Ryan S

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

James Blount (littlejohnnyjewel@excite.com said:

"...and Ryan (who I've never heard a positive anecdote about)"

Is this true for everyone? I haven't heard any good things either, but maybe some person on iLM can rescue his reputation...

― stephen k, Tuesday, 26 November 2002 21:07 (twenty-three years ago)

are you talking about this guy? http://www.wchstv.com/abc/whoselineisit/ryanstiles.jpg

― chaki (chaki), Tuesday, 26 November 2002 21:12 (twenty-three years ago)

I have hung out with Ryan S quite a few times, and so far as I can tell he's a perfectly nice guy.

That said, this thread topic gives me the fear, insofar as it threatens to tie the stupid pervasive "politics" of online music criticism to judgments about someone's personal character.

― nabisco (nabisco), Tuesday, 26 November 2002 21:23 (twenty-three years ago)

haha, nice one, chaki.

have i told the Hepcat anecdote here? in what brief online experience i had with the guy, he was surprisingly uncooperative for someone who gets by on the good faith of a lot of volunteer employees. but that might've just been me, he seems generally not unpleasant. but not especially sharp or much of a writer either, and way too much of a predictable tool to be the tastemaker he'd so like to be. but yeah, i should hold my tongue more, because nabisco is right, this shouldn't get ugly or personal. but sometimes, he's just asking for it.

― Al (sitcom), Tuesday, 26 November 2002 21:28 (twenty-three years ago)

the stories I've heard had nothing to do with him as a 'person' and everything to do with his editorial abilities and aspirations toward Wennerdom.

― James Blount (James Blount), Tuesday, 26 November 2002 21:31 (twenty-three years ago)

"Rescue his reputation" from hearsay? Lame thread, man.

― Dare, Tuesday, 26 November 2002 21:35 (twenty-three years ago)

Yeah - attacks on/discussions of Pitchfork are fine; but some indefinable line is being crossed with a thread purely about Ryan S., especially one essentially asking people to badmouth him. His personal life is none of our business - his business practises hardly more so unless they're particularly shocking ("wanting to be Jann Wenner" doesn't count, sorry!).

― Tom (Groke), Tuesday, 26 November 2002 21:38 (twenty-three years ago)

So questioning editorial practices is crossing a line? I'll admit that starting a thread devoted purely to Ryan Pitchfork is a bad idea, in that it'll draw out all the people who write for Pitchfork and all the people who want to write for Pitchfork, and frankly that topic's been bled dry (more kittens please!). But I haven't seen any personal attacks any more than is directed at say, Chuck Eddy or Robert Christgau.

― James Blount (James Blount), Tuesday, 26 November 2002 21:42 (twenty-three years ago)

the hear'say revival begins here!!

― mark s (mark s), Tuesday, 26 November 2002 21:45 (twenty-three years ago)

In yr dreams mark

― Andrew L (Andrew L), Tuesday, 26 November 2002 21:47 (twenty-three years ago)

Editorial practises are fine for discussion - they've been discussed in every other Pitchfork thread though. And this thread does not set itself out as being about his writing/editing even if you intended your quoted comment to mean that. Nobody's started a thread "Hey tell me some of your favourite Chuck Eddy stories..."

― Tom (Groke), Tuesday, 26 November 2002 21:50 (twenty-three years ago)

I personally didn't mean to say that there's anything wrong with a discussion of editorial practices -- it's just that I've witnessed a whole lot of personal sniping about a lot of things over the past two days, and it greatly depresses me, and the start of this thread seemed to call for a note of caution.

It's also worth noting that a thread solely about Ryan can't possibly be about his editorial practices. Pitchfork's editorial practices aren't public, and it's never had an editor apart from Ryan, so I can't imagine how anyone would know what aspects of the site he is or is not responsible for.

― nabisco (nabisco), Tuesday, 26 November 2002 22:36 (twenty-three years ago)

Pitchfork n' Ryan are alllright blokes as long as they stay two thousand miles away from reviewing any dance records.

― Bit, Wednesday, 27 November 2002 15:37 (twenty-three years ago)

I've chitchatted with several of Pitchfork's writers... let's just say that sometimes things get changed without the authors' consent.

― polyphonic (polyphonic), Wednesday, 27 November 2002 19:31 (twenty-three years ago)

nabisco - The only anecdotes I have heard had come from P'fork writers re: editorial practices, which seem to correspond pretty closely to the Jann Wenner aspirations. Agreed that a thread devoted solely to Ryan Pitchfork is a bad idea, in that even if it was specifically stated that it be devoted to editorial practices it would inevitably devolve into personal sniping and insults.

