[pianotech] Question of Protocol; was: but will it split

David Skolnik davidskolnik at optonline.net
Sat Dec 27 06:58:01 PST 2008


Dear list -

David A - There is a difference between facetious and rhetorical, 
certainly in my mind. It has nothing to do with taking the 
heat.  In  response to Ron's previous post, I said:

>It was a serious rhetorical question, with which I was trying to 
>illustrate the aspect of John Delecour's initial posts that I 
>thought had been overlooked...the value of those "archaic" 
>skills.   I thought my initial post and subsequent explanation were 
>clear enough, but maybe not.  Without actually having experience 
>with the capstan method, I would not have expressed an opinion as to 
>which was better.

Perhaps Ron has not had an opportunity to read this, but if so, he 
has not, as yet, made any effort to convey whether his 
'clarification' in fact modifies his original perception of my 
intent, and whether my thinking yet qualifies for downgrading (or is 
it up?) from the Crap'n Stupid list.

You, David A can't be serious in suggesting that I would waste my 
time, your time, his, or anyone else's by provocation for its own 
sake. Why is it that after three rounds of explanation, few seem to 
get it?  As far as how it would all play out in person, well of 
course, there are two sides to that, as well.  You don't know me 
personally, nor does Ron.  If you did,  I highly doubt you would even 
consider suggesting that there was aggression in my question.  It 
would take a good deal to convince me that the same could be said of 
Ron's response, but I'm open.  Obviously the fault lies in my missing 
too many conventions.

As far as Ron's statement

>What I was attempting to do was to stop it turning into another 
>personal angst session early on. Didn't work.

I find it hard to believe that this was his best effort.  There seem 
so many, more effective, alternatives... like going off-list with 
me.  I'm not out to win forum-points, nor to make anyone else look 
bad.  But Ron's no neophyte when it comes to the patronizing 
put-down, and the unfortunate conflagrations that periodically arise, 
due either to the inadequacies of the (other) writer or  to the 
medium of email itself, are much more the issue than his dismissive 
mis-characterization of my motives.  This isn't personal, it's communication.

And, yes, I'm sorry if I perceive just a tad of disingenuity in the comment
>>Thanks David. I'm glad at least someone got it.

In fact, virtually everyone who responded seemed wholly sympathetic 
to his view, so what's up with that?  But I choose to see it as 
rhetorical disingenuity, not personal, and, as such, an acceptable 
debating tool.  Ron's take on the personal aspect is, of course, a 
mystery to me, and probably better left so.


That's all.   Now I'll go see what kinds of discounts I can find on 
lathes.  Any suggestions?


Cheerful as ever

David Skolnik
Hastings on Hudson, NY



At 06:04 PM 12/26/2008, you wrote:
>David Andersen wrote:
>>Exactly. If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen. For example:
>>>(DS)
>>>If you were called upon to do a fine regulation of existing 
>>>dampers, would you first pull the tray and install capstans? (RN)
>>>Stupid question. If you had to regulate a system with capstans, 
>>>would you pull the tray and remove them? That's two stupid 
>>>questions. Now what, are we done with that crap?
>>BOTH questions are stupid---or, more precisely, facetious and 
>>rhetorical, purely designed to irritate---and RN is simply, and 
>>self-deprecatingly, pointing out the truth by calling both 
>>questions, and all of the facetious leading questions that are 
>>asked around here, which  in my view you would never ask in 
>>person---they would sound aggressive, and mean, and, yes, 
>>stupid---crap. One person was not calling another person crap, or 
>>stupid. Emotions sometimes cloud our ability to perceive what's 
>>really going on.
>
>Thanks David. I'm glad at least someone got it. What I was 
>attempting to do was to stop it turning into another personal angst 
>session early on. Didn't work.
>
>Ron N





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/pianotech_ptg.org/attachments/20081227/cda43d43/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the pianotech mailing list

This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC