I would like to propose that we consider a ban on parody metal from the archives. This would be material that is made to be poor or bad intentionally. This was inspired by the recent addition of "Grinder Mifflin Inc" To be fair I have not listened to this band and they may not qualify under the criterion I'm setting out, but other bands here do. However I did notice that they have an album that is 1min long and their lyrical content is based on "The Office", so I am not too optimistic.

Here are some attributes of what I'm referring to:
- The artwork is intentionally poor
- The music is intentionally poor
- Lyrical content focuses on things like memes, inside jokes
- Artwork may have been created in MS Paint in order to accentuate how intentionally poor the entire thing is
- The purpose of the band is to be a joke moreso than to be a band
- Digital only release is a telltale sign but not a prerequisite
- The existence of the band on the archives is detrimental to the reputation of the site

Example:
https://www.metal-archives.com/albums/Anti-Ben/Bloodthirsty_Benslayers/127762

This is not meant to include:
- All band with funny names or lyrics. (i.e. Cannabis Corpse) The music and presentation is not intentionally poor.
- Pizza party/beer drinking/surfing thrash metal
- Any band with digital only releases
- GWAR

This is not 100% fleshed out and I'm sure it could be refined and structured to better benefit the site. I'm sure others can provide examples of similar metal.

I don't think we should be rejecting bands based on their artwork or lyrics - as far as I know the only factor that has any bearing is the music... lyrics and cover arts do not. I don't agree that parody bands are detrimental to the site's reputation - it's simply an example of a metal encyclopedia documenting a metal band. We even have racist Nazi bands listed - in my opinion it's much easier to say that those bands harm MA's reputation... but I think the staff wanted to simply document metal and stay unbiased towards ideologies, despite the fact almost everyone here agrees their messages are horrible.

Back to parody bands - yes we all know it's silly, but it's metal... I just can't see how a band being intentionally bad or stupid should be a reason to ban it from MA despite the fact that it's metal.

^

We have a fundamental goal, which is to document and archive every band out there that has publicly released and distributed a metal album. While we do place conditions of what we expect a metal album to be - what makes it 'metal' and an 'album' - still the spirit of the site is to grow the largest and most complete database regarding heavy metal bands (or more accurately albums) as possible. While we do appreciate your arguments, pale_horse, I don't think we could do what you've asked us to do. As mods we're here to do what's best in the interests of the site towards its stated purpose, which requires to some degree an ability to put aside personal preferences and desires. You won't find us defending NSBM, the terribleness of some bands, or the utterly ridiculous, but you will find us defending the inclusion of any such band if it satisfies our conditions for acceptance (which are intentionally inclusive).

I personally think, to some degree, that helps to build the case that (at least when it comes to our own mission and our rules) we are impartial and fair. Moreover, it's something I must admit that I take pride in. No matter what some people might say, we don't base our judgments of bands on whether we may like or dislike them. We give every band with an album a fair shake, and if a band has a metal album it is accepted, and if a band lacks a metal album, it is found wanting. Knowing that, I think our users can trust in our decisions, and that those decisions have some relatable rationale to back them up. Some users may not like the decisions we make, but at least those decisions are credible. I strongly believe what you are asking us to do would bestow on us the power to reject a band on entirely subjective grounds, and would therefore break the trust our users (and visitors) have in us as a comprehensive encyclopedia of metal music.

Another point I should make, since I nearly forgot it. It's very easy for us, both as a site and as moderators and even as users, to go "native." That is, it's very easy for us to manipulate artists to do what we want by the way we handle band submissions to this site. A lot of bands use this site as a litmus test for what is and isn't metal, and others use it (without us wanting it to be) as the premier place for advertising their band and even sometimes as their official online source of information. To those bands, getting on MA is a goal or an achievement, and it's common for bands to cater their work to fit our rules for submission. That's not to toot our own horn - trust me it's not something we would want - but it is just a reality of what happens when a site like this ends up growing and evolving as it has within the metal scene.

As a consequence of this, encouraging bands to publicly release and distribute metal albums is not something we necessarily frown upon, even if we do discourage bands from generally shaping their artistic expression to try to get accepted into MA. I think most people can agree that's not necessarily a bad thing. However, going beyond that is something that isn't necessarily "right." Encouraging bands to do away with things we subjectively see as "bad" might seem noble to us and maybe others, but places in us power over art that we do not deserve or should want. We're not here to shape the metal scene, insofar as our personal wants and desires. We're just here to observe and to preserve the (metal) world around us. The less subjectivity in our conditions for acceptance, the better IMO.