Taxi's A & R

[squids]

Actually, I think whoever suggested that the screeners post jes a small bio about themselves is a genius! They don't have to give their names but I sho woulda liked it (preferably befo my membership runs out!;)) to have seen some of the credentials of my anonymous screener. Woulda made me feel much betta, knowing this is a person who really does know what they're talking about. Also might give me a hint as to why they wrote the review they did.I sho hope that idea gets picked up. I don't wanna know their names if there's some real thought that they could be threatened. I'd jes like ta know my guy isn't 12 years old and maybe wrote some pop tune last year that got him some notice, is all.

[heinsite]

thanks squids, but i aint no genius... wh

[weapon]

Squids, only problem with the bio is it is real easy to do some investigating these days and find out who people are, it's really dangerous.

[bwrenhewmach]

Good Morning all I have to admit I was wrong to even suggest the screeners use their real names. After reading some of the over the top responses to my opinion and responses of people that come in at the end of an on going thread and make a point to something opposite to what I had previously stated. I wouldn't want to admit who I am either or sign my name. Dangerous is right. mB

[Casey H]

Oct 26, 2008, 4:54am, bwrenhewmach wrote:Good Morning all I have to admit I was wrong to even suggest the screeners use their real names. After reading some of the over the top responses to my opinion and responses of people that come in at the end of an on going thread and make a point to something opposite to what I had previously stated. I wouldn't want to admit who I am either or sign my name. Dangerous is right. mB Hi BillI tried to answer on this thread without emotion, simply stating the reasons I've been told for anonymity and that they make sense to me. Regarding not revealing screener names for custom critiques (no forward/return decision), I can see where that is a different question, one that could be sent to taxi for an explanation- I'm not sure it's been discussed here before.In general, in situations like this, solving one problem often creates others. I really do think I'm being objective here. Taxi has 12,000 members so the sheer volume of phone calls, emails, complaints about returns, etc. is pretty huge. So, let's say they reveal screener names for custom critiques. How many additional phone calls and emails will there be complaining about the choice of reviewer for those critiques? More phone calls and emails to deal with, more cost and more issues. So every time they try to make things better for 90% of the members, 10% make it unmanageable. That's why A&R folks generally don't respond at all when the answer is "no". A few idiots make their lives miserable.Warren: Regarding a little info on Y/N listings... If taxi promised this, they should at least let us know the status even if they decided against it. No argument there... I have a sneaking feeling that the same problems I discussed above would creep in. 90% of members will simply be grateful to get that little extra info on a "N" decision. 10% (for argument's sake) will call or email taxi, often with a lot of anger, with their disagreement on the reason for return.So, I am not tied emotionally to this answer. I'm trying to step back and look at it from the perspective of running a fairly large business, keeping costs down, etc. Cheers Casey

[billg]

Well, after reading everything posted here I feel like I've gotta chime in. I can understand why screeners wouldn't want to be known . . . after seeing here how passionate people become about their music it's perfectly understandable. However . . . We do deserve to know who screens our music because it is a service we are paying for. The "blanket" list of A&R screeners listed would suffice if it were inclusive of all of the screeners. But that's not the case. There are screeners for Taxi that are not on that list, and I can tell you that on at least one occasion I have been forwrded to (and paid my $5) to a listing by a screener not listed to an opp that I would not have even bothered with if it had been offered elsewhere directly for free. Don't bother to PM asking me details because I'm not gonna go into it. I value my Taxi membership & wouldn't want to get tossed out for mentioning this but I think it's important. If we are not going to know who screens our stuff individually then we should at least have an all inclusive list of screeners and their qualifications. This may even have to be something that is updated monthly, I don't think that is too much to expect. In fact I think I will send an email with that suggestion.

[heinsite]

thanks casey--i get it--really i do! i don't get why nobody has come up with a GOOD (not yelling, i'm on quickiee reply) reply to why we can't have a one line bio on the screener--no names, etc needed, and it can be "automatic" placed when they type in their screener #. on the Y/N thing, i just think they must have canned it, but never heard anything--but LOL although some may think i'm on this forum 24/7, i MAY have missed it!! but there was absolutely promising stuff coming from the top, and i remember (a year ago or more) me answering billg (i think...sorry to bill if he's the wrong dude) when he mentioned it too, and i told him i wrote a letter to michael suggestion the "quick" box Y/N reply thing.that's it, thanks for the feedback.oh, I HAVE ANOTHER IDEA--if a "taxi" idiot person bugs them in a scary way, and it may be current policy anyway--they should ask the member to voluntarily terminate, or just terminate them!! i was reminded in an ill advised post a few months back that although very open minded, this is NOT a stock holder company, but privately owned. why not use that benefit to just ship out those that are truly wack? all the best,warren

[squids]

Thanks Bill fo sayin' that. While Taxi does provide a wonderful service, especially fo the newbies (and I meet the best people on the forums!), this is the thing I was most troubled by. When I buy a service, I would like to know who's providing it. I'm not gonna buy a fridge at Home Depot without bein' familiar with the brand name and the quality of their product. This applies to the screeners here, since it's their word that gets us to the listing contact or doesn't. I think your suggestion to have an all-inclusive list of screeners and their qualifications, updated monthly if that's necessary (gosh, I hope they don't have THAT big a turnover!) is practical and useful, from a consumer standpoint.

[hummingbird]

Oct 26, 2008, 8:07am, billg wrote: If we are not going to know who screens our stuff individually then we should at least have an all inclusive list of screeners and their qualifications. This may even have to be something that is updated monthly, I don't think that is too much to expect. In fact I think I will send an email with that suggestion.Yes! That's my whole point on this thread. No emotion, just saying, more than once, if you *really* want something to be changed, then talk to the people who can change it! Not that things can't be discussed, but at some point it becomes a back and forth between Forum Members who cannot do anything to change the status quo anyway! If you don't like something change it; if you can't change it, change the way you think about it. ~Mary Engelbreit

[bwrenhewmach]

Casey you are always up front and to the point with me. That’s why I respect you. I just wasn't buying the reason at first. However after getting some of the asinine responses by others on this thread for me even suggesting something so simple and so common on other review sites as people signing their work I found it hard to believe that some Taxi members would act in such a way to the screeners, until now. If people will hammer me, one of their own fellow artist and members for just having a opinion. I can just imagine what the Taxi screeners would go through if perhaps they said something negative about one of their songs. Casey although my last post had just a little sarcasm in it.  I did mean what I said about Taxi being right for not putting the screeners name on the reviews on the Taxi site. Bill