Mystery (was Re: %#@$pers), with apologies to the List

[David Ilvedson]

Ron,

When you guys learn?  If its not you, Ron, its some poor innocent newbie who
responds to this guys posts.  He has had nothing substantial to add to this
List since his EBV temperment.  Unless you want to include his 8 tunings in
one day and aren't I something post.  Why can't this List  learn to simply
delete any and all of his posts?  Guess what?  He will no longer annoy you.
He will be happily posting to the great beyond and no one will be listening.
Now doesn't that sound like his just desserts?

David I.

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pianotech@ptg.org [mailto:owner-pianotech@ptg.org]On Behalf
Of Ron Nossaman
Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2000 11:32 AM
To: pianotech@ptg.org
Subject: Re: Mystery (was Re: %#@$pers), with apologies to the List


>It's no mystery to me, Ron.  You failed to see my point, as expected.  And
as
>I said, it's the HT's.  As soon as you see my name, it doesn't matter what
I
>write, it will not be read nor understood for what it really says, it will
>only be viewed with a deeply imbedded resistance and rejection of the idea
>that a proper piano tuning could be *unequal*.

I still don't get it. I didn't make even a hint of a mention of tuning in
the dampers post. I do read what you write, when you're making sense (which
you are quite capable of doing if you chose to), but I still don't
understand this insistence of yours that you're being persecuted, in
reference to a post that had absolutely nothing to do with either you, or
the subject of your personal crusade. You attacked me, Bud, and I fail to
see a reason for it, or any even reasonably sane connection. I don't see
how you could expect anything else, under the circumstances. If you're
having a bad day, I'm sorry for you, but if you feel like taking it out on
me, you could at least attempt to make some sense in the process. That
doesn't seem like a lot to ask.



>The very idea that so many tunings that were meant to be ET are not in fact
>but a backwards version of an HT is all the more disquieting.  Reverse Well
>does not exist because I am the only one who has identified it.  Therefore,
>no matter what I write about anything or how I write it, it is viewed with
>contempt because I have challenged the very way that you and most other
>people have always perceived the art and practice of tuning.  The easiest
way
>to reject my ideas is to delete them or to take cheap shots at them.  It's
me
>against all the rest.  If you choose to see it that way, then it is that
way.

Who said anything about tuning, other than you? How is it that anything at
all that you take exception to, regardless of the subject or context,
triggers this standard avalanche? Is this the only rant you've got? I still
don't see a connection, or a rational justification for this kind of
response to my dampers post.



>I was interested in what you had to say about the substandard rebuilding
job
>but I found the way you presented it to be unreadable, so I deleted it.
It's
>just as I said, it is OK for you to rant and rave and spout off, but I am
not
>allowed to do that.

You didn't delete it. You responded to it, in a manner that was neither
remotely related, civil, nor informative. In my post, I tried to indicate
that partially destroying the damper heads in the interest of expedient
felt removal was counterproductive. Now maybe, just maybe, someone will
remember that when their first time comes up on the wheel and it will save
them a lot of grief in the end. That was the message and the intent. I've
been reading your response messages, but I don't seem to be able to figure
out your intent.



>I've seen other List members write far more outrageous
>things than I ever have and have it accepted as normal discourse.

I haven't, except for the guy who signed off the List a couple of years ago
with a rather memorable blast, you're the hands-down champ, both in
toxicity and volume.


>  To me,
>it's all very amusing because I get lots of private mail from people who
are
>very interested in what I do and have to say but who are much too afraid to
>ever ask about it on the List because they already know what the reaction
>will be.

I read positive responses to your more technical posts here on the List.
Are you trying to deny them too?




>So, if you don't mind too much, I'll talk about what interests me the way I
>want to talk about it and you talk about what interests or concerns you,
the
>way you want to talk about it.  If I lose interest in what you have to say
>simply because of the way you have presented it, then you have done the
very
>same thing that you accuse me of.  It's always been that way, not just
>between you and me but with any of the others who have complained.

Aren't you paying attention, Bill? The point is that you are the one
complaining. If you don't like the way I said it, delete it and don't tell
me about it. That's what I do when you run out of information and fall back
on this standard prose. If you chose to tell me about it, please make an
attempt to be minimally rational about it and at least tie your complaint
into the subject somehow. If you have trouble making a connection, drop me
a note. Maybe I can help.



>As I said, it's the HT's.  If that were not my primary area of interest, if
I
>ranted and raved about PSO's, "tooners", "birdcages are for the birds" and
>about a few "kooks" who want to do funny tunings, "don't they *know* there
is
>only *one* way to tune a piano?!", I'd be cool and just one of the guys,
just
>like you.  But I am not.  So, there.
>
>Bill Bremmer RPT
>Madison, Wisconsin

I know I'll regret saying this, but I can't help but wonder on what List
you read from anyone saying there was only one way to tune a piano, other
than what you wrote yourself. You quote stuff like this incessantly, but I
don't see the evidence of the original offense. If you want to be one of
the "guys", come on out and play. I'll talk to you, and if you'll quit
throwing pointless tantrums and attempt to communicate instead of preaching
Hell Fire, we could probably both learn a few things.

Ron N