Michael Wathen wrote: >>This is a good constructive argument. A source is listed which one can then refer to verify the claim. >>In general, I find this lacking in Internet discussions. Usually there is one or two "Gurus" who appear to have all the answers. They answer the questions without giving the reasons or documentary support for their beliefs. Michael, Thank you for reminding us that our writing style does matter. I don't agree, though, that we should limit our writing to subjects for which we can provide published sources as references. I don't think of this listserve as a place to publish a thesis, but as a place to talk about our work, share ideas, and stimulate thought. It's kind of like talking over dinner and drinks at a convention, only with a little more time to think about what we say. Vince's writing is excellent, and we all benefit from references like he provided, but does that mean that we should _only_ write when we have references and substantiation for everyone to follow up on? I wouldn't bother - it's too much trouble to dig through files for models, serial numers, and locations of examples of pianos discussed. It isn't likely that any of us would bother following up on those references anyway. If we limit our writing here by always substantiating our theories with references and examples of pianos, the general exchange taking place would dry up. I think this would be a loss for all of us. You are correct, however, that a lot of BS would be eliminated. >>We are simply expected to believe in their wisdom because they have researched it for themselves.<< No one is expected to believe anything. However, sometimes it is wise to learn from other's experiences or mistakes. Read, doubt, question, and establish your own opinions. Don_Mannino@yca.ccmail.compuserve.com
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC