[pianotech] [OT] Stuff Which Should Really Be on PTG-L

[Ron Nossaman]

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