The Logic Off Topic list

>Oh - I am very pleased about the present state of LUG - since it´s
>following strict rules, it´s useful again. Thanks to the guys who do all
>the work.

Thats why this list should be unmoderated - as a counter balance to the 
strict censorship on the main list. This allows for a pressure valve for 
people to talk freely. Not interested in banter? Then stick to the main LUG 
list.

> >Oh - I am very pleased about the present state of LUG - since it\ufffds
> >following strict rules, it\ufffds useful again. Thanks to the guys who do all
> >the work.
>
> Thats why this list should be unmoderated - as a counter balance to the
> strict censorship on the main list. This allows for a pressure valve for
> people to talk freely. Not interested in banter? Then stick to the main
LUG
> list.

Wrong. Most topics on the L-OT are not banter and are of interest to
musicians.  Somebody who likes the Logic only topic restrictions of the LUG
could also expect and enjoy music related topic restrictions on the L-OT.
If that person is not interested in banter then they would have no reason to
subscribe to a L-WOT list, if one existed.

Some people want it,  it is no skin off the backs of those that do not want
it.   Does it really matter to them that the subject line shows [L-WOT]
instead of [L-OT] on ocassional threads? It makes no difference to them,
their only argument is that it is not necessary, people can use their delete
buttons.   However, if this does not bother people, why is this thread
happening at all?

Those against a L-WOT list are simply trying to deny others their choice,
when it makes no real difference to them whether there is one or not.

Hector.

A person wrote
> > >Oh - I am very pleased about the present state of LUG - 
>>.since it´sfollowing strict rules, it´s useful again. Thanks to the 
>>guys who do allthe workThats why this list should be 
>>unmoderated - as a counter balance to thestrict censorship 
>>on the main list. This allows for a pressure valve forpeople to 
>>talk freely. Not interested in banter? Then stick to the main
> LUG
> > list.

--- In logic-ot@y..., "Hector" <hector@n...> wrote:
> Wrong. Most topics on the L-OT are not banter and are of 
>interest tomusicians.  Somebody who likes the Logic only topic 
>restrictions of the LUG could also expect and enjoy music 
.>related topic restrictions on the L-OT. If that person is not 
>interested in banter then they would have no reason to
> subscribe to a L-WOT list, if one existed.
> 
> Some people want it,  it is no skin off the backs of those that do 
>not want it.   Does it really matter to them that the subject line 
>shows [L-WOT] instead of [L-OT] on ocassional threads? It 
.>makes no difference to them, their only argument is that it is 
>not necessary, people can use their delete buttons.   However, 
>if this does not bother people, why is this thread Those against 
>a L-WOT list are simply trying to deny others their choice,when 
>it makes no real difference to them whether there is one or not.
> Hector.

Hi everyone,

I have totally rethought my stance on this moderation subject and 
I'd like to share it with you all and waste more bandwidth.

Our problem is that the above posts are both good arguments 
for 2 things that can co-exist. We've been here in OT-land for a 
while and things have been fine, except once in a while when 
political disscussions break out. Ineveitably someone 
complains about that and to be fair, maybe what Hector is 
suggesting is pretty reasonble. 

A W-OT list or a DAW-OT list are both good solutions for the 
problem of the people who don't want to read about politics or 
anything else not having to do with music. I would suggest 
setting up another list called DAW-OT for the music people 
instead of W-OT for the way out people. The reason? in reality, 
the way OT people are happy where they are. The people who 
are complaining are not happy here with all the mucky muck. If 
you make the Way-OT people move and disrupt what's going on 
in the process, it tends to upset people who are trying to 
passionately work through some intense subject matter (to 
them). Making value judgments on the content of the discussion 
at hand is not really why we are here. We're here to share ideas 
and knowledge with eachother. The W-OT people like to get 
other people's perspectives on things other than music. what's 
wrong with that. Same as there's nothing inherently WRONG with 
someone complaing about the amount of non music related 
material.

For me, it stands to reason that a DAW-OT list would be the best 
solution so as to accomodate the maximum amount of people 
on the list. We can argue about the semantics of what the lists 
should be called, but the bottom line is that some people are 
unhappy and that could be addressed for the mere sake of being 
human about it.

My main problem with this whole situation was how it was 
handled by the admins. The whole clamp down attitude that took 
place was really out of line and un called for. The admins could 
have gently setup the other list without bothering the discussion 
and whisked those who didn't like the OT to be too OT over to the 
new list. No big deal. no polls, arguments etc...

If complainers complained about that solution, the answer from 
the admins should have been, "I'm sorry that's the best 
compromise we could come up with, do you have a better idea?"

all this is my sincere opnion. all sarcasm aside.

thanks for listening,
teddybut

>Our problem is that the above posts are both good arguments
>for 2 things that can co-exist.

The best solution is the delete button.  I don't need other people 
figuring out what I want to read.  I have for example deleted long 
long threads of Hector et. al. rehashing the centuries old education 
vs inspiration argument.  It was not difficult it did not piss me off 
I did not resent it I just didn't read it.  Adults can do it children 
can do it why can't you?  I have even on occasion filtered things by 
topic.  It requires about the technical prowess it takes to change a 
light bulb.

I wrote:
> >Our problem is that the above posts are both good 
>arguments for 2 things that can co-exist.

--- In logic-ot@y..., Dennis Gunn <dennisg@a...> wrote:
> The best solution is the delete button.  I don't need other 
>centuries old education  vs inspiration argument.  It was not 
>difficult it did not piss me off  I did not resent it I just didn't read 
>it.  Adults can do it children can do it why can't you?  I have even 
>on occasion filtered things by  topic.  It requires about the 
>technical prowess it takes to change a light bulb.

that's a pretty inflexible point of view, and certainly a valid one. But 
you could be a little more comapassionate about it. I'm not telling 
here, I'm suggesting an alternative for you to consider. There are 
people who are bummed about the list for reasons you can't 
comprehend. Why not give them a place to discuss daw-ot 
without our babbling? What would be the practical difference for 
you if you were on both lists and still did your email filtering 
magic. It would be pretty much the status quo except for 20 
seconds of subscribing. The reason you're mad, and why I was 
mad, is because you were cut off mid argument. That can't be 
fixed now, No reason to cry over spilt milk though. So Jeremy 
made a mistake, so what... he's a good guy, let's move on and 
figure out how we can keep up our non DAW banter without 
interruption.

teddybut

Here is the best thing that was ever written by anybody on this 
list...are you ready for this, cause it makes absolute sense.  Yet, I 
believe HK implied this as well...So are you ready...here it is:

Dennis wrote:
> The best solution is the delete button.

Very experienced, yet wise words.

Peace,
Alexis