Michael Wathen wrote:
>>This is a good constructive argument. A source is listed which one
can then refer to verify the claim.
>>In general, I find this lacking in Internet discussions. Usually
there is one or two "Gurus" who appear to have all the answers. They
answer the questions without giving the reasons or documentary support
for their beliefs.
Michael,
Thank you for reminding us that our writing style does matter. I don't
agree, though, that we should limit our writing to subjects for which
we can provide published sources as references. I don't think of this
listserve as a place to publish a thesis, but as a place to talk about
our work, share ideas, and stimulate thought. It's kind of like
talking over dinner and drinks at a convention, only with a little
more time to think about what we say.
Vince's writing is excellent, and we all benefit from references like
he provided, but does that mean that we should _only_ write when we
have references and substantiation for everyone to follow up on? I
wouldn't bother - it's too much trouble to dig through files for
models, serial numers, and locations of examples of pianos discussed.
It isn't likely that any of us would bother following up on those
references anyway.
If we limit our writing here by always substantiating our theories
with references and examples of pianos, the general exchange taking
place would dry up. I think this would be a loss for all of us.
You are correct, however, that a lot of BS would be eliminated.
>>We are simply expected to believe in their wisdom because they have
researched it for themselves.<<
No one is expected to believe anything. However, sometimes it is wise
to learn from other's experiences or mistakes. Read, doubt, question,
and establish your own opinions.
Don_Mannino@yca.ccmail.compuserve.com
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC