That's right, and that's beautiful, Phil, but we need more info than that. We've crossed over the "just let me take care of it" line. We need to know about this now. No BS. DA > Is it possible, Will, that what Phil is saying is that he's the one pushing to keep the old pianotech list 'as is'? I guess I read it that way, rightly or wrongly... > > Mark Potter > > > From: Encore Pianos <encorepianos at metrocast.net> > To: pianotech at ptg.org > Sent: Mon, July 4, 2011 1:17:42 PM > Subject: Re: [pianotech] Phil Bondi's answers to our questions about what is being done to correct the problems with the Higher Logic program > > > To List Readers, below is my correspondence with Phil Bondi when I tried to find out what is being done about the problems with HL. Start by reading the message at the bottom and read up from there. > > So the simple act of asking you to share information about what is being done to correct the problems that HL has constitutes an online Argument? I didn’t express a point of view at all in my query, if you care to reread it. Who do you report to about the List in the PTG hierarchy? We, as members, have a right to know. > > Your demeanor is forthright enough that I know that you aren’t going to share a damn thing with me or anybody else that it does not serve your own purposes to do so. > > Why pray tell, is it not in order to discuss particulars with me (or anyone else from the list presumably). Who decides it’s not in order? > > What is not good enough for me is that you are deliberately choosing to keep people on the list ignorant about what is being done to correct the problems of HL. Why? Is that a state secret? Who would be hurt by sharing that information? Why do you think that we, the users, have no right to know what is being done to make the product better? At least tell me why it is not appropriate. To simply ignore the request in the way that you have is to display the height of arrogance. > > What is not good enough for me is that you are basically saying that discussion is going on to keep the status quo, to keep Pianotech as it is. That says that essentially it has already been decided that nothing else will be fairly considered, and that probably nothing is even being done to address the bugs and interface issues of HL. > > Loud and clear, you are telling me that the users have no say in the direction that Pianotech will go in the future. > > Will Truitt > > > > > From: Phil Bondi [mailto:phil at philbondi.com] > Sent: Monday, July 04, 2011 11:58 AM > To: Will Truitt > Subject: Re: Phil Bondi's answers to our questions about what is being done to correct the problems with the Higher Logic program > > I'm not going to get into an on-line argument with you or anybody. > > By telling you discussion is going on to keep the status quo - keep pianotech as is - is not good enough for you? > My demeanor is nothing short of honest and forthright. I'm sorry if you don't understand that. To discuss particulars with you is not in order at this time. Again, it is the answer you don't want to either hear or listen to, but the fact is this: discussion is going on to keep pianotech as is. Frankly, I AM the one pushing for that. > > Have a good holiday. > > --------------------- > Phil Bondi, RPT > <image002.jpg> > > <image003.jpg> > www.philbondi.com > 239.949.3688 > -------------------------- > > > On 7/4/2011 11:39 AM, Will Truitt wrote: > Dear Phil: > > You have given me the response that I feared you would, which is that you are choosing to share no information at all. I read your response to Duane Hechler a couple of days ago, which showed the same complete unwillingness to engage with the list participants, even when asking only for basic information concerning what is being done to address the very real problems with the Higher Logic program that users are encountering. If you have been following the posts over the last week, the discussion has been very large, and the dissatisfaction broad and deep. For a Guild Regional Vice President to show this kind of contempt for the list membership in light of this degree of concern, I find appalling. > > Read what you wrote to me: “presently discussion is going on about how to handle all this dissatisfaction”. I take that to mean that you and presumably the others (whomever they are) see that the problem is DISSATISFACTION by the users, and not the bugs or general dysfunctionality of the Higher Logic Program. Your response simply discounts our concerns and intentionally avoids speaking to the issues with the program. Shame on you. Since you won’t tell us what you are doing with Higher Logic people to correct the problems, I can only assume that you don’t see any problems and are doing nothing. > > I am deeply sorry that you have had to suffer the profound dislocation of having to tell the unnamed others that we should leave it alone – AGAIN. Your demeanor makes it very clear that you just don’t want to be bothered by the concerns of the Great Unwashed on the list. > > But you have said enough that we now know that what is most likely to happen in Kansas City is that we will not be listened to, all of this will be swept into the closet, the door shut and locked. You and the others will say that we had the discussion, they will pretend to have gone through the motions (actually I am being unfair to you, you are not even bothering to pretend), and say that in the balance of things, it has been decided to keep HL. And the users will still be stuck with this half broken spaghetti code piece of garbage that we don’t want and which will never be any better than it already is because the core architecture is so crippled by bad design. > > Maybe you can get away with shoving this down our throats, but I promise you that we will not go quietly. This is not over. > > I am forwarding your response and my reply to the list to share with the readers. > > Most sincerely yours, > > Will Truitt > > From: Phil Bondi [mailto:phil at philbondi.com] > Sent: Monday, July 04, 2011 10:10 AM > To: Will Truitt > Subject: Re: Higher Logic questions > > There is presently discussion going on about how to handle all of this dissatisfaction. I have suggested leaving well enough alone - for now - again. > > We'll see where it goes. > > Have a fine holiday, > > --------------------- > Phil Bondi, RPT > <image002.jpg> > > <image003.jpg> > www.philbondi.com > 239.949.3688 > -------------------------- > > > > On 7/2/2011 3:48 PM, Will Truitt wrote: > <image001.jpg> > Thanks for your heads up Phil – enjoy! > > Will > > From: Phil Bondi [mailto:phil at philbondi.com] > Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2011 1:21 PM > To: Will Truitt > Subject: Re: Higher Logic questions > > Hi Will. Thanks for your note. > I am on vacation right now, responding from my phone. I will answer you either late tonight or late tomorrow when I finally land home. > Thank you for understanding. > -Phil > From: "Will Truitt" <surfdog at metrocast.net> > Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2011 13:00:09 -0400 > To: 'Phil Bondi'<phil at philbondi.com> > Subject: Higher Logic questions > > Hi Phil: > > Dale Probst and others have encouraged us to contact you with our questions about the Higher Logic e-mail server that has been recently implemented. As you no doubt know, it has not always behaved perfectly and has some known bugs as well as idiosyncrasies that are not always endearing. > > A great many users of the list are wondering what is being done by Higher Logic to correct the problems. Given the present very high level of interest in this topic (there have been several hundred message in the last few days) it would be very useful to share your responses on both forums, the HL and the old list. We would much rather be discussing the issues with the forum based on knowledge instead of speculation. You are in a unique position to help us in this regard. Specifically: > > Can you share a list of Higher Logic action items with us? > > What will be changed? > > How will these changes be implemented? > > When will these changes take place? > > I very much thank you for your attention to these questions. > > Most sincerely, > > Will Truitt > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/20110704/3d5d8251/attachment.htm>
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC