not-a-fish wrote: 
did you see my question below? bout it being too late? and, i think my roomie pm'ed you with a question or two.

 not-a-fish wrote: 
I think I finally decided on which theme I'm going with.

 newwavegurly wrote: 

I like that idea - it was the part of my initial a-ha moment.   I'd scroll back, but this thread has gotten pretty big and we haven't even sent out the first month of mixes!

SUCH A COOL THING!

 not-a-fish wrote: 

 Zep wrote: 

Yup - you read my mind!  I am just giving this month's co-hosts (and me) a chance to figure out those playlists first. ;)  Rest assured all playlists will be posted so we can discuss the music and artists.  I promise that was a part of the plan all along!

 newwavegurly wrote: 
I know, I know... that's why I'm very guarded when I sense left-brainitis creepin' in. We all know we have to deal with all of that (ridiculous privacy-invading forms, hard-to-please clients, competitive bidding, etc.) as a part of lives, so when there's an opp'y for something that's almost purely creative, I can get overly protective about it, as in "please don't spoil this." 

The postcard swap also required organization, was very cool, very creative, and there wasn't nearly the amount of "how's it work?" discussion. There's beauty in simplicity.

 jagdriver wrote: 
Just remember that there are a whole lot of us 'round here that are "creatives" as well (whether by profession or specific to music).
 
Thatisall. 

 jagdriver wrote: 


I am diggin it, soul brutha!

Groovy.

 mem_313 wrote: 
Completely potluck, as in roll-yer-own.

 pdhski wrote: 
Roger that. Sorry for the {quasi-rant}.

I'm obviously passionate about the concept from an artistic point of view, so that's my story and I'm stickin' to it.

 Zep wrote: 


Probably already asked and answered, but I am not backscrollin! Does each pod have a theme? Or is it a pick your own mix (as a host)?

 jagdriver wrote: 
No - it's just someone that misses old time hockey, and I was also throwing a bone to NAF, since she spent time in a cold-clime hockeytown (and also confessed her crush on Mike Modano)

 newwavegurly wrote: 

I was thrown off by the "After four months, you're up again" comment.

 jagdriver wrote: 
I was kinda hoping to be the Jazz Czar.

 newwavegurly wrote: 
I sure hope so, J. It just seems that there are some to want to overly-complicate something that's so simple in its design.

(Reminds me of our govmint bureaucrats!)

 maryte wrote: 
I think that's already a part of the plan.

 jagdriver wrote: 
Uh... I believe it's all in jest. You might want to get that "quasi-rant" in check.

 maryte wrote: 
Methinks that's part of the scheme already.

 Zep wrote: 

What about the possibility of reshuffling groups, after each group member has a hand at hosting?  Gives us the opportunity to annoy everyone share our music with a greater number of peeps...

 newwavegurly wrote: 
This is exactly why I'm a graphics and word software guy and not a spreadsheet jock (although I know my way around Excel very well, thanks). This is far too much left-brain thinking, IMHO, whereas the enjoyment of music and creating CD mixes is a primarily a right-brain activity. (Yeah, musical structure falls more into a left-brain arena, to be sure, but listening is right-brain.)

In short, why are folks quick to wanna put this project in boxes? I get it that the founder needs to perform a minimal amount of organization, but let it be just that...minimal. It's the (low-cost) creative aspect of this project that makes it enticing.

EDIT: In short, please don't take a fun thing and make it resemble my work. The concept is in place, it'll work, everyone will dig it, and we don't need to wrap it all up in some formalized structure with org charts and the like. (If that's how the founder wants to do it behind-the-scenes, great.) I also get enough competition out in the real world, so I don't need/want anything tied in with stick and ball sports.