Suggestions for Improvement

[contemplativa]

I just discovered this website and it's the best album list I've ever seen. Here are a few suggestions to make this site the ultimate battle station in the universe:

1. Aggregate all of the user lists into one list, then make that list one and only one entry alongside the professional lists. As much as I might like to think that my "20 Greatest" represents God's favorite all time albums, I don't think my top twenty, or anyone else's, should have as much weight as the Rolling Stone 500 (which is itself an aggregate of voters). I realize I can customize to make this list for myself, but we're talking all time here. This will also help people take this website more seriously and it will make the list less likely to change drastically from day to day. Speaking of the RS 500, I noticed tons of albums are missing from that list. All 500 should be included.

2. Eliminate old issues of Q magazine. Q is one of those delightful British magazines that puts out a new Greatest list every 35 minutes. This gives Q an unfair advantage over other professional lists. When Q or anyone else puts out their new list of the 101 Toppermost Albums tomorrow, the previous ones should be considered obsolete.

3. Make a Wikipedia page devoted to this list so it gets more exposure and more user votes.

4. Let's rock!

[albummaster]

Hi contemplativa, thanks for the suggestions. The reason that the whole 500 RS albums were not included was to restrict the albums on this site to the absolute cream of music and we felt that 100 albums was a fair size-limit to impose on all of the charts on this site (we have to set some boundaries somewhere.)

It's a good point about Q, I think we could maybe just include their latest chart when calculating the overall rank rather than also including the previous ones but it's nice to see how their list changes over time and which albums fall out of favour etc. I think we can look at this and maybe adjust things to achieve this along the lines you're suggesting.

I didn't quite understand how you mean to combine the user lists into one entry? At the moment all the charts get aggregated and the overall positions do not change that much in terms of the top 100. We can add something so you generate a chart solely based on user rankings excluding certain types of chart (suggested previously that charts containing more than x entries by one band shouldn't be counted.)

I think these charts are not science, everyone has their own preference as to how it should be generated. If we can provide the tools to allow you to generate an overall chart how you like then maybe that is the best way of making everyone happy.

Regarding Wikipedia, it's against their rules to promote your own causes (so we can't write an article about ourselves), but our site is listed as a reference on relevant articles such as RS 500 and Time's Top 100.

Thanks for the great feedback, much appreciated and taken on board.

albummaster

[contemplativa]

Thanks, albummaster. I like your responses, they're well reasoned. Keep up the good work!

[Elston]

I was reading about the RS 500 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolling_St...f_All_Time) and saw the link for this site towards the bottom and that is how i stumbled upon it.

[contemplativa]

yeah, that's how I found it too.

[martintho]

i understand it's just a temporary (?) experiment this thing about only a half point for ratings. it should however be the other way around, as for example song-ratings is very much missed at the time, and band-ratings are so rare that it still is possible to change the top 100 considerable with extreme ratings.

[albummaster]

Hi, please see this thread for discussion on that topic.