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

[John Ross]

Could it be that Member Max, would be used to exclude non PTG members?
I was a member of PTG for quite a few years, and now that I am 73, I no longer feel that I want to pay the dues.
Actually, I let my membership lapse when I turned 70, or was it 71.
I see that in myptg, there are some areas that I am not allowed to subscribe too. So much for all those years of dues I did pay.
Anyway, I hope it all works out.
The list is still the best resource there is.
John Ross
Windsor, Nova Scotia
On 2011-07-02, at 6:35 PM, Encore Pianos wrote:

> I have been asking myself the same question about the Member Max integration
> thing.  I just don't see how important it is to the list users except in the
> most limited way (and I cannot figure out what that would even be).  
> 
> I'll answer Ron's question.  The Pianotech Forum does not require Member
> Max.  That much is obvious, because no such integration existed for the last
> 15 years and we functioned pretty well without it.  Perhaps the home office
> sees a utility in that integration, but no one has explained that to us yet,
> and the value would only be for their use and not ours.  I think it is fair
> to say that the Pianotech Forum exists primarily for the users - otherwise
> why have it at all?   If the Pianotech Forum exists primarlly for the users,
> then if we are establishing a hierarchy of values, what would be the more
> important value - meeting the users needs and encouraging usage by having
> the best possible e-mail server (one that is easy to use and simple, a
> measure by which the HL fails compared to even the old list) or meeting some
> narrow administrative desire for the home office.   If the users are truly
> valued, it is obvious which answer suits us.  
> 
> Will
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [,mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] On
> Behalf Of Ron Nossaman
> Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2011 5:01 PM
> To: pianotech at ptg.org
> Subject: Re: [pianotech] [OT] Stuff Which Should Really Be on PTG-L
> 
> 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
> 
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/20110702/2060c330/attachment.htm>