As an innocent by-stander to these exchanges (lying low downstream to the trenches) but as a member of the lute community who reads most of the posts, I have been rather surprised by the veiled or sometimes outright criticism by Ron and Dr. Chris of other musicians' efforts and the unabashed self-promotion of their own productions. I was relieved to note however that Dr. Chris gave us permission to give his rendition of Bach published on YouTube a thumbs down as long as we left a 'constructive comment'. I have so far been unable to fulfil this condition so I am keeping my thumbs firmly in my pockets (and my tongue in cheek).
If we had no faults, we would not take so much pleasure in noticing those of others - François de La Rochefoucauld Best, Matthew On 27 févr. 2015, at 03:59, howard posner <howardpos...@ca.rr.com> wrote: > On Feb 26, 2015, at 1:33 PM, Christopher Wilke <chriswi...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> Howard, >> >> I'll be frank. You are having way too much fun tearing apart the sincere, >> heartfelt confessions of musicians who - quite unlike yourself - are >> struggling to simultaneously make a living and art in a difficult >> environment. I could counter-refute your semantics, but I don't think that >> would be productive as I suspect that you're really more interested in >> playing "gotcha" logic games than advancing the discourse. >> >> You are free to disagree and contribute to the discussion in a constructive >> way, of course. I would ask, however, that you consider replying a bit more >> respectfully to those of us down in the trenches to whom topic is a more >> personal one than it will be to someone such as yourself who holds no real >> stake in the matter. >> >> Chris > > OK. I’ve waited a few hours and taken a lot of deep breaths, so this is me > being calm. > > Danny wrote that he did not understand statements that unnamed organizations > were doing unstated things that benefitted some unnamed persons and harmed > other unnamed persons. Since any such statement, however “heartfelt” or > however deep in the trenches it originates, is devoid of information and thus > meaningless for any practical purpose, his remark was so obviously > self-evident that I wonder why he even wasted the 30 seconds it took to type > it. > > You responded by calling him a liar. > > This was beneath scorn, and certainly beneath you, and I think my response > was measured, inasmuch as I chose to explain the substance (actually the lack > of it) and ignore the personal attack on Danny. I have no idea why you > thought you could get into a credibility contest with someone who has never > made an ill-considered remark in all the years he’s been in the lute > community, but you are way out of line. You should refrain from talking > about “respect” until you’ve apologized to him. > > And don’t even get me started on "if one were make such statements, they > would represent an inappropriately dismissive response to the issues under > discussion.” > > You need to take a step back. > > > > To get on or off this list see list information at > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
