[pianotech] List changes - it's a lot bigger than just the lists...

[Israel Stein]

On 11:59 AM, Encore Pianos wrote:
>
> So Isreal, are you saying that those 
> who disagree with you should be thrown 
> in with the crunchy granola crowd?  
> Are we part of a greater conspiracy 
> that the unsuspecting public knows 
> nothing about -- the Intergalactic 
> Insect Brain Trust?  I've never owned 
> Birkenstocks, will I be arrested and 
> charged anyway?
>
>
No, Will. Just those who couch their 
disagreement in the sort of preachy and 
utterly sanctimonious manner reminiscent 
of all that sixties' pop psychology that 
makes you feel like you are swimming 
through a sea of custard... I rather 
appreciate the sort of pointed criticism 
spiced with a bit of humor such as your 
message above.  I disagree vociferously 
and pointedly with some of my best 
friends - and appreciate the 
intellectual challenge the throw at me. 
Just ask Bill Shull...

> Ok, I've had my fun.  It's time to 
> remember that you are not the enemy 
> and we are not the enemy.  The 
> problems are with the new website and 
> issues within and not with each 
> other.  It's time to throw water on 
> the discussion, not gasoline.  Speak 
> to the issues at hand only -- that's 
> addressed to you and me and everybody 
> else.  If you have an argument, 
> support it with reason and facts.  
> Let's look for solutions, not blame.
>
Point taken. Thank you.

Israel Stein


> Peace, Brother
>
> Will Truitt
>
> *From:*pianotech-bounces at ptg.org 
> [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] *On 
> Behalf Of *Israel Stein
> *Sent:* Thursday, March 10, 2011 8:34 AM
> *To:* pianotech at ptg.org
> *Subject:* Re: [pianotech] List 
> changes - it's a lot bigger than just 
> the lists...
>
> Al,
>
> It's funny how many people have 
> expressed appreciation for my putting 
> things in perspective - and did not 
> see my post as a personal attack on 
> anyone at all. Some people, I guess, 
> are just a bit thin skinned - of whom 
> at least one is well known for his 
> habit of intellectually browbeating 
> anyone who happens to disagree with 
> him... And some of the cloying 
> sanctimony that I have seen here in 
> response to my post absolutely makes 
> me retch (not you, Al, you are pretty 
> straightforward) - and I get an awful 
> lot of that here in Berkeley from the 
> organic-and-Birkenstock crowd and 
> should be immune to it by now...
>
> Israel Stein
>
>
> On 11:59 AM, Al Guecia/Allied 
> PianoCraft wrote:
>
> Israel, I think you should address the 
> problems and concerns here and stop 
> making personal attacks!
>
> Al -
>
> High Point, NC
>
> On Mar 10, 2011, at 1:14 AM, Israel 
> Stein wrote:
>
>
>
> On 11:59 AM, Ron Nossaman wrote:
>
> On 3/9/2011 8:36 PM, Israel Stein wrote:
>
>         And yes there are issues there
>         - but I see
>
>         that Ron Nossaman has gotten
>         out of his "this is crap" mode
>         and started
>
>         asking constructive questions
>         about how it could possibly be
>         made to
>
>         work.
>
>     Charming, as always.
>
> Pot calling the kettle black, sir...
>
>     In the old format, I've learned
>     valuable things from people I
>     might not otherwise read at all
>     from their long record of having
>     nothing much interesting or lucid
>     to say. The value of information
>     is not contingent on it's source,
>     but on it's validity, and unlikely
>     people know interesting things on
>     occasion that I'm grateful to
>     learn. The threading, discussion
>     grouping, and other social
>     filtering trends are real horizon
>     limiters in my opinion, as very
>     busy people limit their exposure
>     to ideas to what they are
>     concerned with at this hour. Next
>     week will naturally be different
>     as the crisis hot line turns. Some
>     folks are actually interested in
>     and able to learn, change, and
>     adapt to what's important to them
>     without being forced into a new
>     and improved format that has to be
>     kicked out of the way to get to
>     the process. I offered some
>     modified possibilities, which I
>     haven't heard back on,
>     incidentally, that would allow the
>     "fogies" all the raw data and
>     interactivity necessary to
>     maintain their current and
>     changing state of knowledge, and
>     still let the new age pursue their
>     passions. The thing is really not
>     that far off from being usable for
>     everyone with some changes, if
>     that's an allowable concept.
>     Awaiting enlightenment on that
>     one, but I suspect I already know
>     the answer.
>
> We will find out - won't we? I am glad 
> that you offered your suggestions - 
> and I noted that in the original post. 
> I am not happy that an atmosphere of 
> mockery and derision was created 
> before those suggestions were offered.
>
> I know the old system has burned out 
> the folks that made it work, but it 
> still strikes me as curious that the 
> users weren't polled before the money 
> was spent and major changes were made. 
> If our preferences don't count, why 
> bother to maintain discussion lists at 
> all?
>
> Don't know - i wasn't part of the 
> process. But instead of immediately 
> jumping on people - perhaps it might 
> be useful to first find out what 
> factors were used in the decision? And 
> how do you know that some users were 
> not polled? As much as a small core of 
> users like to believe that this list 
> is theirs - there is a huge body of 
> subscribers who might not agree with 
> you, and also quite a sizable body of 
> former subscribers who have been 
> driven off this list by the format and 
> the attitudes of some of the "major 
> contributors".
>
> Israel Stein
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/20110310/02455ed3/attachment.htm>