Conference napalm::commusic_v1

Brad -

I agree, this conference is very interesting, but there are too many
redundant topics and old obsolete notes. I think it would be more vital
and informative to restructure it more like db did in MUSIC. We need
a moderator who is active in the conference and can keep it tidy. Also,
if each of us would assign the appropriate keyword to our topic, it
would help a lot getting a directory of applicable entries.

I set up a MIDI notes conference, but never activated it because the
vote was split. Some wanted good old COMMUSIC, which is an old friend,
others said go for it. I don't think we need both a MIDI and a COMMUSIC
conference. Should we start a new volume of COMMUSIC, a new conference
called MIDI, or keep going as we are?

Do a "show keywords" command to see the list. Most people don't use
them though.

dave

    What say we just archive everything before, say, note 1000 and create
    a new Commusic with a note dedicated to 'for sale' items?  'Twould
    seem the easiest solution to me ...
    
    Steve

USE DESCRIPTIVE TITLES. USE EXISTING TOPICS FOR RELEVANT DISCUSSION.

I would vote not to create a new conference.

Creating a new conference will not stop people from entering duplicate
entries. In fact that's one reason why I would hate to have an 'old' and
a 'new' conference around. I would just strongly erge people to reuse
existing topics for relevant discussions. If you're gonna talk about the HR-16,
do it in an existing HR-16 note!

I vote for keeping old entries around. I use this information alot when
shopping for things I need. Who's to say what's old? I also like having
old for sale ads around to see what was paid for what when.

>    Is it possible or desirable to close this conference and open a new
>    version, with perhaps a few topics dedicated to things like conference
>    directories, for sale and wanted topics, etc?

A block of topics could be reserved right here and now. They don't have to be
in topics 1 through 20. I know this isn't the ideal way of doing it, but...

>Maybe even a list
>of keywords defined somewhere?

I never did find use for keywords, only USEFUL AND DESCRIPTIVE TITLES.

>    Of course, if this is not appropriate or if I'm the only one who
>    cares, I'll be happy to delete this note and forget that I ever
>    mentioned it.

I care very much how the conference is used, but I don't think replacing
the conference is the answer.

/Mitch

    (I know about SHOW KEYWORDS, but a note dedicated to them is faster
     over the net.)

    Here's my vote for "dedicated topics" (not necessarily complete):

	a) Conference Directory
	b) For Sale
	c) Wanted
	d) Music Stores (phone numbers, addresses, contacts)
	e) Manufacturers (ditto)
	f) Conference Announcements
	g) Who's Who

    Who's gonna moderate, though?

-b

    I don't see any problem with archiving this version and setting
    up a new version.  We could write lock the old version but still
    have it available for reference.
    
    I second the motion to have a single note for "For Sale" and possibly
    another for "Wanted".  Makes it easier to find.
    
    I also agree that descriptive titles are very important, as is trying
    to stick to the topic in the title.  I find myself guilty of this
    offense more often than I would like.
    
    		Derek

    
    Hmm. I have not accessed about 83% of this conference ever. 
    
    This data is from a directory I did last week. Funny how synchronicity
    works. 
    
    Yeah, at least reorganize it so the keywords make sense. That alone
    warrants a re-initialization.  While I agree with .-1, it still
    does not explain the 1000+ topics with multiple keywords, ambiguous
    titles, non-existant keywords, non-sensical topics, obsolete
    information, and otherwise wasted disk space. On the other hand,
    there are LOADS of extremely valuable information here.
    
    HACKERS reorganized a couple of months ago. Other than occasional
    pointers back into the old (write-protected but accessable) conference,
    it is a bit easier to deal with now (it's smaller at least), and
    people seem to be sticking to each topic pretty well.
    
    I really see the need for decent keywording. It would make this
    conference a much better reference.
    
    The FORSALE stuff should get it's own, moderated, topic.
    
    Whatever. If the MIDI conference appears, I'll peek through that
    too.
    
    /pjh
    
    

    I'm new here at DEC and just managed to stumble in here today for
    the first time. What a *great* conference ! I tend to agree that
    the older material should be archived for reference purposes.
    Realistically, how much material from 1985 still applies to today's
    music scene. Not a whole lot, I think. (From a hardware standpoint,
    anyway...) So.... there's my opinion....
                                   B-natural...
                                      Floyd

    COMMUSIC Tapes
    COMMUSIC Reviews

    Here's a vote for archiving the old conference.
    Here's another vote for NOT starting a new conference.
    
    ~/~ ;-} ^^^
    
    Tom

    I would still like to vote for a separate MIDI conference. 
    After all MIDI is a data communications protocol and the world's
    leader in networking ought to have a conference titled MIDI.  :-)
    
    Seriously speaking, I've often thought that this conference
    suffers a bit from the fact that it has some very valuable
    technical information mixed with stuff like sales items, 
    COMMUSIC tape byrocracy notes, general music conversations, 
    etc. All that is certainly valuable as well and sometimes 
    very entertaining, but it lowers the signal to noise ratio
    for someone seeking info/help on more technical subjects.
    
    We have to admit that a large portion of what's here hasn't 
    got much to do with computer music and hence doesn't do justice 
    to the title of this notes file.
    
    What I would like to see would be a conference titled MIDI
    that would be for solely technical discussions about the 
    Musical Instrument Digital Interface. No Wurlizer synth
    adds, prices or too musical discussions.
      
    Then another one for all the topics that I just ruled out 
    from MIDI - i.e. mostly this conference. A more appropriate
    title wouldn't hurt either. Probably 'Music'-something or ...
    (...on the lines of making music)
    
    Then finally I would like to see a conference titled Computer
    Music that would deal with the really heavy stuff. (Here I'm
    only dreaming because I'm sure it wouldn't be popular at all)
    Some appropriate topics would be for example: digital audio 
    processing, score programs, high end musical workstations
    (ala Droidworks), algorithms, program listings etc. All the 
    stuff that CMJ is made of.  
    
    Comments?     
                          
    Timo
    
    P.S. I would volunteer to host/moderate, but Finland is probably 
         a bit too far off the center of easynet. 

    OK, I'll be reactionary and vote against.  There's a _huge_ amount
    of good stuff in this file.  Why, it only took me about 60 seconds
    to find Alesis' phone number (to order a manual)...  Either we
    regain the disk space by junking this conference wholesale, or
    we continue to use disk space by write-locking it (and "lose" some
    people who don't know it's here/ information goes out of
    date and can't be updated, etc).
                             
    -=-=-=-=-
    
    The ultimate good idea is for someone to go through all ten 
    thousand or so entries and sort them into three classes:
    
    	1) Hard tech info or product review - goes into a
    	   per-product note
    	
    	2) Anecdotes- capture the "flavor of the times" - goes
    	   into per-event note
    	
        3) Crap. - goes into NL:
    
    Of course, I don't know of any warm bodies to do this work...
    	
    	-Bill  

    I vote for no separate MIDI conference.  this IS the MIDI conference!
    
    Re: 'serious' computer music discussions, people can just VAXmail 
    Tom Janzen.  
    
    Re: archiving, well, yes, this is getting kinda bulky.. but yes, 
    people can find what they want if they extract the directory
    into a buffer and searching that, or doing a DIR/TITLE="FOO".
    
    Re: yes, this is my FAVORITE CONFERENCE on the net !
    
    Re: karl 

    Please no seperate MIDI conference...too much duplication would take
    place. 
    
    Serious computer music discussions? Seems like the note we have
    has had only a few contributors....that indicates a lack of interest
    to me....but what do I know?
    
    I'd reorganize with some enforced guidelines, ie: for sale in one
    note...delete after it's gone/off the market (boy am I guilty here)
    that requires an active moderator...
    
    dbII

    I've heard the argument both on and off-line that this conference
    doesn't live up to it's title. BFD. We could call it NOVA::SHEEP_
    RAISING and it wouldn't change the quality of the info.
    
    I personally like the "moderator-less" style of this file. Sure,
    sometimes the topics go down ratholes (guilty!) and there's a lot
    of non-MIDI banter (guilty), but that's *why* I like this conference. 
    As much as I like discussing my toys, a hardware conference would
    bore me silly. I made some damn good friends in this conference
    largely because of it's style. That's infinitely more important
    to me than being able to find a particular topic quickly...
    
    This *is* the MIDI conference; starting another would be a waste
    of time and resources. If everyone took a little time and deleted
    all the outdated "For Sale" ads and some of the non-related banter
    I'm sure we could clean up the file.
    
    No offense to Dave Blickstein, but I find the non-MIDI related
    musical discussions in this conference to be far more interesting
    than those in MUSIC::, which despite all the good intentions of
    the moderator and some of the noters, is for all intents and purposes,
    the ROCK_N_ROLL notesfile. 
    
