Could it be that Member Max, would be used to exclude non PTG members? I was a member of PTG for quite a few years, and now that I am 73, I no longer feel that I want to pay the dues. Actually, I let my membership lapse when I turned 70, or was it 71. I see that in myptg, there are some areas that I am not allowed to subscribe too. So much for all those years of dues I did pay. Anyway, I hope it all works out. The list is still the best resource there is. John Ross Windsor, Nova Scotia On 2011-07-02, at 6:35 PM, Encore Pianos wrote: > I have been asking myself the same question about the Member Max integration > thing. I just don't see how important it is to the list users except in the > most limited way (and I cannot figure out what that would even be). > > I'll answer Ron's question. The Pianotech Forum does not require Member > Max. That much is obvious, because no such integration existed for the last > 15 years and we functioned pretty well without it. Perhaps the home office > sees a utility in that integration, but no one has explained that to us yet, > and the value would only be for their use and not ours. I think it is fair > to say that the Pianotech Forum exists primarily for the users - otherwise > why have it at all? If the Pianotech Forum exists primarlly for the users, > then if we are establishing a hierarchy of values, what would be the more > important value - meeting the users needs and encouraging usage by having > the best possible e-mail server (one that is easy to use and simple, a > measure by which the HL fails compared to even the old list) or meeting some > narrow administrative desire for the home office. If the users are truly > valued, it is obvious which answer suits us. > > Will > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [,mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] On > Behalf Of Ron Nossaman > Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2011 5:01 PM > To: pianotech at ptg.org > Subject: Re: [pianotech] [OT] Stuff Which Should Really Be on PTG-L > > On 7/2/2011 2:44 PM, Dale Probst wrote: >> >> I know that the Member Max/Higher Logic interface was how we came to HL. > > I don't recall that anyone else has asked, so I will. The integration with > Member Max has been invoked as the overwhelming justification for buying the > HL package nearly every time someone complains about the new pianotech > forum. But what does that mean to us? What does Member Max have to do with > the pianotech list? Looking it up, I see it's an organizational management > system, but I don't find mention of mailing list forums. Is Member Max > necessary to Pianotech? If so, how. If not, why is it always thrown up > between the question and a possible answer as a justification for the > current lame forum that is being shoved down our throats when it's > irrelevant? So what's the connection. How does the pianotech forum require > Member Max? > > >> I'm pretty sure from my conversations with Board members that they >> want the best they can get. > > For whom? That's the core of this discussion. > > > I have been told that if HL doesn't work, we will >> go another direction. > > Again, doesn't work for whom? The pianotech forum already doesn't work for a > considerable number of us, but I don't see any signs of movement addressing > basic function. And is "another direction" another $75K or more spent > without care as to whether the list communities will find the replacement > adequate? We've all been told a lot of stuff, but it's all very fuzzy and > unaccountable. > > Here's a suggestion. We have a number of folks in the organization, and more > on the lists, that have professional programming experience. I wouldn't be > surprised if some of them wouldn't volunteer (the magic word > VOLUNTEER!) to give HL's code a look and get some idea what it would really > and truthfully take to make it work for the mail lists. I wouldn't be > surprised if the interface couldn't be reorganized into something usable > too, given someone with experience. From our viewpoint, we can't verify that > HL even truly exists, or that this thing isn't being run by some 16 year and > an iguana in someone's basement. > > >> I would suggest you read Fred Sturm's post on PTG-L when you have >> time. Progress in PTG can try your patience due to the volunteer basis >> of the organization. I always heard it compared to turning an aircraft >> carrier. > > Is HL volunteer? Don't they have a list of changes (which we haven't seen > and can't judge potential usefulness), which they are being paid to > implement? That's what we were told. Is that right? > > This thing showed up in February as one giant impenetrable ink cloud. > From then to now, we just a couple of days ago got figures on what it cost, > and still can't seem to get information other than "we're working on it". > Since our questions mostly concern the lists and the answers are either > hopelessly vague or office administration specific, will we ever know what > "it" is? > > How about we all talk about the same thing, at least? > Ron N > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/20110702/2060c330/attachment.htm>
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC