Crazy growth!

Just to remind people that the list "Crazy Music" has grown up to be
an even better list for composers than this one:

/crazy_music/messages

The valuable composer-orientation comes from the Herculean efforts of
Atlas himself, Brian McLaren...

However, things sometimes get a little "crazy" over there, and Atlas
frequently shrugs... so don't be upset if you get INSULTED if you go
over there.

That list is only for the strong. (Hi Ayn Rand!)

(Just joking.... :) )

_______ ______ ________
Joseph Pehrson

Joe,

--- In tuning@y..., jpehrson@r... wrote:
> Just to remind people that the list "Crazy Music" has grown up to
> be an even better list for composers than this one:

Just to offer an alternative view, the list "Crazy Music" has, as
others have in a similar manner, devolved quite frequently into mean-
spirited, one-sided opinions cast as "facts", other opinions cast
as "lies", and a great loss of signal/noise ratio. What started,
courtesy of Jacky Ligon, and restarted after one meltdown, is now
another smallish group that occasionally offers insights and more
often offers inanity.

Fortunately, time has allowed me to gather and correspond with a
sizeable number of people who are knowledgeable, interested in
composing and performing, and supportive of music sans agendas. I
plan on keeping up private communication with them, and sharing here
on this list. If at some point in the future another list evolves
that doesn't serve as a platform for the One True Way of making
microtonal music, I'll be interested to give it a try. Those who not
only feel that the noise level on CM is acceptable but, by their
tacet approval, commendable, are welcome to find their muse on that
list.

Me, I await the newly purchased TX-802 eagerly, and plan on getting
on with some writing.

> ...so don't be upset if you get INSULTED if you go over there.
> That list is only for the strong.

I see it a different way, and I don't think that information has to
be shared in a heavy-handed, insulting manner. Condoning it, in fact
recommending it, says a lot to me. Maybe I should start a new list,
moderated, with clear rules as to general list behavior, as the best
lists I've belonged to operated this way.

Nah...

Cheers,
Jon

--- In tuning@y..., "Jon Szanto" <JSZANTO@A...> wrote

/tuning/topicId_26193.html#26194

> Joe,
>
> --- In tuning@y..., jpehrson@r... wrote:
> > Just to remind people that the list "Crazy Music" has grown up to
> > be an even better list for composers than this one:
>
> Just to offer an alternative view, the list "Crazy Music" has, as
> others have in a similar manner, devolved quite frequently into
mean- spirited, one-sided opinions cast as "facts", other opinions
cast as "lies", and a great loss of signal/noise ratio.

Thanks, Jon, for your "alternate" view of the other "alternate" list.

As we both know, frequently we don't agree on some things...

However, I would like to think that we have both no *evolved* to
listening and tolerating each other's views! I think we've managed
this... I hope.

So thanks for sharing the "other pole.., alter ego, whatever..."

It's valuable...

best,

________ _______ ______
Joseph Pehrson

Joe,

--- In tuning@y..., jpehrson@r... wrote:
> Thanks, Jon, for your "alternate" view of the other "alternate"
> list. However, I would like to think that we have both now
> *evolved* to listening and tolerating each other's views! I think
> we've managed this... I hope.

I think so, too. People should try CM and see if it meets their
needs, and I only wanted to offer the "forewarned is forearmed"
approach as well.

To each his/her/their own.

Cheers,
Jon

--- In tuning@y..., jacky_ligon@y... wrote:

/tuning/topicId_unknown.html#26210

> --- In tuning@y..., "D.Stearns" <STEARNS@C...> wrote:
> > The 450 plus membership and its promise of
> > an interested but silent contingency was a sham...
> > --Dan Stearns
>
> Do you think they all may be Mr. Zill?
>
> He he!
>
> Jacky Ligon
>
> }: )

Hi Jacky!

Well, undoubtedly Mr. ZILCH...

______ _______ ______
Joseph Pehrson

[Jon Szanto wrote:]
>Just to offer an alternative view, the list "Crazy Music" has, as
>others have in a similar manner, devolved quite frequently into mean-
>spirited, one-sided opinions cast as "facts", other opinions cast
>as "lies", and a great loss of signal/noise ratio. What started,
>courtesy of Jacky Ligon, and restarted after one meltdown, is now
>another smallish group that occasionally offers insights and more
>often offers inanity.

Alas, yes. I challenged the pronouncements of one list member over
there, and ended up being compared to Hitler (in fact, IIRC, Hitler was
found to be a nice, reasonable guy compared to me ;-> ). I feel a bit
drained, and may join you, Jon, in leaving that list, if the temporary
calm now does not last.

>Maybe I should start a new list,
>moderated, with clear rules as to general list behavior, as the best
>lists I've belonged to operated this way.

>Nah...

Daniel Wolf, in off-list correspondence recently, expressed the same
wish. But who would have time to act as moderator? I try to envision
what the role would be like, and imagine feeling torn between wanting to
read and approve posts in a timely manner, so that exchanges aren't
slowed waaaay down, and feeling harried, almost as if responsible for
the care of a demanding baby who wants feeding day and night.

It sounds like a miserable job, with really lousy pay (zero dollars,
zero cents). So... wanna volunteer, Jon?

JdL

--- In tuning@y..., "John A. deLaubenfels" <jdl@a...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_26193.html#26213

> It sounds like a miserable job, with really lousy pay (zero dollars,
> zero cents). So... wanna volunteer, Jon?
>
> JdL

Personally, I'm opposed to any "censorship" of either the
crazy "Crazy" list... which, by definition is *supposed* to be a
little "crazy" or *this* more "staid" one... so I hope Jeff Scott
doesn't do that.

There has been a lot of miserable stuff over there... but many "gems"
as well. My personal contention is that, because of the rather,
er, "ideosyncratic" nature of some of the writers, the latter would
not occur without a free statement of the unfortunate "former" as
well...

_______ _______ ________
Joseph Pehrson

John,

--- In tuning@y..., "John A. deLaubenfels" <jdl@a...> wrote:
> It sounds like a miserable job, with really lousy pay (zero dollars,
> zero cents). So... wanna volunteer, Jon?

I'm taking it into consideration. Seriously. You'll know if I post
any notices...

Cheers,
Jon

Joe,

--- In tuning@y..., jpehrson@r... wrote:
> Personally, I'm opposed to any "censorship" of either the
> crazy "Crazy" list... which, by definition is *supposed* to be a
> little "crazy" or *this* more "staid" one... so I hope Jeff Scott
> doesn't do that.

If you would read carefully, no one is proposing censorship of an
existing list. I simply mused about a carefully and caringly
moderated list, similar to lists that I've been on before.

> There has been a lot of miserable stuff over there... but
> many "gems" as well. My personal contention is that, because of
> the rather, er, "ideosyncratic" nature of some of the writers, the
> latter would not occur without a free statement of the
> unfortunate "former" as well...

That, as you say, is a personal observation. I can't agree that the
only time good information and discovery comes through is in an
atmosphere of complete and unchecked chaos. Maybe you just haven't
been on enough lists to see proof of this. It can be done, has been
done, and may well be done in the future. The best list I've ever
belonged to split from a list that had ill-tempered behavior similar
to CM, and went on to not only surpass it but become a recognized
force in that particular area of research/interest.

All because of a wise guiding hand.

Cheers,
Jon

--- In tuning@y..., "Jon Szanto" <JSZANTO@A...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_26193.html#26225

>
> If you would read carefully, no one is proposing censorship of an
> existing list. I simply mused about a carefully and caringly
> moderated list, similar to lists that I've been on before.
>

Oh... I guess I misread that...

> > There has been a lot of miserable stuff over there... but
> > many "gems" as well. My personal contention is that, because of
> > the rather, er, "ideosyncratic" nature of some of the writers,
the
> > latter would not occur without a free statement of the
> > unfortunate "former" as well...
>
> That, as you say, is a personal observation. I can't agree that the
> only time good information and discovery comes through is in an
> atmosphere of complete and unchecked chaos. Maybe you just haven't
> been on enough lists to see proof of this. It can be done, has been
> done, and may well be done in the future. The best list I've ever
> belonged to split from a list that had ill-tempered behavior
similar
> to CM, and went on to not only surpass it but become a recognized
> force in that particular area of research/interest.
>
> All because of a wise guiding hand.
>

I will leave open that possibility... and, yes, quite possibly I have
not been on all that many lists...

So let us know what additional lists develop...

Joe

________ _____ _____
Joseph Pehrson

Joe,

--- In tuning@y..., jpehrson@r... wrote:
> > All because of a wise guiding hand.
>
> I will leave open that possibility... and, yes, quite possibly I
> have not been on all that many lists...

To be even about it, I must leave open the possibility that good
things have happened on very wild, free-for-all lists sometime
*after* I bailed out! :)

But one thing is clear: if a person has limited time to spend reading
list material, that time is precious and efforts to keep the noise
down and the signal high are seen as beneficial.

Onward...

Cheers,
Jon