[VIHUELA] Protocol of emails (again...)
Dear Monica, Like you, I used to think it was a courtesy to reply to an individual as well as to the list, until one such individual pointed out to me that they subscribed to the list and would get the message anyway. If you are actively involved in a thread, you are unlikely to overlook a reply. One could as well say that it is discourteous to send two messages, because the person receiving those messages is inconvenienced with the extra work of dealing with them: almost certainly deleting one of them, but only after checking that the messages are in fact exactly the same. Before sending a message to the list I tidy up the subject title, replacing upper case letters (=shouting) with lower case, removing unnecessary clutter like [Vihuela] Re: Re: Re:, but not correcting spelling, because it is important to keep the thread intact. I also get rid of this sort of thing: Ed Durbrow Saitama, Japan [1]http://www.musicianspage.com/musicians/9688/ [2]http://www9.plala.or.jp/edurbrow/ -- References 1. http://www.musicianspage.com/musicians/9688/ 2. http://www9.plala.or.jp/edurbrow/ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html which would otherwise have been sent at the bottom of this message. To avoid duplication I delete the sender's name, and replace it with Vihuela List. Best wishes, Stewart. -Original Message- From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On Behalf Of Monica Hall Sent: 20 December 2011 14:31 To: Ed Durbrow Cc: Vihuelalist Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Protocol of emails (again...) That seems reasonable. There is one other point which I would make and that is - if you are commenting on something that another individual has said, especially if you are disgreeing or saying something which is critical it is courteous to reply to them directly as well as to the list as they may otherwise overlook the comments. It is quite difficult to keep these discussions completely neutral. Monica - Original Message - From: Ed Durbrow edurb...@sea.plala.or.jp To: vl vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2011 12:58 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Protocol of emails (again...) I think that is a harder call. With this list, for example, sometimes I'll hit reply, write my reply and then send it off only to realize that I meant to send it to the whole list and not just the individual. So that is one case. The other is when the priority is to the individual but you would like the list to get it to. In a case where I was responding to you via the list, I would try to remember to send it only to the list, but some people I know (me for instance) might go for a couple of days without looking at the list posts while monitoring individual messages daily. Sometimes you want to make sure the person doesn't miss it. I imagine some people might get a digest and skip over things. I suggest using your RH pinky to delete those extra posts, as we all know lute players simply don't get enough exercise for that neglected digit. :-) Stewart McCoy wrote: When people reply to my messages, they often send me the same email twice: one to me and one to the List to which I subscribe. This is unnecessary duplication,
[VIHUELA] Protocol of emails (again...)
Sorry Stewart - there is no way that everyone is going to be happy whatever we might decide to do (and who is going to police it anyway?) I personally have no problem at all with the fact that I receive the messages twice - or indeed with the fact that I receive my own messages back straight away. I think you have to accept that if you are on the list everyone is going to do exactly as they please and there is nothing you can do about it - except not be on the list. As far as tidying the heading is concerned I understand that [VIHUELA] is inserted automatically. As for capital letters - well we all make typing mistakes and sometimes it is helpful to use them to emphasise something. I think it is pretty clear from all the messages so far that we would each like to impose our own protocol on everyone else. But in a free world that's just not going to happen. Regards Monica (who in this instance has sent the message only to the list and has tidied the heading to see what may come back when she presses send). - Original Message - From: Stewart McCoy lu...@tiscali.co.uk To: Vihuela List vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2011 5:09 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Protocol of emails (again...) Dear Monica, Like you, I used to think it was a courtesy to reply to an individual as well as to the list, until one such individual pointed out to me that they subscribed to the list and would get the message anyway. If you are actively involved in a thread, you are unlikely to overlook a reply. One could as well say that it is discourteous to send two messages, because the person receiving those messages is inconvenienced with the extra work of dealing with them: almost certainly deleting one of them, but only after checking that the messages are in fact exactly the same. Before sending a message to the list I tidy up the subject title, replacing upper case letters (=shouting) with lower case, removing unnecessary clutter like [Vihuela] Re: Re: Re:, but not correcting spelling, because it is important to keep the thread intact. I also get rid of this sort of thing: Ed Durbrow Saitama, Japan [1]http://www.musicianspage.com/musicians/9688/ [2]http://www9.plala.or.jp/edurbrow/ -- References 1. http://www.musicianspage.com/musicians/9688/ 2. http://www9.plala.or.jp/edurbrow/ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html which would otherwise have been sent at the bottom of this message. To avoid duplication I delete the sender's name, and replace it with Vihuela List. Best wishes, Stewart. -Original Message- From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On Behalf Of Monica Hall Sent: 20 December 2011 14:31 To: Ed Durbrow Cc: Vihuelalist Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Protocol of emails (again...) That seems reasonable. There is one other point which I would make and that is - if you are commenting on something that another individual has said, especially if you are disgreeing or saying something which is critical it is courteous to reply to them directly as well as to the list as they may otherwise overlook the comments. It is quite difficult to keep these discussions completely neutral. Monica - Original Message - From: Ed Durbrow edurb...@sea.plala.or.jp To: vl vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2011 12:58 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Protocol of emails (again...) I think that is a harder call. With this list, for example, sometimes I'll hit reply, write my reply and then send it off only to realize that I meant to send it to the whole list and not just the individual. So that is one case. The other is when the priority is to the individual but you would like the list to get it to. In a case where I was responding to you via the list, I would try to remember to send it only to the list, but some people I know (me for instance) might go for a couple of days without looking at the list posts while monitoring individual messages daily. Sometimes you want to make sure the person doesn't miss it. I imagine some people might get a digest and skip over things. I suggest using your RH pinky to delete those extra posts, as we all know lute players simply don't get enough exercise for that neglected digit. :-) Stewart McCoy wrote: When people reply to my messages, they often send me the same email twice: one to me and one to the List to which I subscribe. This is unnecessary duplication,
[VIHUELA] Protocol of emails (again...)
Dear Monica, Many thanks for your single message. Much appreciated. :-) I think it's fair enough to discuss how we send messages to each other, but Heaven forbid that any arbitrary protocol should be imposed. If anything is seriously amiss, Wayne will intervene, but otherwise we are free to do things as we think best. One thing which does worry me about emails is their impersonal nature. We cannot see the sender's friendly, smiling face, so it is easy to take something amiss, especially when many of us have never met face to face. The lists at Dartmouth College are a wonderful resource, and I am grateful to Wayne for organising them. Best wishes, Stewart. -Original Message- From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On Behalf Of Monica Hall Sent: 20 December 2011 17:35 To: Vihuelalist Subject: [VIHUELA] Protocol of emails (again...) Sorry Stewart - there is no way that everyone is going to be happy whatever we might decide to do (and who is going to police it anyway?) I personally have no problem at all with the fact that I receive the messages twice - or indeed with the fact that I receive my own messages back straight away. I think you have to accept that if you are on the list everyone is going to do exactly as they please and there is nothing you can do about it - except not be on the list. As far as tidying the heading is concerned I understand that [VIHUELA] is inserted automatically. As for capital letters - well we all make typing mistakes and sometimes it is helpful to use them to emphasise something. I think it is pretty clear from all the messages so far that we would each like to impose our own protocol on everyone else. But in a free world that's just not going to happen. Regards Monica (who in this instance has sent the message only to the list and has tidied the heading to see what may come back when she presses send). To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] PROTOCOL OF EMAILS (again...)
I much prefer to have a sequential record of a discussion/thread rather
than having to go back to laboriously search for the relevant email to
see precisely what was said umpteen emails ago. As it is, the
well-recognised problem with this particular mode of communication is
that many/most people often only skim a message (I count myself guilty
sometimes) and if, by deleting earlier messages, we loose what was
actually said (short of an even more time consuming search of archives)
then any check on accuracy is also lost.
I also prefer to have the most recent message at the top rather than
mixed in with the previous one (which can lead to selective quotes) or
at the bottom which, clearly, if a long thread also involves much
scrolling down and time wasting.
Surely if a consistent system is followed whereby messages are always
replied at the top with the previous ones below in date order then
nothing is lost. If someone doesn't want to scroll down then they don't
have to.
One other thing: I think it important to change the subject heading
when there's a significant change in content. Some interesting threads
have subject titles which end up bearing little if any relation to the
most recent discussion.
Martyn
--- On Sat, 17/12/11, Monica Hall mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk wrote:
From: Monica Hall mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk
Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: Strumming as basso continuo {was: Return
to earlier question: {was: Agazzari guitar [was Re: Capona?]}
To: Martyn Hodgson hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk
Cc: Vihuelalist vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu
Date: Saturday, 17 December, 2011, 15:35
Ah - I think I know what's happening - you've got the wrong end of
the
stick:
I am glad you know what is happening. It all depends on which end of
the
stick one has got hold of.
I'm not (and have not as far as I can see) suggesting that an
alfabeto accompaniment necessarily converts into a bass line (ie
the
lowest sounding note in each chord would result in the bass line -
even
if we knew it) but the converse: that a bass line enables one to
'realise' a chordal accompaniment (eg alfabeto) on the guitar - not
the
same thing at all.
I'll take your word for it - there isn't time to go back all over it.
And, of course, songs with nothing other than alfabeto can't and
therefore don't show single notes. It's only when mixed tablature
becomes common that we could expect to start to
see such realisations. That's quite different to say it's 'wrong'
to
consider the practice of inserting some bass notes if one has the
bass
and not just the alfabeto. It's almost as if
one only saw the alfabeto dances in Calvi (1646) without noticing
his
intabulated dances later in the same book and concluded he never
wrote
in two parts.
He didn't write either of them actually. He copied them from
elsewhere. The
alfabeto pieces are copied from Corbetta's 1639 book and the other
pieces
from an unidentified source probably not originally for
guitar. They
belong to two different traditions.
And I haven't even got round to Valdambrini yet - he seems to
exhibit a
fine disregard for the precise octave of the bass in his cadential
examples.
But that is not relevant to earlier alfabeto accompaniments.
And, no, I don't anywhere suggest that if one has a bass line AND
the
alfabeto one should always seek to amalgamate the two. But I
certainly
don't think the practice is prohibited by any early contemporary
sources - hence my suggestion about the performance of the
Grandi song which has both the alfabeto and the bass line...
It is not a question of whether it is prohibited or not since we do not
have
any surviving instructions. It is a question of what was customary
at the
time the Grandi song appeared in print and earlier - as far as we can
tell
from surviving sources which include written out alfabeto
accompaniments.
These do not give any suggestion at all that any attempt was made to
include
the bass part.
Monica
With reference to Lex ps could you please stop sending the whole
thread of the discussion together
with your newest posts? I have deleted an endless stream of junk
from the end of this message.
I suppose we are all such incurable individualists on this list that we
will never agree as to how we should reply to messages.
But I wish that people would delete everything except the points they
are responding to. Whatever may have been netiquette in the dim
distant past seems to me irrelevant today. Remember that these
messages are archived and if they are just a mess it is difficult to
refer back to them for useful information.
--
To get on or off this list see list
[VIHUELA] Protocol of emails (again...)
Dear Martyn, Please may I add something to your list of gripes. When people reply to my messages, they often send me the same email twice: one to me and one to the List to which I subscribe. This is unnecessary duplication, since I usually want to read their message no more than once. Sending an ever-growing conversation back and forth, is also unnecessary, and clogs up the memory. (I save all messages.) For the sake of continuity I include the previous message, or only part of it if it is a long one. Best wishes, Stewart McCoy. -Original Message- From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On Behalf Of Martyn Hodgson Sent: 18 December 2011 10:07 To: Vihuelalist Cc: Monica Hall Subject: [VIHUELA] PROTOCOL OF EMAILS (again...) I much prefer to have a sequential record of a discussion/thread rather than having to go back to laboriously search for the relevant email to see precisely what was said umpteen emails ago. As it is, the well-recognised problem with this particular mode of communication is that many/most people often only skim a message (I count myself guilty sometimes) and if, by deleting earlier messages, we loose what was actually said (short of an even more time consuming search of archives) then any check on accuracy is also lost. I also prefer to have the most recent message at the top rather than mixed in with the previous one (which can lead to selective quotes) or at the bottom which, clearly, if a long thread also involves much scrolling down and time wasting. Surely if a consistent system is followed whereby messages are always replied at the top with the previous ones below in date order then nothing is lost. If someone doesn't want to scroll down then they don't have to. One other thing: I think it important to change the subject heading when there's a significant change in content. Some interesting threads have subject titles which end up bearing little if any relation to the most recent discussion. Martyn To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
