<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)"><style></style></head><body bgcolor=white lang=EN-US link="#660099" vlink="#993366"><div class=WordSection1>No, I am not considering that possibility. I have reread his communications many times. If that were the case he could have said so directly and simply. That’s not so difficult is it? The best word I can use to describe his communication style is opaque. He’s certainly made no effort to inform, nor did he explain that he was not in a position to share certain things. My read is still that he had no interest in answering our questions, nor did he feel the need to explain why he wouldn’t answer our questions. Your mileage may vary. No matter how hard he works, or how many people may or may not be working on it, does not change the quality of his demeanor. <o:p></o:p><o:p> </o:p>I’m not implying anything. I am clearly saying that we feel that we are being disregarded and blown off because of an almost complete lack of response to our queries and concerns by the PTG leadership people. Excepting Norman Cantrell’s welcomed post this evening, we’re being kept completely out of the loop. Reminding us that they are all volunteers states the obvious and distracts from the issues. And I have thanked him and everyone else for their service and mean that sincerely. The issues exist separately from our gratitude for their service. Near complete absence from communication is never a good strategy if you want people to feel that their concerns are being taken seriously. <o:p></o:p><o:p> </o:p>It is possible for people to communicate diplomatically and inform concerned parties while retaining appropriate boundaries. It can be done, but it isn’t. It does take effort, tact, and thoughtfulness. I just want the lines of communications to open up and have the dialog go both ways. <o:p></o:p><o:p> </o:p>How do you know what Phil knows? How do you know who he is communicating with and what is not yet decided? Why do you think I am asking him to invent details out of speculation? How do you know he thought the news would be welcomed? <o:p></o:p><o:p> </o:p>I will refrain from discussing your characterizations of me. <o:p></o:p><o:p> </o:p>Sincerely, <o:p></o:p><o:p> </o:p>Will Truitt<o:p></o:p><o:p> </o:p><o:p> </o:p><o:p> </o:p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'>From: pianotech-bounces@ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces@ptg.org] On Behalf Of Mark Purney Sent: Monday, July 04, 2011 8:41 PM To: pianotech@ptg.org Subject: Re: [pianotech] Phil Bondi's answers to our questions about what isbeing done to correct the problems with the Higher Logic program<o:p></o:p></div></div><o:p> </o:p>Will, have you considered the possibility that Phil shared the only information he was able to at this time, and maybe there are a lot of details and communications that are still being worked through before any additional information can be made available? Maybe you haven't considered the possibility that board members and other volunteers have been taking many hours of their holiday weekend to deal with this very issue in order to resolve it in a way that is thorough, professional, includes proper communication between various volunteers and staff (out of respect for each other), while bringing clarity to an issue that is immersed with confusion surrounding many details that you are lucky to not have to even know about, let alone deal with. To imply to the hundreds of people on this list that you are all being disregarded and blown off by PTG leadership is not only complete nonsense, but it's disrespectful. Please show more respect to those who serve the PTG as volunteers. They don't get paid money, but if you can't find it within yourself to be grateful for their efforts, please at least refrain from making obnoxious accusations that you have no legitimate basis to make. Phil tried to share some news that he thought would be welcomed, and to try and tell someone what's going on (without inventing details out of speculation on matters not yet decided - which would be irresponsible), and he gets blasted for not telling you what's going on? That's insane. If he gave you money, would you post to the list about how insulting the amount was? On 7/4/2011 2:39 PM, Encore Pianos wrote: <o:p></o:p>I appreciate his service and that of any others who have volunteered to keep the pianotech list running.Â  <o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p>But I still think he and others have a responsibility to tell us what is going on.Â  Is that unreasonable?<o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p>I regret that the dialog has sharpened.Â  But we are being disregarded and blown off<o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p>Will .Â  <o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p><o:p> </o:p></div></body></html>