I agree Ron. If they could fix it so that we can affix attachments to our email so it is not required to log on to view them, I would accept this crummy forum. Terry Beckingham At 09:45 AM 2/12/2012 -0600, you wrote: >On 2/12/2012 7:45 AM, ed440 at mindspring.com wrote: > >>On the user help group there is a busy discussion between PTG staff and >>users, >>with what appears to be success and satisfaction. > >With one very fundamental, obvious, and serious exclusion. The new system >still offers no equivalent to the email based old (real) Pianotech list, >in attaching files and reading attached files so there is no need to log >on to the web forum to do so. This was one of the earliest requests, and >has yet to be sensibly addressed. > >There actually are a number of us who prefer not logging on to a forum to >participate, but the offered "feature" doesn't work with file attachments. >In an email client, we get no indication which of the downloaded messages >(too large a percentage of which are still complaints and discussion of >this marvelous new system) have a file association, unless we open and >read the message. It's still easy to miss even then. Messages from the old >Pianotech are clearly flagged by the email client as including an attachment. > >So once again, I ask. If we are offered a "legacy" option for email based >use of the lists, why can't it be made to work? A year into it, we hear >that the character set thing is being finally fixed real soon. Well, >maybe, but if now, why not then? And why can't the email users attach and >receive files without having to log on? I don't know how common it is, but >in my case I've elected not to attach clarifying photos or spreadsheets >because of the unnecessary hassle. My point is that if an email function >is offered, make it work or don't offer it. I've been screamed at a couple >of times for repeatedly suggesting this, but I have yet to receive an >intelligent response as to why it hasn't been done. Will I ever? > > >>Technical discussions are happening on CAUT and Pianotech. > >Ambiguously put, as the bulk of it still seems to be on the old email >based Pianotech. > > >>A "How to Subscribe" video is being made. > >I'd be embarrassed that such a thing was necessary if I was trying to sell >a system to people already forced into it. > > >>Someone subscribing now might not understand what all the fuss has been >>about. >>Ed Sutton > >Administratively put... Likely not, if no one cares about the long time >supporters and participants. This is worded as if it's all over and >everyone is happy. Such is not the case. > >PS: Why was this posted to the old perpetually condemned Pianotech email >list instead of the new constantly improved (necessarily) HL system? A >greater number of recipients, perhaps? Fix the lame HL legacy option to >provide the same simple functionality as the old Pianotech list, get all >the archives into usable format (including all those spreadsheets those >new subscribers and most of the current ones aren't aware of), and you can >dump the old system and still serve it's subscribers without all this nonsense. > >Ron N
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC