Hi all,

I have a proposal re: The Acoustic Discussion. First, I thank Keith for his patience and for hosting it on this forum. However, I do not believe that this is the appropriate venue for it in its present form.

Discussions like these are works-in-progress, and often meander, hit dead ends, reverse themselves, wander into narrow alleys and generally are all over the place. This is natural and is part of the process. However there is no need to do this on this forum. as it turns out.

The original idea of keeping the discussion public stemmed from the thought that perhaps others might wish to participate. In fact, this has not happened, and it appears that the general feeling is that our posts do not make a positive addition to the group as constituted.

Given the history between certain interested parties, moving the discussion to the acoustics group does not seem like an ideal solution; therefore I propose the following:

The main part of this discussion should be taken private. It is quite easy to form an email group, in which all members of that group receive all posts to and from other group members. Some years ago when I was heavily into writing fractal algorithms for use in algorithmic art programs, we used this method for beta-testing the formulae before release. This spared the main group the endless bug reports, but in the end important results gleaned from the private traffic were posted to the main group.

If we formed an email group among parties interested in the acoustic topics, the bulk of the forum members would be spared all the nuts-and-bolts, back-and-forth traffic. If the group members agreed that something worth sharing was happening, a post to the forum could be made. This might be win-win in several ways. First, it would spare the forum subscribers from having to sit through a lot of stuff that doesn't interest them in the least. Second, it would remove the members of the discussion from the pressure of being in public, and would stop any grandstanding that might occur, although I don't really think that has been happening here. Third, it would allow whatever gems are finally mined out of the tons of ore to be presented cleanly, without forum members being forced to sift through tons of silt to find the hidden nugget.

Practically it would mean only that anyone interested in receiving private email messages relating to the dicussion put their names forward. Only one person has to collect all the names and put them (for convenience) into a group in OE. After a single message is sent out, everyone wishing to participate need only hit the "reply to all" button when sending a message. Things are pretty much autonomous after that, although if people wish to join or leave the group someone pretty much needs to take responsibility to maintain the group list and make sure the name is either present or removed from the group traffic for a few posts, until all the residual "reply to all" posts have gotten on track. In a group of less than 20 persons this is no sweat, and I doubt we will have near to that number from the tenor of the posts to the forum lately ;-)

I throw this proposal out for discussion.

Toby

It would probably be easier just to set up another Yahoo group such as this
one, admit who you want and give the members the option of receiving email
posts or just reading the group site..once it is set up it pretty much takes
care of itself. This process would make it much easier for lurkers who may
have an interest in the material being discussed.

 

From: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com [mailto:MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of Toby
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2010 10:19 PM
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [MouthpieceWork] the acoustic discussion

 

  

Hi all,

 

I have a proposal re: The Acoustic Discussion. First, I thank Keith for his
patience and for hosting it on this forum. However, I do not believe that
this is the appropriate venue for it in its present form.

 

Discussions like these are works-in-progress, and often meander, hit dead
ends, reverse themselves, wander into narrow alleys and generally are all
over the place. This is natural and is part of the process. However there is
no need to do this on this forum. as it turns out.

 

The original idea of keeping the discussion public stemmed from the thought
that perhaps others might wish to participate. In fact, this has not
happened, and it appears that the general feeling is that our posts do not
make a positive addition to the group as constituted.

 

Given the history between certain interested parties, moving the discussion
to the acoustics group does not seem like an ideal solution; therefore I
propose the following:

 

The main part of this discussion should be taken private. It is quite easy
to form an email group, in which all members of that group receive all posts
to and from other group members. Some years ago when I was heavily into
writing fractal algorithms for use in algorithmic art programs, we used this
method for beta-testing the formulae before release. This spared the main
group the endless bug reports, but in the end important results gleaned from
the private traffic were posted to the main group.

 

If we formed an email group among parties interested in the acoustic topics,
the bulk of the forum members would be spared all the nuts-and-bolts,
back-and-forth traffic. If the group members agreed that something worth
sharing was happening, a post to the forum could be made. This might be
win-win in several ways. First, it would spare the forum subscribers from
having to sit through a lot of stuff that doesn't interest them in the
least. Second, it would remove the members of the discussion from the
pressure of being in public, and would stop any grandstanding that might
occur, although I don't really think that has been happening here. Third, it
would allow whatever gems are finally mined out of the tons of ore to be
presented cleanly, without forum members being forced to sift through tons
of silt to find the hidden nugget.

 

Practically it would mean only that anyone interested in receiving private
email messages relating to the dicussion put their names forward. Only one
person has to collect all the names and put them (for convenience) into a
group in OE. After a single message is sent out, everyone wishing to
participate need only hit the "reply to all" button when sending a message.
Things are pretty much autonomous after that, although if people wish to
join or leave the group someone pretty much needs to take responsibility to
maintain the group list and make sure the name is either present or removed
from the group traffic for a few posts, until all the residual "reply to
all" posts have gotten on track. In a group of less than 20 persons this is
no sweat, and I doubt we will have near to that number from the tenor of the
posts to the forum lately ;-)

 

I throw this proposal out for discussion.

 

Toby

John tried this for a week or two and nobody joined.  Perhaps those interested like the idea of a moderator who has been less involved in the discussions.  Would John, Toby, and Lance be interested in moving the discussion to a "MouthpieceWork2" site if I set it up?  You could then cross post any milestone findings to this group.

Toby's Email list idea could also work but it lacks a public archive feature that the Yahoo Groups provide.  Membership administration is easier and members can opt for getting individual posts or daily digest summaries.




________________________________
From: STEVE GOODSON <saxgourmet@...>
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sat, March 20, 2010 9:02:56 AM
Subject: RE: [MouthpieceWork] the acoustic discussion

  
It would probably be easier just to set up another Yahoo group such as this one, admit who you want and give the members the option of receiving email posts or just reading the group site….once it is set up it pretty much takes care of itself. This process would make it much easier for lurkers who may have an interest in the material being discussed.
 
From:MouthpieceWork@ yahoogroups. com [mailto:MouthpieceW ork@yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of Toby
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2010 10:19 PM
To: MouthpieceWork@ yahoogroups. com
Subject: [MouthpieceWork] the acoustic discussion
 
  
Hi all,
 
I have a proposal re: The Acoustic Discussion. First, I thank Keith for his patience and for hosting it on this forum. However, I do not believe that this is the appropriate venue for it in its present form.
 
Discussions like these are works-in-progress, and often meander, hit dead ends, reverse themselves, wander into narrow alleys and generally are all over the place. This is natural and is part of the process. However there is no need to do this on this forum. as it turns out.
 
The original idea of keeping the discussion public stemmed from the thought that perhaps others might wish to participate. In fact, this has not happened, and it appears that the general feeling is that our posts do not make a positive addition to the group as constituted.
 
Given the history between certain interested parties, moving the discussion to the acoustics group does not seem like an ideal solution; therefore I propose the following:
 
The main part of this discussion should be taken private. It is quite easy to form an email group, in which all members of that group receive all posts to and from other group members. Some years ago when I was heavily into writing fractal algorithms for use in algorithmic art programs, we used this method for beta-testing the formulae before release. This spared the main group the endless bug reports, but in the end important results gleaned from the private traffic were posted to the main group.
 
If we formed an email group among parties interested in the acoustic topics, the bulk of the forum members would be spared all the nuts-and-bolts, back-and-forth traffic. If the group members agreed that something worth sharing was happening, a post to the forum could be made. This might be win-win in several ways. First, it would spare the forum subscribers from having to sit through a lot of stuff that doesn't interest them in the least. Second, it would remove the members of the discussion from the pressure of being in public, and would stop any grandstanding that might occur, although I don't really think that has been happening here. Third, it would allow whatever gems are finally mined out of the tons of ore to be presented cleanly, without forum members being forced to sift through tons of silt to find the hidden nugget.
 
Practically it would mean only that anyone interested in receiving private email messages relating to the dicussion put their names forward. Only one person has to collect all the names and put them (for convenience) into a group in OE. After a single message is sent out, everyone wishing to participate need only hit the "reply to all" button when sending a message. Things are pretty much autonomous after that, although if people wish to join or leave the group someone pretty much needs to take responsibility to maintain the group list and make sure the name is either present or removed from the group traffic for a few posts, until all the residual "reply to all" posts have gotten on track. In a group of less than 20 persons this is no sweat, and I doubt we will have near to that number from the tenor of the posts to the forum lately ;-)
 
I throw this proposal out for discussion.
 
Toby



      

I had ten people sign up for my saxophone acoustics group and actually had a few posts so I think there is some support for this sort of forum. 
Sent on the Sprint® Now Network from my BlackBerry®

-----Original Message-----
From: Keith Bradbury 
Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2010 07:38:19 
To: 
Subject: Re: [MouthpieceWork] the acoustic discussion

John tried this for a week or two and nobody joined.  Perhaps those interested like the idea of a moderator who has been less involved in the discussions.  Would John, Toby, and Lance be interested in moving the discussion to a "MouthpieceWork2" site if I set it up?  You could then cross post any milestone findings to this group.

Toby's Email list idea could also work but it lacks a public archive feature that the Yahoo Groups provide.  Membership administration is easier and members can opt for getting individual posts or daily digest summaries.




________________________________
From: STEVE GOODSON 
To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sat, March 20, 2010 9:02:56 AM
Subject: RE: [MouthpieceWork] the acoustic discussion

  
It would probably be easier just to set up another Yahoo group such as this one, admit who you want and give the members the option of receiving email posts or just reading the group site….once it is set up it pretty much takes care of itself. This process would make it much easier for lurkers who may have an interest in the material being discussed.
 
From:MouthpieceWork@ yahoogroups. com [mailto:MouthpieceW ork@yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of Toby
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2010 10:19 PM
To: MouthpieceWork@ yahoogroups. com
Subject: [MouthpieceWork] the acoustic discussion
 
  
Hi all,
 
I have a proposal re: The Acoustic Discussion. First, I thank Keith for his patience and for hosting it on this forum. However, I do not believe that this is the appropriate venue for it in its present form.
 
Discussions like these are works-in-progress, and often meander, hit dead ends, reverse themselves, wander into narrow alleys and generally are all over the place. This is natural and is part of the process. However there is no need to do this on this forum. as it turns out.
 
The original idea of keeping the discussion public stemmed from the thought that perhaps others might wish to participate. In fact, this has not happened, and it appears that the general feeling is that our posts do not make a positive addition to the group as constituted.
 
Given the history between certain interested parties, moving the discussion to the acoustics group does not seem like an ideal solution; therefore I propose the following:
 
The main part of this discussion should be taken private. It is quite easy to form an email group, in which all members of that group receive all posts to and from other group members. Some years ago when I was heavily into writing fractal algorithms for use in algorithmic art programs, we used this method for beta-testing the formulae before release. This spared the main group the endless bug reports, but in the end important results gleaned from the private traffic were posted to the main group.
 
If we formed an email group among parties interested in the acoustic topics, the bulk of the forum members would be spared all the nuts-and-bolts, back-and-forth traffic. If the group members agreed that something worth sharing was happening, a post to the forum could be made. This might be win-win in several ways. First, it would spare the forum subscribers from having to sit through a lot of stuff that doesn't interest them in the least. Second, it would remove the members of the discussion from the pressure of being in public, and would stop any grandstanding that might occur, although I don't really think that has been happening here. Third, it would allow whatever gems are finally mined out of the tons of ore to be presented cleanly, without forum members being forced to sift through tons of silt to find the hidden nugget.
 
Practically it would mean only that anyone interested in receiving private email messages relating to the dicussion put their names forward. Only one person has to collect all the names and put them (for convenience) into a group in OE. After a single message is sent out, everyone wishing to participate need only hit the "reply to all" button when sending a message. Things are pretty much autonomous after that, although if people wish to join or leave the group someone pretty much needs to take responsibility to maintain the group list and make sure the name is either present or removed from the group traffic for a few posts, until all the residual "reply to all" posts have gotten on track. In a group of less than 20 persons this is no sweat, and I doubt we will have near to that number from the tenor of the posts to the forum lately ;-)
 
I throw this proposal out for discussion.
 
Toby



      

Both Steve and Keith have good points about a public
rather than private group. I would happily move the
discussion to a different Yahoo group, but let's let the
rest of the acousticteers have a say.

Toby

--- Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@...> wrote:

> John tried this for a week or two and nobody
> joined.� Perhaps those interested like the idea
of
> a moderator who�has been less involved�in
the
> discussions.� Would John, Toby, and Lance be
> interested in moving the discussion to a
> "MouthpieceWork2" site if I set it up?� You could
> then cross post any milestone findings to this
> group.
> 
> Toby's Email list idea could also work but it lacks
> a public archive feature that the Yahoo Groups
> provide.� Membership administration is easier and
> members can opt for getting individual posts or
> daily digest summaries.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> From: STEVE GOODSON <saxgourmet@...>
> To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Sat, March 20, 2010 9:02:56 AM
> Subject: RE: [MouthpieceWork] the acoustic
> discussion
> 
> � 
> It would probably be easier just to set up another
> Yahoo group such as this one, admit who you want and
> give the members the option of receiving email posts
> or just reading the group site$Bb&(B.once it is set up
> it pretty much takes care of itself. This process
> would make it much easier for lurkers who may have
> an interest in the material being discussed.
> �
> From:MouthpieceWork@ yahoogroups. com
> [mailto:MouthpieceW ork@yahoogroups. com] On Behalf
> Of Toby
> Sent: Friday, March 19, 2010 10:19 PM
> To: MouthpieceWork@ yahoogroups. com
> Subject: [MouthpieceWork] the acoustic discussion
> �
> � 
> Hi all,
> �
> I have a proposal re: The Acoustic Discussion.
> First, I thank Keith for his patience and for
> hosting it on this forum. However, I do not believe
> that this is the appropriate venue for it in its
> present form.
> �
> Discussions like these are works-in-progress, and
> often meander, hit dead ends, reverse themselves,
> wander into narrow alleys and generally are all over
> the place. This is natural and is part of the
> process. However there is no need to do this on this
> forum. as it turns out.
> �
> The original idea of keeping the discussion public
> stemmed from the thought that perhaps others might
> wish to participate. In fact, this has not happened,
> and it appears that the general feeling is
that�our
> posts�do not make a positive addition to the
group
> as constituted.
> �
> Given the history between certain interested
> parties, moving the discussion to the acoustics
> group does not seem like an ideal solution;
> therefore I propose the following:
> �
> The main part of this discussion should be taken
> private. It is quite easy to form an email group, in
> which all members of that group receive all posts to
> and from other group members. Some years ago when I
> was heavily into writing fractal algorithms for use
> in algorithmic art programs, we used this method for
> beta-testing the formulae before release. This
> spared the main group the endless bug reports, but
> in the end important results gleaned from the
> private traffic were posted to the main group.
> �
> If we formed an email group among parties interested
> in the acoustic topics, the bulk of the�forum
> members would be spared all the nuts-and-bolts,
> back-and-forth traffic. If the group members agreed
> that something worth sharing was happening, a post
> to the forum could be made. This might be win-win in
> several ways. First, it would spare the forum
> subscribers from having to sit through a lot of
> stuff that doesn't interest them in the least.
> Second, it would remove the members of the
> discussion from the pressure of being in public, and
> would stop any grandstanding that might occur,
> although I don't really think that has been
> happening here. Third, it would allow whatever gems
> are finally mined out of the tons of ore to be
> presented cleanly, without forum members being
> forced to sift through tons of silt to find the
> hidden nugget.
> �
> Practically it would mean only that anyone
> interested in receiving private email messages
> relating to the dicussion put their names forward.
> Only one person has to collect all the names and put
> them (for convenience) into a group in OE. After a
> single message is sent out, everyone wishing to
> participate need only hit the "reply to all" button
> when sending a message. Things are pretty much
> autonomous after that, although if people wish to
> join or leave the group someone pretty much needs to
> take responsibility to maintain the group list and
> make sure the name is either present or removed from
> the group traffic for a few posts, until all the
> residual "reply to all" posts have gotten on track.
> In a group of less than 20 persons this is no sweat,
> and I doubt we will have near to that number from
> the tenor of the posts to the forum lately ;-)
> �
> I throw this proposal out for discussion.
> �
> Toby
> 
> 
> 
>       

I like your suggestion Keith.  It makes perfect sense to do something like that.  It will be interesting to see who ends up participating.  Count me in.

