Mr. SkolniK (sorry about the earlier misspelling!), Interesting post. I'll chew on that for a while! Ryan On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 11:33 AM, David Skolnik <davidskolnik at optonline.net>wrote: > David Skolnick said: > > > > Ryan - > First, and most importantly, it's "nik" not "nick". > > Next, as I mentioned in the unrelated private post, I was not intending > to chastise you with any more severity than Horace did. We see how much > trouble that caused for him. I disagree with nothing you say below, for > the most part, though I'm not sure it's fair to attribute Jim B's decision > to unsubscribe completely to the list issues. There has been quite a bit > posted recently saying that the list was NOT being shut down immediately, > and, in fact, Jim hasn't posted (except for once, earlier this year) since > early 2008, so we must remember to be careful with our interpretation of > data. > > With regard to political speech, I agree that it is difficult to discern > exactly where the line is, but it's important to remember that it does > exist, to wit: it's one thing to criticize, *strongly,* the decisions and > actions taken by the administrators (the committee, the Board, the Home > Office) *AS* administrators of the list while, at the same time, keeping > separate their functions as officers and administrators of PTG. Think of > it this way, perhaps. Assuming that the basic infrastructure of this mail > list were still viable, what would prevent us from finding an alternate > host? The cost? Rights to the name "Pianotech"? Redundancy with my.ptg > lists? > > Also, if the inadequacies (in some peoples opinion) of the current > offering were actually remedied, would the continued existence of the two > "pianotech"s make sense? Is there something fundamentally different in the > originating mission of the two that is not easily resolved? Open > membership as opposed to membership closely tied to PTG interaction? RonN > made the same point, way back, on Dec. 31st. > > As I said, there IS no dedicated list that this readership can redirect to > in order to discuss self-referential aspects of the list's functioning. It > all has to happen here, in one big room. (Sounds like a caucus). The > self-perpetuating irony, as you've seen, is that, in order to engage in > such discussion, we seem to be herded to the website, and, even there, need > to make the distinction between what is "User Help Group", and what goes to > "PTG-L". For example, in your earlier post, where you said: > > I think the problem is this Board of Directors is too emotionally invested > in the new and improved product because they have spent so much time, > energy, and (our)$$ on it. The only hope would be to elect a new board who > isn't so invested in it. > > > The first sentence would be at home on the User Help list. The second > belonged on PTG-L. It may seem absurd, but one way of unmasking it as such > is to follow it through to the extreme. Send a different version to each > of the relevant lists. Is someone on "Users" going to say, "No, we have > nothing to do with the old Pianotech? Not likely, but, if so, who does? > As far as anything going to PTG-L, the question( would be the boundaries of > discourse, even there, and how much representation this list has there. > > This list can't just become defined by our reluctance to adapt (no, I'm > not talking about LC*) or about what a terrible person Duaine is. (Maybe > there would be a separate list on the website for that). The question is, > are the administrators of this list as responsible to any question raised > by Duaine (as a non-PTG'er) as they might be to me (as soon as I pay my > dues)? Is there less of a sense of responsibility, as list administrators, > to this list than the one on the web? > > Clearly, I'll do anything to avoid honest work. > > Keep celebrating - > David Skolnik > Hastings on Hudson, NY > *(Learning Curve) > > > > > > At 12:37 PM 1/3/2012, you wrote: > > David Skolnick said: "The rub, so to speak, is the indistinctness of the > line between what is list business and what is PTG business. This > obfuscation is not new...we have engaged in it for years, and we continue > to do so. This thread was walking the line until, I regret to say, Ryan > stepped unmistakably over it in expressing opinions that related > specifically to the politics of the organization." > > This thread was began with yet another contributor leaving the list > because they are completely unsatisfied with the very large change that was > dropped like a bomb on the list users last year, without any real notice, > feedback, or involvement from the heavy users. That was a political > decision that had some strong reprucussions for many in the list community > - and the large drop off in participation that followed proved this. > > Mentioning anything relating to PTG politics on a non-PTG-L list seems to > be taboo. However, this list, if it survives, will only do so if there is a > certain amount of political will exerted. This thread is about the survival > of this list - which is ultimately a political decision. Just because there > is a dedicated political list, it doesn't follow that any and all relevant > political opinions in regards to a thread topic are counter-productive. > > Ryan > > > -- Ryan Sowers, RPT Puget Sound Chapter Olympia, WA www.pianova.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/20120103/6b788085/attachment.htm>
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC