[pianotech] unsubscribe

[David Skolnik]

>David Skolnick said:


Ryan -
First, and most importantly,  it's "nik" not "nick".

Next,  as I mentioned in the unrelated private post, I was not 
intending to chastise you with any more severity than Horace did.  We 
see how much trouble that caused for him.  I disagree with nothing 
you say below, for the most part, though I'm not sure it's fair to 
attribute Jim B's decision to unsubscribe completely to the list 
issues.  There has been quite a bit posted recently saying that the 
list was NOT being shut down immediately, and, in fact, Jim hasn't 
posted (except for once, earlier this year) since early 2008, so we 
must remember to be careful with our interpretation of data.

With regard to political speech, I agree that it is difficult to 
discern exactly where the line is, but it's important to remember 
that it does exist, to wit: it's one thing to criticize, strongly, 
the decisions and actions taken by the administrators (the committee, 
the Board, the Home Office) AS administrators of the list while, at 
the same time, keeping separate their functions as officers and 
administrators of PTG.   Think of it this way, perhaps.  Assuming 
that the basic infrastructure of this mail list were still viable, 
what would prevent us from finding an alternate host?  The 
cost?  Rights to the name "Pianotech"?  Redundancy with my.ptg lists?

Also, if the inadequacies (in some peoples opinion) of the current 
offering were actually remedied, would the continued existence of the 
two "pianotech"s make sense?  Is there something fundamentally 
different in the originating mission of the two that is not easily 
resolved?  Open membership as opposed to membership closely tied to 
PTG interaction?  RonN made the same point, way back, on Dec. 31st.

As I said, there IS no dedicated list that this readership can 
redirect to in order to discuss self-referential aspects of the 
list's functioning.  It all has to happen here, in one big 
room.  (Sounds like a caucus).  The self-perpetuating irony, as 
you've seen, is that, in order to engage in such discussion, we seem 
to be herded to the website, and, even there, need to make the 
distinction between what is "User Help Group", and what goes to 
"PTG-L".  For example, in your earlier post, where you said:

>I think the problem is this Board of Directors is too emotionally 
>invested in the new and improved product because they have spent so 
>much time, energy, and (our)$$ on it.  The only hope would be to 
>elect a new board who isn't so invested in it.

The first sentence would be at home on the User Help list.  The 
second belonged on PTG-L.  It may seem absurd, but one way of 
unmasking it as such is to follow it through to the extreme.  Send a 
different version to each of the relevant lists.  Is someone on 
"Users" going to say, "No, we have nothing to do with the old 
Pianotech?  Not likely, but, if so, who does?  As far as anything 
going to PTG-L, the question( would be the boundaries of discourse, 
even there, and how much representation this list has there.

This list can't just become defined by our reluctance to adapt (no, 
I'm not talking about LC*) or about what a terrible person Duaine is. 
(Maybe there would be a separate list on the website for that).   The 
question is, are the administrators of this list as responsible to 
any question raised by Duaine (as a non-PTG'er) as they might be to 
me (as soon as I pay my dues)?  Is there less of a sense of 
responsibility, as list administrators, to this list than the one on the web?

Clearly, I'll do anything to avoid honest work.

Keep celebrating -
David Skolnik
Hastings on Hudson, NY
*(Learning Curve)




At 12:37 PM 1/3/2012, you wrote:
>David Skolnick said: "The rub, so to speak, is the indistinctness of 
>the line between what is list business and what is PTG 
>business.  This obfuscation is not new...we have engaged in it for 
>years, and we continue to do so.   This thread was walking the line 
>until, I regret to say, Ryan stepped unmistakably over it in 
>expressing opinions that related specifically to the politics of the 
>organization."
>
>This thread was began with  yet another contributor leaving the list 
>because they are completely unsatisfied with the very large change 
>that was dropped like a bomb on the list users last year, without 
>any real notice, feedback, or involvement from the heavy users. That 
>was a political decision that had some strong reprucussions for many 
>in the list community - and the large drop off in participation that 
>followed proved this.
>
>Mentioning anything relating to  PTG politics on a non-PTG-L list 
>seems to be taboo. However, this list, if it survives, will only do 
>so if there is a certain amount of political will exerted. This 
>thread is about the survival of this list - which is ultimately a 
>political decision. Just because there is a dedicated political 
>list, it doesn't follow that any and all relevant political opinions 
>in regards to a thread topic are counter-productive.
>
>Ryan

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/20120103/53510959/attachment.htm>