<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD> <META content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type> <META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 9.00.8112.16430"></HEAD> <BODY style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 10pt" id=role_body bottomMargin=7 leftMargin=7 rightMargin=7 topMargin=7><FONT id=role_document color=#000000 size=2 face=Arial> <DIV>All,</DIV> <DIV><BR>Don Mannino posted this to the new pianotech discussion forum and it was so thoughtfully written I want to be sure everyone can see it.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Regards,</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Bill</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT lang=0 size=2 face=Arial FAMILY="SANSSERIF" PTSIZE="10">Bill Shull, RPT, M.Mus.<BR>President, Shull Piano Inc<BR>Director, Period Piano Center<BR>25041 Redlands Blvd<BR>Loma Linda, CA 92354<BR>909 796-4226 bus cell<BR>bdshull@aol.com<BR><A href="http://www.shullpiano.com/">www.shullpiano.com</A><BR><A href="http://www.periodpianos.org">www.periodpianos.org</A></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT lang=0 size=2 face=Arial FAMILY="SANSSERIF" PTSIZE="10"></FONT> </DIV> <DIV>Don was responding to posts which expressed strong concerns and regrets with the new system.  Here is his response:</DIV> <DIV><FONT lang=0 size=2 face=Arial FAMILY="SANSSERIF" PTSIZE="10"><BR>Most of this discussion mirrors my own feelings about the new system. At first I was just astounded at how difficult it is to use, and to view messages on line, etc. Once I started using it again as an e-mail list it became less onerous, but it still has strong limitations that bother me.<BR><BR><BR><BR>However, some of the criticism written recently is overstated, mainly because some people have not taken the time to wade through the instructions to set up the new e-mail subscription. Which is a pain.<BR><BR><BR><BR>Once the plain text e-mail format is set up, the new system will function mostly like the old, except it needs to be in plain text format, and you cannot simply attach files to messages. Of course, there are other limitations â but overall, it does work.<BR><BR><BR><BR>But having said that, it is very clear that the new setup is disliked by a large percentage of past users, and that the on-line web based version is just plain dumb and disorganized in function. To me, it is all but useless.<BR><BR><BR><BR>I checked some of the other companies (all non-profits) that the software vendor advertises as using their software. It appears that all of them have the same semi-dysfunctional format instead of a logical, threaded forum as is readily available from other software vendors. So it does appear that the software itself is not adaptable to work like a normal informational forum, as we all have used. Piano World is one great example, but also most computer companies have support forums which are very simple to use.<BR><BR><BR><BR>From what I have heard in talking to PTG people, the software package was purchased for a wide variety of uses. For some aspects of what the PTG needs it to do, it apparently has features that are beneficial and useful â especially to the board and committee members. The software company, Higher Logic (and yes, that company name seems especially ironic to me) apparently sold the PTG a bill of goods, featuring all of the truly useable features and somehow glossing over the member discussion areas. Our management is not immune to making mistakes, of course, and instead of having some key forum users look at the software and evaluating it, they seem to have believed what they were told and went with the package. I know that I would have been very glad to have evaluated the software, and I think others would have as well, and that step alone would have prevented this fiasco. Or at least, one would hope so.<BR><BR><BR><BR>As it is now, things are awkward. I believe the issue will be discussed at length in Council, but I donât know what decisions can be made. Once the money has been spent it becomes very hard to simply right it off completely and move to something different. Plus, those features of the PTG software that are beneficial would need to be retained. So throwing it out completely doesnât make sense, but there are options.<BR><BR><BR><BR>In my opinion, here are the current issues and possibilities:<BR><BR>- It is beneficial for PTG to administer mail lists for members, to keep searchable archives, and to provide the central location for managing list subscriptions as a service to the PTG members and technical community.<BR><BR>- The list maintenance and management (eliminating spam, dealing with hacks, fixing subscriber issues, etc.) really should be a volunteer activity. This has been the case to some degree in the past, and the process has become rather overbearing for those involved. Especially keeping junk out apparently has become a very time consuming problem. <BR><BR>- Good software should solve the junk / spam issue, and the current software seems to have done so as far as I know. But of course, the software is in other ways bad and we donât like it.<BR><BR>- This software allowed the maintenance of both web based and e-mail based discussions. Unfortunately it does both of them badly.<BR><BR><BR><BR>What can we do instead?<BR><BR>- Ask the PTG to set up different software for community forums separate from Higher Logic, with trials and input from members and users.<BR><BR>- Decide if we all would be happy with an on-line forum instead of e-mail. This would be a big change for many, but in my opinion would solve the problem of both SPAM and ease of use. But the messages would not move through our e-mail software.<BR><BR>- If we all vote for continuing this as an e-mail service, then a group of administrators needs to share the responsibilities for maintaining it. This could be set up as an ongoing committee, made up of technically minded and interested people from our membership. The administration would still be handled like before through the PTG web site.<BR><BR><BR><BR>If there are web forums that allow both e-mail and well organized web based forums, Iâd love to have that option. But so far I havenât seen such a thing.<BR><BR><BR><BR>Personally, my vote would be for an on-line forum, similar to Piano World or other such forums. I am much more comfortable taking an hour or two each day to scan things in an online forum, and read and contribute to threads that are of interest and that I can contribute to. I also feel this is less distracting for my work day, as it doesnât pull me away from other work to read incoming messages all day. These can also be formatted for mobile devices â something that would make life very much easier for many who use smartphones. <BR><BR><BR><BR>Wait, can we get someone to write a PTG APP for iPhone, Android, and Windows Phone? Now thereâs an idea.<BR><BR><BR><BR>I am not a PTG-L subscriber, so cannot post there. If anyone wishes to re-post this in that area, feel free.<BR><BR><BR><BR>Don Mannino RPT</DIV> <DIV><BR></DIV> <DIV> </DIV></FONT></FONT></BODY></HTML>