moderation on the tuning list

Generally we only moderate spam. However, if you repeatedly
make crazy inflammatory statements about how you've just done
something for the first time in history and nobody else on the
list could ever hope to do it etc etc, and you've been asked
to stop about three dozen times over a period of 2 years, you
may be moderated.

Such discussion isn't polite, it starts flame wars, and you
know, it just deserves to be moderated into oblivion. And if
you keep doing it and keep complaining about it and start
mouthing off about censorship, I'll ban you completely. The
world doesn't owe you anything, and the tuning list owes you
even less. Hundreds of people of all races, creeds and
nationalities have posted here for almost 20 years, and every
one of them has been recognized fairly according to what
they contributed. If you're not getting the recognition you
feel you deserve, consult a physician, because you won't find
a more meritocratic institution in this life.

-Carl

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <carl@...> wrote:
>
> Generally we only moderate spam. However, if you repeatedly
> make crazy inflammatory statements about how you've just done
> something for the first time in history and nobody else on the
> list could ever hope to do it etc etc, and you've been asked
> to stop about three dozen times over a period of 2 years, you
> may be moderated.

Cranks can be annoying, and we get plenty of them on this list, but they also can make valid contributions, sometimes almost in spite of themselves. Ernest McClain is a crank, but there is at least one interesting idea in his stuff. Joseph Yasser was in some respects a crank, but 19et is a solid system. And while Harry Partch certainly wasn't a crank, many people thought he was. The following reviewer thinks people advocating historically correct tunings are mostly cranks:

http://www.classical.net/music/recs/reviews/g/gas00332a.php

About time.

Oz.

✩ ✩ ✩
www.ozanyarman.com

On Jul 17, 2010, at 11:21 PM, Carl Lumma wrote:

> Generally we only moderate spam. However, if you repeatedly
> make crazy inflammatory statements about how you've just done
> something for the first time in history and nobody else on the
> list could ever hope to do it etc etc, and you've been asked
> to stop about three dozen times over a period of 2 years, you
> may be moderated.
>
> Such discussion isn't polite, it starts flame wars, and you
> know, it just deserves to be moderated into oblivion. And if
> you keep doing it and keep complaining about it and start
> mouthing off about censorship, I'll ban you completely. The
> world doesn't owe you anything, and the tuning list owes you
> even less. Hundreds of people of all races, creeds and
> nationalities have posted here for almost 20 years, and every
> one of them has been recognized fairly according to what
> they contributed. If you're not getting the recognition you
> feel you deserve, consult a physician, because you won't find
> a more meritocratic institution in this life.
>
> -Carl
>

Yes, the endless "I've finally DONE IT" followed by an "oh wait, there was an error somewhere", coupled with the smug assurance that his incomplete theory (which has thus far produced not ONE error-free piece of music) is unquestionably the "only" correct way to make music, even though it's never actually been used in practice...quite tiresome. For someone who talks so much of logic, he sure isn't keen on using it. I'm hoping he does not return until he's learned some humility.

-Igs

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <carl@...> wrote:
>
> Generally we only moderate spam. However, if you repeatedly
> make crazy inflammatory statements about how you've just done
> something for the first time in history and nobody else on the
> list could ever hope to do it etc etc, and you've been asked
> to stop about three dozen times over a period of 2 years, you
> may be moderated.
>
> Such discussion isn't polite, it starts flame wars, and you
> know, it just deserves to be moderated into oblivion. And if
> you keep doing it and keep complaining about it and start
> mouthing off about censorship, I'll ban you completely. The
> world doesn't owe you anything, and the tuning list owes you
> even less. Hundreds of people of all races, creeds and
> nationalities have posted here for almost 20 years, and every
> one of them has been recognized fairly according to what
> they contributed. If you're not getting the recognition you
> feel you deserve, consult a physician, because you won't find
> a more meritocratic institution in this life.
>
> -Carl
>

Thank you Carl.

While Marcel has said some insightful things *of late* - some of the
claims especially with regard to Harry Partch or or composers not
writing their pieces correct are just incredibly narrow minded and
conceited.

I can't imagine a better way (excepting Michael S. circle arguments)
to get most of this list in an uproar than to say Harry didn't know
what he was doing.

Chris

On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 4:21 PM, Carl Lumma <carl@...> wrote:
If you're not getting the recognition you
> feel you deserve, consult a physician, because you won't find
> a more meritocratic institution in this life.
>
> -Carl

P.S.
May I suggest a psychiatrist is more appropriate.

Chris

And indeed Freud said that all artists are cranks. Speaking of which, did anyone happen to catch that doco called "Beethoven's Hair"? I didn't catch it but apparently someone had kept a lock of his hair which was recently uncovered. Scientists did DNA tests (no, not a Country music chord progression) and found that he had lead poisoning, probably through the water system. Symptoms; irritability and eventual deafness!

-Rick

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "genewardsmith" <genewardsmith@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <carl@> wrote:
> >
> > Generally we only moderate spam. However, if you repeatedly
> > make crazy inflammatory statements about how you've just done
> > something for the first time in history and nobody else on the
> > list could ever hope to do it etc etc, and you've been asked
> > to stop about three dozen times over a period of 2 years, you
> > may be moderated.
>
> Cranks can be annoying, and we get plenty of them on this list, but they also can make valid contributions, sometimes almost in spite of themselves. Ernest McClain is a crank, but there is at least one interesting idea in his stuff. Joseph Yasser was in some respects a crank, but 19et is a solid system. And while Harry Partch certainly wasn't a crank, many people thought he was. The following reviewer thinks people advocating historically correct tunings are mostly cranks:
>
> http://www.classical.net/music/recs/reviews/g/gas00332a.php
>

>"I can't imagine a better way (excepting Michael S. circle arguments)
to get most of this list in an uproar than to say Harry didn't know
what he was doing."
Stop being a troll because you can't manage to give any real quotes or
examples of me. Marcel said some crap about Partch...fine that's an example of
him and saying composers did not compose their own work is wrong (perhaps even
legally because it's denying copyright).

But why on earth are you bringing me into this? I swear, now you're just
being a troll looking for me to say something like "but look...he has no proof"
and then using my saying that as an excuse for launching more insults at me as
if it'll convince me to shoot myself in the foot and call myself an idiot (it
never has, never will).

Well I'll say this much..just saying things along the lines of "uh, well the
reason is I don't like the guy" or "I didn't like the way Mike fought back the
last time I name-called him" is no excuse for your behavior. And, yes, I talk
and bite back and am not your B. If you don't want that, don't launch random
vague off-topic insults at me.