― James Blount (James Blount), Wednesday, 27 November 2002 21:13 (twenty-three years ago)

Heh, I think it goes without saying that an ILM thread about Ryan based entirely on unconfirmed hearsay from his own staff is probably a bad idea as well (unless you're the sort of person who gives the children a hornets' nest for a pinata).

― nabisco (nabisco), Wednesday, 27 November 2002 21:28 (twenty-three years ago)

Hi, Poly, it's you!

Anyway, changing things -- sometimes w/o author consent -- is what editors do!

― scott pl. (scott pl.), Wednesday, 27 November 2002 22:33 (twenty-three years ago)

(hell, often w/o author consent!)

― scott pl. (scott pl.), Wednesday, 27 November 2002 22:33 (twenty-three years ago)

Hmm, Tom maybe it's just my imagination but I have a suspicion of a double standard here. That's the second time I've seen you step in to object to personal criticism of writers. I may have missed it, but I've never detected any similar sensitivity from moderators in relation to musicians. Search, say, "wanker" and you'll see my point.

(BTW I'm not suggesting that personal criticism of writers is ok. And I'd never heard of Ryan S before I read this thread).

― ArfArf, Wednesday, 27 November 2002 23:06 (twenty-three years ago)

I think there is a double standard, yes. It's not consciously a musicians-writers thing, it's more to do with likely awareness of ILX. Also ILX is affiliated to my free publication, and I don't want my free publication to be associated with personal slams against the editor of another free publication.

The few occasions musicians have turned up on ILM the slams have quickly turned to sheepishness - the one (known) occasion a 'name' musician has become an ILX regular the sheepishness has turned back to occasional slams again, based almost entirely on what the guy says on the boards.

― Tom (Groke), Wednesday, 27 November 2002 23:30 (twenty-three years ago)

Tom, you flatter me!

― Chris Ott, Thursday, 28 November 2002 01:11 (twenty-three years ago)

Hey scottpl, thanks for explaining my joke.

― polyphonic (polyphonic), Thursday, 28 November 2002 01:17 (twenty-three years ago)

nuts, sorry poly, I'm a bit dim.

― scott pl. (scott pl.), Thursday, 28 November 2002 02:18 (twenty-three years ago)

It was a lousy joke, anyway.

― polyphonic (polyphonic), Thursday, 28 November 2002 02:24 (twenty-three years ago)

Tom - why is 'name' in scare quotes?

Nabisco - I hardly expect him to confirm the hearsay! And it only became hearsay when I repeated it (which I regretted before this thread even started). I just found it odd that every 'writer' I know that's written for Pitchfork has had a negative experience, at the hands of Ryan Pitchfork. I'll also say in fairness to Ryan that many of the complaints were somewhat less than legit (ie. "he wouldn't let me do what I want")

― James Blount (James Blount), Thursday, 28 November 2002 08:14 (twenty-three years ago)

Cos it struck me that the musician I was thinking of might not be a familiar one to several posters. (It was Momus btw - John D and Dave Q and many other ppl here make music but I encountered them as posters first so even with the rip-roaring international success of the Mountain Goats etc. that's how I think of them) (I kept remembering loads of other musicians after posting too.)

― Tom (Groke), Thursday, 28 November 2002 08:19 (twenty-three years ago)

Yeah, I knew you meant Momus, although one of my favorite ILx posts is when Ethan called for more civility in the wake of Saul Williams' post.

― James Blount (James Blount), Thursday, 28 November 2002 08:22 (twenty-three years ago)

If any members of Spinotaur post here, can we have at them?

― James Blount (James Blount), Thursday, 28 November 2002 08:22 (twenty-three years ago)

Tom - that's true, but it doesn't hide the fact that one of my favourite posts was when Larry Hundred Reasons posted on the HR thread. Maybe we should just, like, switch off Google.

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Thursday, 28 November 2002 09:12 (twenty-three years ago)

three years pass...

http://69.93.254.120/G/storage/site1/files/24/67/54/246754_34189266f9d154nklej406.jpg

myheritage.com is way too concerned with flattering people

― gear (gear), Friday, 29 September 2006 21:52 (nineteen years ago)

pavarotti is probably the most otm, from that photo

http://www.taylor.org/~argus/all/miscpix/Ryan

― trees (treesessplode), Saturday, 30 September 2006 05:29 (nineteen years ago)

ha ha ha ryan s

― trees (treesessplode), Saturday, 30 September 2006 05:30 (nineteen years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.