    Similarly, with no offense intended to Dave Orin, a notesfile totally
    dealing with MIDI H/W with all the manufacturers in nice little
    groupings would appeal to me as much as all these orange manuals
    sitting in my office. Vital info, but hardly something I'd go 
    outta my way to read unless I had a specific need. 
    
    The music conferences are fractured enough; MUSIC::, COMMUSIC::,
    DRUMS::, GUITAR::, JAZZ::, FOLK::, CLASSICAL::, RECORDS::, BEATLES::,
    CD::, AUDIO::, ad infinatum... Too much of my noting time already
    is spent opening conferences and reading the same "For Sale" ads
    cross posted to half a dozen conferences.
    
    COMMUSIC:: is a perfect blend of hardware, software, application
    and just plain friendly discussions.
    
    I see no need and have no desire to change/modify/add anything.  
    
    Edd                                                      
    
    P.S. And shouldn't Jim Ravan have the final word on this?

    I'm sorta slightly in favor of a MIDI conference.
    
    My main motive is that I find it very hard to locate things in this
    conference due to the lack of that aspect of moderation that imposes
    organization.  We have at least a half dozen 15 ESQ-1 notes for example.
    HR-16 tips are scattered throughout the conference (guilty), etc.
    
    I just think it would be more useful to me if I knew that I could
    go back and find things.
    
    The only way to achieve an organized conference is to start over
    though.
    
    BTW, for all its flaws, I *love* Commusic.  It's my favorite conference
    by far (including MUSIC btw).  I have given some consideration to
    moderating/hosting "MIDI"  and giving up MUSIC.  I know that I
    don't have the time to do both though, or at least not do both
    without some help at the level that I intervene in MUSIC (moving
    notes, writing mail messages, etc.)
    
    	db

	I vote for keeping things as is, much for the same reasons Edd has 
outlined.  This is MY favorite conference too, mostly because it offers an
almost PERFECT fit with the subjects I am most interested in.  Or perhaps, my
interests have come to conform with what is most often discussed here?  Whatever
the case, I look forward to logging in and finding out what's going on here - 
who's selling what, who's bought what, learning some of the quirks of various
kinds of equipment (recording, synths, P.A., MIDI hardware/software...).  It 
would frustrate the pants off of me to have to dig through multiple conferences
to gather the great info I find here.

	This conference has been solely responsible for taking a non-technical
musician (me) and putting enough info in his head to be able to make intelligent
decisions to the end that I now have a VERY satisfying electronic music system.
I could never have done it if it weren't for COMMUSIC!

	Not only has it helped me, (and others who have access to it), but it 
has enabled me to be a resource to other non-DEC musicians in offering them
worthwile advise in their technical endevours (as they relate to the electronic 
side of music).  This conference is a GOLD MINE!!!!

	I dread the day when COMMUSIC is no longer available as it is today.

	Dan

    One more vote, for all the good reasons just listed, to keep COMMUSIC
    as is. The content and mix of discussion is great.
    
    Could be worthwhile to archive anything over two years old, the
    technology changes fast enough that a lot of that would be out of
    date. 
    
    Also, another plea to try and keep titles meaningful. Cute titles
    are fun, but it's much easier to find things if we keep our humor
    in the text of the notes. And common notes for "for sale", COMMUSIC
    tapes, etc., sounds good.
    
    Rob

    To clarify my position:
    
    1.) I don't particularly care what the title of the conference is
    (I call it MIDI in my VAX Notes notebook anyway), but I also vote
    for keeping 1 conference related to all the issues discussed in
    this conference.  It is my favorite too and I have been helped
    innumerable times by advice from COMMUSIC noters.  No need to fragment
    the discussions of PA, keyboards, drum machines, technical issues,
    etc. into separate conferences.
    
    2.) I do feel the current file is getting rather bulky and cumbersome
    and could stand to have a new version created.  We would write lock the
    current COMMUSIC and rename it to "COMMUSIC_V1" and create a new
    conference called COMMUSIC in its place.  That way the old version
    would be available for reference purposes but we could impose a
    little more order on the new conference. 

    		Derek

    
    I don't mind a re-org of some kind (I'm used to those around here
    anyway), but I think it would be impossible to find a better name than
    COMMUSIC because this conference covers such a wide variety of
    information.  In general, it's about producing music through
    technology--all kinds of technology, including computers, synthesizers,
    samplers, recorders, etc.  COMMUSIC is as good a title as any. 
    
    We could call it Music Technology, but I'm not so sure about that
    name either...
    
    I'm voting against a new MIDI conference, because then I'd have to read
    both and like everyone else, I don't always have a couple of hours to
    read Notes conferences.  Anyway, how can you discuss new synthesizers
    without mentioning their MIDI capabilities? 
    
    Peter

    I guess since I started this, I should clarify. 

    I DON'T WANT TO SPLIT UP COMMUSIC.  That would be stupid for reasons
    already mentioned.  What I WOULD like to see happen is a NEW VERSION of
    COMMUSIC, and here's why: 
 
	1) current conference is very disorganized, making it hard to
	   find information over a month old or so (especially over
	   a slow network link)

	2) too many duplicate entries (multiple ESQ/HR16/etc topics)

	3) outdated information (eg notes about the "new Roland drum
	   machines [aka 707])

	4) given the above 3, moderation is difficult

    An ounce of prevention, y'know ... up front organization and an
    informative introductory note might help clean things up a bit. 

    While the MUSIC conference may indeed be nothing more than an "ooh, my
    fav group is" thing, don't overlook the effects of db�'s organization
    and moderation efforts. Things are REAL easy to find. 

    Splitting up into MIDI, REAL_music, etc conferences is not at all what
    I suggested or even want(ed).  If a new rev of the conference dictates
    a split in scope, then I will happily withdraw my original request. 

-b who_is_NOT_trying_to_start_a_war

    Why is it necessary to start a new conference or a new "volume"
    of COMMUSIC in order to improve the organization?  Doing either
    will only improve things in the future, which we can also do in
    the existing conference.  As for finding things, I keep a little
    "index" of things of interest to me, and I can find most things
    I want to go back to fairly easily.
    
    I we're sloppy here about organization, I'm not sure I understand
    why anything will change if we "go somewhere else".
    
    len.
    

    Another race condition.  Sigh.  Whatever, I think Derek has the right
    idea.

-b who_raises_sheep

RE: .21

    (puff puff - trying to keep up)

    There are two choices, Len.  Either someone (aka the moderator, whoever
    that is) goes to a whole boatload of work to try and reorganize this
    conference, or we start over with a structure from the beginning. I
    don't think that a reorg is going to be a simple thing.  And since the
    latter is easier ... 

    You guys up north might not have much trouble accessing the conference,
    but those of us who note over 9.6Kb lines aren't so lucky. 

-b

>	1) current conference is very disorganized, making it hard to
>	   find information over a month old or so (especially over
>	   a slow network link)

I think this is mostly due to people entering redundant topics.

>	2) too many duplicate entries (multiple ESQ/HR16/etc topics)

Only an active moderation effort will prevent this. A new conference
won't prevent this.

>	3) outdated information (eg notes about the "new Roland drum
>	   machines [aka 707])

I would like to keep the 707 information online. I don't consider it
to be useless. Same applies to lot's of topics which we could debate
whether they are useful or not.

>	4) given the above 3, moderation is difficult

Moderation is always difficult, but somebody has to do it if there is
to be organization in the conference.

>    An ounce of prevention, y'know ... up front organization and an
>    informative introductory note might help clean things up a bit. 

I think up front organization (in and of itself) will help a little,
but not too much.

>    don't overlook the effects of db�'s organization
>    and moderation efforts. Things are REAL easy to find. 

I think this is mostly due to his moderation efforts, and not so much due
to the original organization. (imo)

>-b who_is_NOT_trying_to_start_a_war

I don't mean to be offensive either. I do speak from some experience though:
I moderate 10 restricted access work-related conferences, each with over 100
members (though I admit they are no where near as active as the music related
conferences).

Want a perfect example? Here we are talking about conference organization,
and all of a sudden someone enters a topic "What size screws for a rack?".
I hate to single out an example like this, but don't we already have
"equipment rack" topics already??? (No personal offense to anyone, really.)

Only an active moderator can keep a conference organized.

/Mitch

    re .23 - No, we don't have to reorganize this conference.  We just
    don't screw it up any worse.  We agree that *from now on*, we talk
    about this subject here, and that subject there.  There really aren't
    that many "duplicate notes".
    
    It's just not necessary to start over again.
    
