---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment Andre, David, Sarah, Y'all- First, I think that the acceptance and use of the OT designation has been=20 remarkably successful...(exceptin' for the Porsche thread)... almost as=20 much so as the success of municipalities in convincing their citizenry,=20 whether peasant or royalty, to pick up after their pets. It allows me, in= =20 my manual archiving, to simply channel non-technical posts to their own=20 location, where I can look at them if I so choose, without distracting me=20 when I'm reviewing the technical posts. This list has long had what could rightly be called a "DON'T ASK! DON'T=20 TELL" policy. That is, we have elected to acknowledge only enough of each= =20 other to allow a singular conversation.. about pianos. In theory, it=20 wouldn't matter if a contributor has perpetrated some outrageous act, or=20 holds repugnant beliefs. If their contributions to the list conform to our= =20 expectations of content and form, then they have fulfilled the primary list= =20 requirements. So, what deep need is being fulfilled by the periodic=20 venture "OFF TOPIC" ? It's natural for an active mind to make=20 associations, and sometimes it helps to relieve the tension engendered by=20 having to monitor and filter what one says to those who have become a kind= =20 of community. But, is there a difference between an "OT" which is simply=20 observational, and one which is intended or can be expected to be=20 controversial or inflammatory? In fact, I think we feel the periodic need to remind ourselves that the=20 world we have created with this list is not real, and that there IS a=20 difference between a cyber community and, dare I say, a real" one. In the= =20 latter, we cannot easily choose to ignore those qualities that challenge=20 our own values. While we share common endeavors and interests, we reflect= =20 a tremendous range of experience, opinion, and convictions and we may not=20 wish to or be able to acknowledge the validity of an opposing view. What=20 do you suppose the effect on the list would be, of our knowing the=20 political, religious, sexual, or other preferences of each of the=20 contributors? Would it, in some subtle (or not) way, affect the way we=20 interact with each other? This is, for the most part, a comfortably or=20 uncomfortably amoral environment, depending on your point of view. We might choose (theoretically) to have yet another, separate place (list)= =20 expressly for those sorts of exchanges... one which, like ptg-l, would have= =20 controlled access. If a few people want to have such a dialog, they would= =20 retire to that list, whose contents would not be archived with the regular= =20 list, a concern I find reasonable. However if, in fact, the motivation is=20 to "witness" ones beliefs in as broad a public as possible, or to change=20 the beliefs of others, such a separate list would probably prove=20 inadequate. In that case, the only hope would be the conscious commitment= =20 to respect the principles by which this list has thrived. And then, of course, in these times of Homeland Security, there's those=20 paranoid types amoung(st?) us (why do you think I'm talking about you?)=20 who suspect that any statement of conviction might be read and noted by=20 invasive authorities. HOW ABOUT IT ANDY? A FIGHT LIST? Rambling pomposity at its best - David Skolnik - At 11:49 AM 2/14/2004 -0500, you wrote: >Andre, David, et al., > >'Nuff said, then. My sincere apologies for being OT. I've tried keeping= =20 >OT stuff to < 10%, on the whole, over time. I hope I've been successful=20 >in that regard. I make no apologies for having political opinions, though= =20 >-- or for my opinions being what they are. > >Peace, >Sarah >----- Original Message ----- >From: <mailto:antares@euronet.nl>antares >To: <mailto:pianotech@ptg.org>Pianotech >Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2004 11:44 AM >Subject: Re: Yeah!!! Political Questions ( very OT - feel free to delete ) > >I think one of the first reasons why, normally speaking, religion and=20 >politics and non related piano issues are not discussed on this list, is=20 >because this is called a pianotech list. >In the past we have had fierce yelling, fist fights and flamings because=20 >someone thought otherwise. >Secondly, quarrels over piano related stuff is one thing, but when=20 >religion and politics are allowed, this list will probably be blow itself= =20 >up very soon. >I am ready to try new things, but in this case I don't think it will= succeed. >my 2 euro's > >friendly greetings >from >Andr=E9 Oorebeek > >Amsterdam - >The Netherlands > >0031-20-6237357 >0645-492389 >0031-75-6226878 >www.concertpianoservice.nl >www.grandpiano.nl > > >On 14-feb-04, at 17:01, Sarah Fox wrote: > >Hi Ric, > >Ok... that makes about 10 to one..... 10 posts argueing back and forth >about whether political posts should be written... for every political >post that actually IS written. Just counting :) > > >... and one wonders whether anyone besides Bush supporters object to these >political discussions! Is it a bandwidth problem or a content problem? And >should we limit all discussion on this list to things about which everyone >will agree? FAIW, I don't think I've ever seen anyone complain about posts >espousing any aspect of Republican ideology. People have argued against the >ideas, sure. But I don't think anyone has argued that they shouldn't be >posted. > >Peace, >Sarah > >_______________________________________________ >pianotech list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives > > > ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/ac/82/9d/99/attachment.htm ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC