Like Scott, I think a linked site to "The Dead", Other Ones, etc is the appropriate thing to do.
Barry -----Original Message----- From: Scott Allan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, August 16, 2003 7:45 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Policy on The Dead ----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, August 16, 2003 1:23 PM Subject: Policy on The Dead > Are there plans to start incorporating setlist data from the resurrected band, now called The >Dead? It's not a resurrected band, but a new band with an old name that just might resurrect some bank accounts. > I realize that there are different camps of thought regarding the use of the name, etc., but it >seems to me that if the surviving members of the band see this as a continuation of the legacy, >then Deadlists should as well. Continuation of the legacy does not equal the same band. This band is no more the Grateful Dead than were The Other Ones. Don't let the name and the "official" feel-good spin on the matter fool you - it's a different band. > And while some might feel the absence of Jerry is the be all and end all, the reality is that the >name of the site is DEADlists... not the Jerry Site, etc. > > I, for one, think that it makes perfect sense that the site should start documenting setlists by >the Dead. The imperfection is that The Dead are *not* the Grateful Dead, period. A linked site with setlists for spinoff bands that include The Dead (and The Other Ones, JGB, Ratdog, etc.) would be wonderful. However, it would be just plain untruthful to include the new band's setlists as if they were a continuation of the actual Grateful Dead. As I said before, The Dead represents a continuation of the legacy, but not a continuation of the band. You mileage may vary, but only if there are impurities in the odometer. ----Scott
