An email listserv is one of the basic forms of communication on the web. There are literally ten's of thousands of these listservs on the web most of them operating at no cost to the users. I just can't buy the fact that this is too expensive for PTG to maintain along side the new system. <br> <br>As far as dilution goes - the REAL dilution will occur if we lose some of the most important contributors. <br><br>I think the biggest mistake that was made was that the folks who made the final decision didn't realize how personal and very important on many levels these lists are. For some members it's "just a list" for others it has become an important part of their professional and personal life and should not be taken lightly by those who don't see it that way. <br> <br>JIM MOY WROTE:<br><div style="margin-left: 40px;">With Andy and Ron's help, I integrated the existing listserv with some<br> forum software much like the one that operates the PianoWorld forums.<br> The two operated together so seamlessly that very few noticed it<br> happened. The listserv continued to operate as usual, and the forum<br> operated in parallel. All emails on the listserv were funneled into a<br> likewise named web forum, and all posts to the web forum were<br> forwarded out to the listserv. Those who preferred the email interface<br> could stick with it, and those who preferred the forum interface could<br> participate from there. The integration was such that user experience<br> in both seemed apropos to its environment. It has since been taken<br> down because of its maintenance issues, and the versions of the<br> software are now outdated, but it demonstrated an approach that could<br> move the community in that direction with little disruption. At the<br> same time, the forum seemed capable of making the PTG archives and<br> sponsored forums more visible thus raising PTG's stature on the<br> Internet.<br></div><br>So for a time, at least, both systems were running and nobody really knew. <br><br>From what I gather following this topic, it is the simplicity and immediacy that is so appreciated by the users. Imagine someone coming into your shop and taking your favorite regulating tools and replacing them with ones that make your job more cumbersome and less enjoyable. That is essentially what has happened. The longer I'm in this business the less tools I seem to need. I look at the "Key-leveller" and wonder at the complexity and awkwardness of it. I can achieve the same results in less time with a short $5 straightedge, and of course my trillion $$ machine (thank you Dave Andersen!)<br> <br>I'm worried that so much effort has been put into this new system that "Damn the torpedoes, full steam ahead!" is going to prevail. What the list needs to remember is that PTG is a political machine, that works very well but you have to apply your energy to it in a thoughtful way to get results. <br> <br>All it takes is a motion in council and sound arguments to back it up to get the machine to do its thing. <br><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 12:14 PM, William Monroe <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:bill@a440piano.net">bill@a440piano.net</a>></span> wrote:<br> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">One dilutes the other, as I see it. With the collective subscribers splitting between two systems, or subscribing to both, it gets very confusing. Additionally, it will gobble up even more resources to administer two systems. I firmly believe we need to settle on one workable system, whatever that may be.<div> <br></div><div>William R. Monroe</div><div><br></div><div><br><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div class="im">On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 1:39 PM, Ryan Sowers <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:tunerryan@gmail.com" target="_blank">tunerryan@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;"><div class="im">I mostly agree with this, William. <br><br>However, this situation is akin to coming into a client's home and adjusting the touch and tone on their piano only to get a call back that they liked it better before. So even though the technician may see it as an improvement, the user now no longer enjoys their instrument. <br> <br>I don't see why the two systems cannot operate side by side each catering to a different subset of the membership. Why does it have to be one or the other?<br><br></div><div class="gmail_quote">Ryan Sowers</div></blockquote> </div> </div> </blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Ryan Sowers, RPT<br>Puget Sound Chapter<br>Olympia, WA<br><a href="http://www.pianova.net">www.pianova.net</a><br>