My earlier statement on the "circular arguments" with Lance would apply to this forum as well.  Thanks for your support.

John

--- In MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com, Keith Bradbury <kwbradbury@...> wrote:
>
> John tried this for a week or two and nobody joined.  Perhaps those interested like the idea of a moderator who has been less involved in the discussions.  Would John, Toby, and Lance be interested in moving the discussion to a "MouthpieceWork2" site if I set it up?  You could then cross post any milestone findings to this group.
> 
> Toby's Email list idea could also work but it lacks a public archive feature that the Yahoo Groups provide.  Membership administration is easier and members can opt for getting individual posts or daily digest summaries.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> From: STEVE GOODSON <saxgourmet@...>
> To: MouthpieceWork@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Sat, March 20, 2010 9:02:56 AM
> Subject: RE: [MouthpieceWork] the acoustic discussion
> 
>   
> It would probably be easier just to set up another Yahoo group such as this one, admit who you want and give the members the option of receiving email posts or just reading the group site….once it is set up it pretty much takes care of itself. This process would make it much easier for lurkers who may have an interest in the material being discussed.
>  
> From:MouthpieceWork@ yahoogroups. com [mailto:MouthpieceW ork@yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of Toby
> Sent: Friday, March 19, 2010 10:19 PM
> To: MouthpieceWork@ yahoogroups. com
> Subject: [MouthpieceWork] the acoustic discussion
>  
>   
> Hi all,
>  
> I have a proposal re: The Acoustic Discussion. First, I thank Keith for his patience and for hosting it on this forum. However, I do not believe that this is the appropriate venue for it in its present form.
>  
> Discussions like these are works-in-progress, and often meander, hit dead ends, reverse themselves, wander into narrow alleys and generally are all over the place. This is natural and is part of the process. However there is no need to do this on this forum. as it turns out.
>  
> The original idea of keeping the discussion public stemmed from the thought that perhaps others might wish to participate. In fact, this has not happened, and it appears that the general feeling is that our posts do not make a positive addition to the group as constituted.
>  
> Given the history between certain interested parties, moving the discussion to the acoustics group does not seem like an ideal solution; therefore I propose the following:
>  
> The main part of this discussion should be taken private. It is quite easy to form an email group, in which all members of that group receive all posts to and from other group members. Some years ago when I was heavily into writing fractal algorithms for use in algorithmic art programs, we used this method for beta-testing the formulae before release. This spared the main group the endless bug reports, but in the end important results gleaned from the private traffic were posted to the main group.
>  
> If we formed an email group among parties interested in the acoustic topics, the bulk of the forum members would be spared all the nuts-and-bolts, back-and-forth traffic. If the group members agreed that something worth sharing was happening, a post to the forum could be made. This might be win-win in several ways. First, it would spare the forum subscribers from having to sit through a lot of stuff that doesn't interest them in the least. Second, it would remove the members of the discussion from the pressure of being in public, and would stop any grandstanding that might occur, although I don't really think that has been happening here. Third, it would allow whatever gems are finally mined out of the tons of ore to be presented cleanly, without forum members being forced to sift through tons of silt to find the hidden nugget.
>  
> Practically it would mean only that anyone interested in receiving private email messages relating to the dicussion put their names forward. Only one person has to collect all the names and put them (for convenience) into a group in OE. After a single message is sent out, everyone wishing to participate need only hit the "reply to all" button when sending a message. Things are pretty much autonomous after that, although if people wish to join or leave the group someone pretty much needs to take responsibility to maintain the group list and make sure the name is either present or removed from the group traffic for a few posts, until all the residual "reply to all" posts have gotten on track. In a group of less than 20 persons this is no sweat, and I doubt we will have near to that number from the tenor of the posts to the forum lately ;-)
>  
> I throw this proposal out for discussion.
>  
> Toby
>

Toby posted:

I thought we had moved beyond talk of moving the acoustic
discussion to Steve's group. Keith has offered to host a
separate group. What about that?

Toby