| |
Rough
Account closed
Registered: Feb 2002
Posts: 1829 |
Handle id #6826 : The Arrogance
this entry should be divided into two persons and merged with the other nicks of those, TJ and Reptil. |
|
... 10 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts....
|
| |
TheRyk
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 2226 |
Not every new or additional handle is a fake handle, however. The latter of course are usually meant to release something under false flag, e.g. rants, poor silly cracks and whatnot. Whereas in other cases someone just didn't like his old handle anymore, wanted to start a new career in a new group or whatever.
That some peeps openly flag their own fake handles THEMSELVES here on CSDb as fake or lamer label of their main label XYZ is another story. Not much stealth in that, but probably THEY WANT users to associate their fake label releases with the main label - might make no sense to me or you but it's _their_ decision.
@Krill: More than once I found the common practice of merging multi-handle sceners in one CSDb entry quite useful when looking for information such as which group(s) were the root(s) of another group etc. |
| |
Krill
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2971 |
Quoting TheRyk@Krill: More than once I found the common practice of merging multi-handle sceners in one CSDb entry quite useful when looking for information such as which group(s) were the root(s) of another group etc. So, were you able to debunk that old myth that demoscene somehow was spawned from cracking scene, rather than co-evolving with some overlap pretty much at the same time? =) |
| |
TheRyk
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 2226 |
Personally, I'd say there's evidence for both, a demoscene evolving (more or less) independently from cracking (compunet) and demo groups directly emerging from cracking (crack intro) scene. But that's only my 2 cents, based on my experience aka what I (not) know. Anyway, there were groups starting with legal stuff and later doing cracks and the other way round, never did any deeper research on what was the case more often.
I guess your question would need someone writing his doctoral thesis evaluating all the data here... and in the end, I bet 5 quatloos that even that 'Doctor of Scene' will only come to some vague conclusion that both is true and there is not only one 'root' of demoscene. |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11378 |
Quote:So, were you able to debunk that old myth that demoscene somehow was spawned from cracking scene, rather than co-evolving with some overlap pretty much at the same time? =)
Not sure how this is related - but any sane person knows that it was like this :) |
| |
Frantic
Registered: Mar 2003
Posts: 1647 |
Quote: Quote:So, were you able to debunk that old myth that demoscene somehow was spawned from cracking scene, rather than co-evolving with some overlap pretty much at the same time? =)
Not sure how this is related - but any sane person knows that it was like this :)
Did "it was like this" refer to the first or the second scenario, as described in Krill's post? |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11378 |
Demos and crack intros appeared at about the same time. |
| |
Krill
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2971 |
Quoting chatGPZNot sure how this is related - but any sane person knows that it was like this :)
Demos and crack intros appeared at about the same time.
Then... quite a sizeable chunk of the demoscene is not sane? :)
I keep hearing (stage talks) and reading (forums, books, UNESCO) the same old myth time and again.
Kind of a pet peeve of mine. =) |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11378 |
I know. I have given up on it :) It's still better than the "Demoscene started on Amiga" nonsense some ppl keep telling :) |
| Previous - 1 | 2 - Next |
