Jim, Wim, Jon, and List, While I concur, in part, with Jon about using a different list for some discussions; I must respectfully suggest that the (however inadvertently introduced) issues raised here are of substantive value to each of us. If memory serves, and I was not present for what went on and therefore admit to repeating hearsay, not only were there problems with the content of what certain factions wanted to see happen, but also, and more importantly, there were problems with the ways in which they tried to do business. That is to say that the "pot and kettle" name calling which has become so rampant was not one sided. Where I _may_ disagree, in part, with Jon, is that I believe that these kinds of issues _are_ important to this list as well, and we cannot avoid them simply because some folks may view them as unpleasant. If we take the largest (reasonable) context, and acknowledge that these lists in general (and this list in particular) cater to technicians who are generally above average to begin with, then I would suggest that, along with such recognition, comes a certain level of responsibility to the profession. In _my_ view, this responsibility includes, taking on (in some reasonable way) those issues which affect our professional lives, as well as those which are specifically technical. I freely admit that I keep coming back to issues that are arguably philosophical, as much as technical in nature. I also freely acknowledge that these issues _may in part_ reside outside of what is generally considered acceptable grist for our mutual mill. On the other hand, if we are going to view what we do as not simply bending pins (or whatever), then who we are as individuals enters into how we do our work, and how we conduct ourselves then becomes a relevant part of the discussion. What is necessary is for each participant to work to expand their point of view to include that of their correspondent, whether specifically technical or not. That's quite glib, and also quite difficult. There is yet another issue at work here. That is that the problems which have been most recently bubbling over since ca. 1995 are not new. These same, and similar debates have been marked throughout the history of the PTG and its antecedents. Some folks, (perhaps including Jim) have been around the guild long enough to be truly tired of (what seems to be) virtually unrelieved infighting. Others, (like myself, for example) avoided the guild for many years before joining, partly out of ambivalent feelings about an organization clearly in such turmoil. To the extent that any given entity becomes exclusive, rather than inclusive, it loses a certain vitality. To the extent that individuals of a group are excommunicated, either by choice, fiat, or denegration, the group loses a degree of its own viability. Surely, no positive purpose has been served by the resignations of Fern and Bill. Equally, none would be served by the resignation of Jim, or anyone else for that matter. In the instant case, the issues seem to revolve around Jim's (well intentioned, but improperly addressed) post. The base issue is, however, one which should be of concern to each of us; that is some variation of "at what point do the ends justify the means?". Jon, I do agree with you that this kind of thing is _probably_ better discussed on the larger ptg-l list. On the other hand, I do not know how many of the folks on this list subscribe to the other. Further, having done no research, I am talking directly through my hat, but suspect that many of the officers in the guild, and/or instructors at various guild events (e.g., people who are, in one way or another, leaders in the profession) are here rather than there. Thus, there is some argument for at least _some_ discussion of this type to take place here. Jim has taken, and holds to, a certain stand. Wim, I support Jim in his position as I supported you recently when I thought you were being inappropriately treated. "The hottest places in Hell are reserved for those who, in times of moral crisis, do not cry out." - Dante Alighieri Best to all. Horace >In a message dated 97-05-05 22:56:26 EDT, Jim Byrant writes: > >>I promise you this, I will >>continue to speak out on the issues, and if the time ever comes I that I am >>not willing to do so I will resign from PTG. >> >> If bitterness creeps into my posts I think, and trust them to, that the >>list will let me know in no uncertain terms. > > >Jim: > >You asked for it, you got it. You are an expremely bitter person. Please >stops speaking out on the issues. > >Wim Horace Greeley hgreeley@leland.stanford.edu "The defining statistic of death is that it has a one to one ratio." - George Bernard Shaw LiNCS voice: 415/725-4627 Stanford University fax: 415/725-9942
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC