OT stuff, archives

[Richard Brekne]

Dave Nereson wrote:
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Richard Brekne" <Richard.Brekne@grieg.uib.no>
> To: "Pianotech" <pianotech@ptg.org>
> Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2004 9:59 AM
> Subject: Re: OT stuff, archives
> 
> 
> 
>>>You guys just dont get it....  . . . >>
> 
> 
>     No.  Having an opinion doesn't mean nobody else "gets it."   "Gets", of
> course, is contemporary slang for "understand, comprehend"; but what is
> 'it'?  We don't get WHAT?  YOUR idea of what should be allowed or included
> in this discussion group?  

No, not MY idea. Not an idea or an opinion at all really. A simple 
observation. People converse... what can I say. If you want my OPINION 
on the matter I can offer it to you... not that that makes any 
difference to reality mind you... but just so... here it is. Legislating 
peoples behaviour has been tried and found lacking I believe.

> Or do you mean we don't "get" some universal
> consensus of what should be allowed in these discussions?  Oh, there IS no
> universal consensus?  

Of course not... which should also be evident since there are several on 
both sides of this question, and the usual silent majority whoes 
opionions on the matter vary as well.

> Then why is it a PIANOTECH list?  (I don't mean to
> shout, but I don't think this e-mail program does italics or underlining
> Why was it created under the auspices of PTG? (pianotech @ ptg.org).  Why
> don't we just call it anythinggoes@ptg.org?

Thats cool.. I know you well enough from your posts David and you amoung 
the polite guys :)  Its called PIANOTECH... because its an appropriate 
name for the list. Thats what we talk about most.. thats our primary 
reason for being her. Anything goes would not invite piano folks so 
naturally.

>     Yes, we can stray from the subject at hand now and then.  A little.  And
> very briefly.  If it's going to go on and on, change the subject line.  Go
> to a different discussion group.  Send the message privately.  But don't
> fill up the PTG PIANOtech archives with long rants, fluff, cutesy
> one-upmanship, etc. etc. 

Now THIS is where we enter the realm of opinion. I dont share this 
FWIW... (except the archives bit) simply because I dont really see that 
its so awrully practical. The list will self-regulate as it has... with 
these kind of blow ups quiting everything down from time to time and 
thats the way it is. OR you can get a moderator to kick off whoever << 
gets judged >> with all that entails.

> A separate list for happy hour-type banter could
> be formed for that.

There are other lists... no.. I think we should pretty much deal with 
the archives problem and otherwise let people be people. Regulating 
peoples behaviour has never been all that great an alternative to 
getting what you want out of them.
> 
> <<Lately it seems that adding "OT" is an excuse to post anything.  I feel
> this has really lowered the quality of the list content.>>
>    Amen!
> <<. . . .when someone (including one of us) comes to
> search the archives of the piano experts, they get the off-topic stuff
> as well.  That's a big shame in my opinion.>>
>  And in mine also.

I agree that this stuff, and much more, has no purpose in the archives 
and simply makes using them more of a chore then it should be. I do not 
agree that attempting to censor list participants in any other way then 
we already do is the way to go about it, and have suggested at least one 
perfectly viable alternative towards addressing that question.

>      --David Nereson, RPT
> 
> 

Cheers David

RicB