them because they are in fact "pretty". even if i have used them for close to two years i still fumble for the play and pause buttons when my phone rings at work.

[suck did an article close to two years ago about some of the inherent problems with skins that jibes with most of my feelings which can be digested here. i won't go any deeper into the diatribe on the problems with most skins seeing as how they're my opinions and not of much consequence anyhow.]

i can understand matt's reluctance to let anyone make a skin for something that has such a poor ui, let alone something that bears the name of something he's poured himself into - but i also understand jcterminal's desire to contribute something more than a post here and a comment there to a community that he feels he's a part of. while i like jcterminal's skin [or at least what i've seen so far. seriously, if it looks that good once you're done let me know and i'll add it to my short list of skins.] i think the only way it should be distributed is if it's labeled as a "fan skin" sans the mefi name. if the desire's there to do an official skin, working together is probably the only way this could get done without anyone's feelings getting hurt and also keeping the integrity of official mefi product at it's highest level.

if this sounds like an idea, may i suggest that y'all shoot for winamp 3.x tho seeing as how one would have a bit more control of the ui via it's xml layout?

"it'll destroy you if you try to make it mean anything to anyone but yourself." - henry rollins
posted by boogah at 12:38 AM on February 18, 2002


I've read a bit more about this winamp 3 of which you speak. Is it the mozilla of music players? I mean, I know it comes from the same (broader) company and all it just seems to share similar XML/XUL style.

Which in my opinion is a good thing. Talking of Mozilla, the MozAmp2 skin is the only one that I find better than the traditional one for the 'mathowie test' (finding pause is quicker).
posted by nedrichards at 3:27 AM on February 18, 2002


No, it's just version 3 of Winamp, and allows for free-form skinning. Big whoop. Frankly, it would be nice to see somebody make a skin with Matt's intentions behind it. Most programs with free-form skinning just end up being unfamiliar on top of unusable, since the people making skins 1. completely redo the UI and 2. know nothing about information/interface design. They just think it "looks neat."

Something I found interesting about the program is that apparently, the changes are little more than cosmetic, not counting the media library. It has the exact same audio decoder as the previous version. This is odd, since one of the main things I've seen about Winamp from people who use other programs is that they provide better audio quality. Whatever, it's good enough for me, but still.
posted by Su at 5:51 AM on February 18, 2002


they provide better audio quality.

aside: There is an excellent plug-in to increase sound quality for winamp.. It's second or third down on the "most downloaded" list, I believe.
posted by j.edwards at 5:58 AM on February 18, 2002


Thanks, I'd hoped that it might have been part of a general rethinking and opening of interfaces at AOL. Obviously slightly wishful there.

And yes, I can't notice an audio difference either, but then again I do listen to mp3's in 48kps so as to fit as many as possible onto my 32mb card. :-)
posted by nedrichards at 6:41 AM on February 18, 2002


Matt did indeed create this place but that doesn't by itself give him supreme authority. He created it for the public. Not the all-nice public. Not the all-snarky public. The public in all of its negative and positive glory. He opened the box so let him deal with the consequences.

I'm constantly debating whether he has read books on alienating the public or simply has applied his own theory.

To Matt: You built a great website. You were on the cover of Brill's Content. You know Kottke. Please get over yourself.
posted by ttrendel at 9:51 PM on February 18, 2002


I'm constantly debating whether he has read books on alienating the public or simply has applied his own theory.

To Matt: You built a great website. You were on the cover of Brill's Content. You know Kottke. Please get over yourself.


I don't mean to speak of behalf of Matt, but ttrendel, what the hell are you talking about? The MetaFilter name is copywritten. It's Matt's. Sony makes all sorts of products for the public, but the public cannot put the brand name on anything. Obviously, as Matt has already said, he won't go after those who abuse his brand. He simply asks for people to ask for his permission to use HIS creation's name.

I personally did not like the skin. It was simply the MeFi colors and logo thrown onto the base skin. I can't say what Matt was thinking, but I can say that if he wants to create his own skin with his name, he has that right. He also has the right to ask others not to use the MeFi name.

In regards to getting over himself, dude, methinks you have a slight inferiority complex. Matt ain't a fucking god, but certainly he has free reign over his own site. You are a guest. I am a guest. Don't like it? Start a MetaTalk thread about how it was better before Matt was such as ass and get the fuck out.
posted by BlueTrain at 10:13 PM on February 18, 2002


Wow Bluetrain..you've typed exactly 3 paragraphs without saying anything. I believe that I did append such a thread. Your point?
posted by ttrendel at 10:27 PM on February 18, 2002


My point? I'm sorry, those paragraphs didn't represent my point? My fault, perhaps a more condescending tone and arrogant attitude would help you understand. Sadly, I ain't biting. You don't get it? Have someone read it to you, slowly.
posted by BlueTrain at 10:29 PM on February 18, 2002


Maybe you should have someone read it to yourself, Bluetrain. Your post said nothing new.
You didn't like the skin? Wow. We care. Please tell me what changes you would make to the base skin (without kissing Matt's ass)? What changes? Please tell me. I would love to hear what an uneducated asshole's impressions are on usability. I'm sure that your opinion is groundbreaking.
posted by ttrendel at 10:51 PM on February 18, 2002


Christ ttrendel, what's your problem?

If you look at the past three years of history here, you'll see that I had no problem with people having metafilter gatherings, metafilter bookclubs, metafilter donation drives, metafilter scholarships, and parody after metafilter parody. If someone wanted to start a metafilter movie club tomorrow, I wouldn't care.

I only take a few things seriously, and it certainly isn't myself. I take the interface and usability of the things I use everyday seriously. That includes metafilter and metatalk, and also things like winamp. I have in my mind the perfect skin for winamp, and I don't think jcterminal's first crack above is it. I'd prefer to do it myself. Just like I'd prefer to design any new section of metafilter myself. I'm sorry if that seems like I'm alienating people here, but it's something I'd rather do myself if it is going to say "metafilter" all over it.

If you don't like what I've said in this thread, and everyone is an uneducated asshole, why do you visit the site?
posted by mathowie (staff) at 11:16 PM on February 18, 2002


Metafilter Movie Club. Hmmmm. First movie? The War Room. Apt title, gets all those political things out of the way. Hoo-daddy. Or maybe The Breakfast Club?
posted by owillis at 11:29 PM on February 18, 2002


ttrendel, if you can't understand Matt's point of view from a personal perspective, then understand it from a legal perspective.

It's pretty obvious this is something he has wanted to do for some time. That doesn't mean he is going to do it today, or tomorrow, or even this year. He's not stopping anyone putting out a Mefi skin, just asking that they make it clear it's a fan skin, by not appending the logo which he designed.

"Maybe you should have someone read it to yourself, Bluetrain. Your post said nothing new."

That sounds like something little kids say to each other when they don't want to listen, just want to argue.

In a perfect world, it would have been better if he had spoken up in the first thread regarding this, but the fact that he didn't is more because he often tries to be everthing to everyone, to be too nice, in other words, rather than the fact that he was trying to hurt Jcterminal's feelings.

It's clear that if people want to do something that incorporates Metafilter or the Metafilter logo Matt prefers a polite email outlining the request rather than being put on the spot in a public setting. I think that's fair.

Having said that, I really like the skin, and I hope JCT puts it out as a fan skin.
posted by lucien at 7:33 AM on February 19, 2002


Evanizer said: (if I fscked that up, just scroll up)

Why not call the skin "MusicFilter", which would give it it's own identity. You could use similar themes/colors of the 'Filter proper, but make it something really unique by ironing out the terrible design decisions of the standard skin. This way the skin would also have a conceptual connection to the site, being a place where you go to listen to music/filter out good tunes. Thus, while being an homage to MeFi, it would also be a cool accessory to boot.


Personally, I like this idea, and (duck!) it got me to thinking: how about (with, hey, Matt's permission) trying to put together some sort of actual MusicFilter gadget, a sort of MeFi radio playlist?

To be clear, I'm not talking about Matt or MeFi streaming mp3s out to folks. I'm suggesting a dynamic playlist, with links to songs being submitted to the MusicFilter page/thing/whatever, which then stores the playlist, for quick fetching (by what means, I don't know, it'd be cool to get WinAmp/YourFavoritePlayer to automatically access it) whenever anyone feels like getting an earful of MeFi musical wackiness.

Typing the idea out has made it easy for me to see how much of this I'm not actually sure how to implement, but hey, there are some clever people hereabouts, so...anybody like this idea? Anybody know how it might be gotten to be happening? Like Yoda I talk?

posted by cortex at 4:22 PM on February 19, 2002


I think that's an excellent idea cortex. It is sort of what I was getting at, but I didn't have the courage to mention it, being a wuss and a newbie and a geek who couldn't code his way out of a paper bag. But music comes up here a lot, and I think it would be a great asset. It could be a SportsFilter type seperate entity perhaps... count me in.
posted by evanizer at 4:31 PM on February 19, 2002


this would be pretty easy to do, actually. There are automated ways to stream up your playlists, that look like this.

I could create some sort of page that linked to everyone's lists, or have people send them to metafilter and put them all together.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 5:11 PM on February 19, 2002


There's one big issue that's bugging me, though.

Imagine, for a moment, that there's a nifty MusicFilter (not to imply its existence by my repeated use of the name, but I've got to call it something) gadget up and behaving, approximately like so:

People toss in links to .mp3s (and .mods and .wavs and?) they find online;

Those links get assembled into playlist formats for various popular players as well as a plain page (perhaps the Front Page) of hrefs and some sort of posting comment description (perhaps/hopefully with a MeFi thread-commentary functionality);

People come to this MusicFilter, either through their happily automated fetch-me-a-playlist means or through their browser window, and they behold, and download, some wacky eclectic musical things.

ISSUE:

What sort of effect does this have on the owners of the sites from which these mp3s are being linked? Will this be a Slashdot anathema for small web-site owners?

My original notion was that there would be no central MuFi-owned server/account on which the Filtered musical selections would be stored**, and I stand by that, for the moment. Given that the files will be accessed in place, how much traffic would we be looking at for Joe Musician who has some interesting mp3s posted? Would the impact of a song being on the MusicFilter playlist for a day or two be prohibitively damaging to poor Joe? I know my friends would be irate if I started sucking up our server's DSL-based bandwidth with a bunch of downloads of my music; it would go beyond "irate" if we got into excessive-bandwidth penalties and surcharges.

Is this overly conservative on my part? If this is a serious problem with the whole idea, how could we work around it? While I would very much like to see some sort of MusicFilter thing happen, I'd hate to become the bane of small-time website owners in the process.

Thoughts?

(**The alternative is that someone will have to pay for the space and the bandwidth of a lot of traffic -- a Mb for every minute or two of music, multiplied by how much listening time per user, multiplied by how many users? -- and sure as hell am not in a position to pay for it.

Regardless, even if some wonderful philanthropist was willing to fund a centralized server for the MusicFilter to store files on, there is another problem: linking to an mp3 is pretty damn defensible, this being the WWW an all, but copying mp3 files from diverse sources might be asking for copyright troubles. Not necessarily, but it strikes me as a sticky area.)
posted by cortex at 5:16 PM on February 19, 2002


Heh. Two quick things:

1. That last, lumbering comment of mine is not really a response to anyone but myself; the "though", on a third glance, makes it sound -- to me -- like I'm responding to your comment, Matt (or maybe yours, Evanizer).

2. That page you linked to kills my computer, Matt. Arcane problem with hardware conflicts, but yeah. You found the "die" button. :)
posted by cortex at 5:33 PM on February 19, 2002


Actually cortex, why link to a downloadable mp3 at all? like the page I showed, just show title/artist info of currently circulating songs on users' playlists.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 5:52 PM on February 19, 2002


it'd be a neat list of songs, no doubt. of course it would probably have about 50,000 tracks at least, too.
posted by modofo at 6:01 PM on February 19, 2002


One of the things that occured to me as being vital to the whole idea was being able to quickly and directly** get an earful of what other folks were listening to, hence providing a hyperlink to the music in question.

Although, given my worries from above, just sharing artist/title info might be a safer way of doing it.

Regardless, it'd be nice if there was some good discussion involved. Perhaps judicious use of links-to-mp3s inside a music-y thread would be safer...

Hum. I feel like I'm just batting a lot of ideas around here.

(** though I suppose it'd be easy enough for most to kick into gnutella or whatever and grab something interesting-sounding; linking to the file just cuts out the middleman, for music that is at all well-circulated, and cuts out the frustration for music that isn't, which may be a lot of what people would want to share.)
posted by cortex at 6:06 PM on February 19, 2002


Think maybe I'm gonna work on a MetaFilter Board Game. *smirk*
posted by ZachsMind at 7:21 PM on February 20, 2002


« Older what about a footnote button?   |   I/P: look, we are behaving Newer »

You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments