[pianotech] Phil Bondi's answers to our questions about what is being done to correct the problems with the Higher Logic program

[Laura Olsen]

Ron,

I'm listening and I'm not on the Board, but would like to be. I believe I can be an advocate and make a difference.  I believe I can help improve communication between the Board and the "rank and file". I've been on the Board before and I'm catching what you're pitching.  I'm smelling what you're cooking.  You're right, speak in specifics and you are much more likely to get others to listen and to act.

See you in Council,


Laura Olsen, RPT
Candidate for Vice President
Barrington, IL.

On Jul 4, 2011, at 1:35 PM, Ron Nossaman wrote:

> 
> 
> A point I'd like to try to make once again, please.
> 
> 
> Everyone please try to clearly differentiate between the entire HL system and the mailing list portion when you're talking about mailing lists.
> 
> HL will NOT be dumped until it proves inadequate to the administration - period. Get used to it. And I really couldn't care one way or the other until it hiccups and takes the whole organization down. Also, please quit saying we want the old list maintained forever. That's totally unrealistic. It has been made clear for many years that the administrative overhead of the current dinosaur was abusive, primarily to Andy, as well as the folks handling file attachments. When those complaining about the mail lists demand the dumping of HL, you make it dead simple for the board to ignore any and all valid points you may make in addition.
> 
> What we, or at least I want is some functional equivalent to the old list, supplied by a vendor who can write usable software. Not the old list, but something that works, and offers the same function.
> 
> First things first. Find a functional replacement to the old Pianotech list that doesn't require the volunteer overhead to maintain. From what I'm reading on the old abandoned list (which is where virtually all the traffic is) this shouldn't be difficult. Keep the HL version up if you must, for the six people who say they find it valuable, and run a separate and usable email list functionally similar to the original for the rest of us who prefer the format and quick and easy information exchange.
> 
> But PLEASE, don't make it any easier for the board to ignore us than it already is by lumping everything together. Don't demand they dump HL - not going to happen - bitch about specifics, like bypassing or replacing (not fixing, I doubt they have the capabilities) the list software.
> 
> In the highly unlikely event that we can actually get a decent mail list up and running again, then we can tilt with the windmill over the other 4000 or so things if we care to or have the time after discussing all those fine piano related topics on a functional Pianotech list.
> 
> And if our liaison won't talk to us, is he talking to HL? And if he's not listening to us, what's he talking to HL about? Do we have an advocate or not?
> Ron N