    Besides, if we start a new conference (or archive this one) then
    some useful stuff will require going to another conference.  No
    matter how well organized the new conference is (and I have some
    skepticism about how long that would remain the case), having to
    access two conferences is a loss.
    
    len.
     

    Well, maybe what we need then is an active moderator.  What happened to
    Jim Ravan, anyway?  

    Why not give moderator privilege to someone else? 

-b

    Len,
    
    One of the advantages of starting over is that the "obvious"
    notes get low numbers which are easy to find and easy to remember.
    
    By "obvious", I mean things like "For Sale", "Wanted", a DECMS
    stuff, a directory of notes (like note 2 in MUSIC), policies,
    etc.
    
    The key thing is to get an active moderator who imposes an organization
    on the file.
    
    	db

    Let me also mention that while I think we can have co-moderators,
    the principle moderator also has to be on the host machine. 
    Moderation requires a lot of reading, moving, and deleting notes.
    
    It would be very frustrating to moderate over a slow network
    connection.
    
    	db

    Oh, yeah? Well, MY link is only 4800 baud.. and flakey!

       As a novice MIDI person and an interested  studio/sound
       person,  and  as  a  drummer,  and as a whatever else I
       am...I vote to leave commusic as  one  note  conference
       and not start a new one or a seperate MIDI conference.

       I'd also vote to LEAVE the outdated tech-tips and info.
       This stuff  is  VALUABLE  to  people  still  using  1st
       generation  whatzits  and also shows progression in the
       technology for comparisons. Before I  got  the  HR16  I
       looked  up  using SEARCH everything I could find on the
       TR505, TRxxx's in general.

       What I WOULD DO:

       1) make ONE note for FOR  SALE  items  and  immediately
       delete all the exsiting FOR SALE notes. a moderator (as
       db knows) will have to still do work to keep  for  sale
       items  in  one  place, but I think MUSIC has shown that
       once the  regulars  get  the  hang  of  it,  alot  less
       creeping  crud results (ie, people have been staying in
       the  FOR  SALE  note  or  the  WANTED  note   and   not
       propagating    new   sons-of-FOR-SALE   notes).   Sure,
       newcomers and non-regs will sometimes breach this,  but
       that  will  be minimum in a conference with as specific
       an audience as this.

       2)  try  and get more KEYWORDing in use. (somebody else
       noted this).

       3)  And I'd also try (i don't know how to enforce this)
       to get people to put notes of  certain  topics  in  the
       appropriate  note  stream  and  not  reply  aboout HR16
       problems  or  tips  in  notes  about   Wurlygigs   (for
       example) or start 5 new  notes  about  Roland  D-series
       products  when 1 note already exists. (Maybe a seperate
       note about each and one about all would be accptable).

  I'd  really not have to add yet-another-music-related-conference to
  my notes directory. I don't have the time to leap frog  around  the
  universe  looking  for  stuff  that  should  be  under  one topical
  category (like if I want to ask something about MIDI  I'd  look  in
  COMMUSIC. *everybody* knows that even the non-musicians!!! ;-) )

    Well it looks like the votes are something like 28 to 1,
    me being the '1'. :-) 
    
    If you decide to open a COMMUSIC vol 2. please at least consider 
    a more descriptive name. It will make things less confusing if 
    I or someone ever decides to create a COMPUTER_MUSIC conference   
    (I just might do it, if for no other reason, for a personal 'file 
    cabinet' of computer music related documents). Besides, I quite like 
    the name 'Music Technology' that someone suggested in a previous reply. 
    It better reflects to what's happening here and might attract even
    more participants. The name may not seem that important to us, but
    consider an average just signed deccie taking a glance at
    EASYNOTES.LIS and finding an entry for COMMUSIC as opposed to for 
    example MUSIC_TECHNOLOGY.  

    There's one more reason for at least taking the naming, reorganisation, 
    splitting questions seriously. DEC computers have always been the
    most used minis in computer music. With the growth of the workstation
    market and stations getting cheaper this application (music) for
    computers is getting more popular all the time. It just might be that 
    one day DEC itself could consider MIDI for example as something worth 
    looking into. One could even say that if there's something we could do 
    now to make MIDI get more attention and perhaps have a MIDI interface 
    one day for example for the Q-bus (ours or 3rd party) would be to at
    least have a conference titled *MIDI* (only a minor point, I admit,
    but a start as such, anyway...) Just as a sidenote - both ATARI and 
    Apple are heavily advertising to the 'music segment' these days.
    
    I 'vote' for NOT doing a cleaning/reorganisation for this file,
    because to me that would seem like 'changing the history'.
    I feel that, for example it'd be more feasible to just copy the 
    most important notes from this file to the new one (if one gets
    created) once it has been set up with a some structuring.
    
    Timo
    
    
    P.S.  I hope no-one misunderstood that I'd be against THIS FILE.
          I've been an active reader for about 3 yrs now although
          my last contributions are a bit 'dated'. Among other things
    	  I allways enjoy the humor here. 
    

I'm with Edd.  Rather than repost his reply, please go back and re-read it.

How much do I like Commusic?  It is the only conference that I read.  I don't 
have lots of time to contribute (I still have a review of Commusic IV half
done, as well as a review of the Kawai K3), or lots of gear to talk about.
I do get a chance to get in and read it every other day or so.

It is useful.  It is entertaining.  It is not overmoderated.

It seems like we are trying to solve one problem - information retrieval. It
seems that in solving this one problem, we are creating lots of other problems
(killing the activity of the older topics, electing an active moderator to
keep the notes in all the right places, lowering the entertainment value thru
formalization, etc.)

I believe the following is enuf:

	1.  Seperate topics for Commusic tapes, Equipment reviews and any other
		commonly used topics that Commusic regulars participate in.
		They'll remember to enter replies rather than new notes.

	2.  Separate topics for the stuff that is for sale.  To reduce
		moderation, there should be a banner that appears when you
		enter the file designating the proper note number.  'ANY 
		FOR_SALE ITEMS NOT IN NOTE XXXX WILL BE DELETED'.

	3.  Descriptive titles.  We all have to pitch in on this one.

The only task the moderator should have to perform is the deleting of the
FOR_SALE items that are not in the proper place.  That's it.

Let's keep Commusic self-moderated [hey, how about giving all the regulars 
moderator privs?] and personable.

Todd.

    I just read thru the first 20 topics in this conference (including
    replies {whew!}).  I don't see any reason (other than nostalgia,
    perhaps) for having them in the conference.  Some of the responses
    simply don't have any business being there. 

    I also just got done printing an entire directory listing of the
    conference.  It is truly amazing how much duplication exists (eg, MIT
    seminars at mumble, customer's night at mumble).  A weekly directory
    listing, an informative base note and some moderator activity would
    have eliminated most of the problems.

    Look - I'm not into a totally moderated conference; I like the free
    form, too.  But a little discipline never hurt anyone.  But I've said
    this all before. 

    Unless there is someone who is *violently* opposed, I'll be compiling
    all previous notes to see if I can determine vote counts for archiving
    this conference and perhaps opening a new one (just to see where we
    stand).

-b

    Here's the list as it currently stands.  The numbers are certainly
    interesting.  There are 13 votes to archive/reopen, 7 to keep the
    current file active (in some state) so far. 

    Of course, this is totally meaningless without moderator input.

    If I have misinterpreted a posting, I apologize in advance. 

-b
    

Participant		A	M	R	S	Z
----------------------	-	-	-	-	-
DREGS::BLICKSTEIN	X	X
MTBLUE::BOTTOM_DAVID 	X	X
JAWS::COTE 						X
NIMBUS::DAVIS		X	X
AKOV88::EATOND						X
DRUMS::FEHSKENS				X
PAULJ::HARRIMAN		X	X
ANGORA::JANZEN		X
4TRACK::LAQUERRE	X	X
KIPPIS::LEHTINEN	X			X
HPSMEG::LEITZ			X	X
SALSA::MOELLER 		X
HPSRAD::NORCROSS		X	X
SUBSYS::ORIN		X	X
HPSTEK::RHODES				X
DYO780::SCHAFER		X	X
MIZZOU::SHERMAN		X
CLULES::SPEED		X	X
RAIN::THARRIS		X
MIDEVL::YERAZUNIS		X	X
---------------------	----	----	---	---	---
	Totals >	A:13	M:11	R:5	S:1	Z:2		

      A - ARCHIVE; archive v1 and open v2
      M - MODERATE; more moderator activity
      R - REORGANIZE; fix current conference, or "stop being bad"
      S - SPLIT; archive v2, split conference into multiples (MIDI, etc)
      Z - ZILCH; do nothing, leave conference as is

    I volunteer to help with the moderator duties...if necessary...
                                               
    dbII

    
    
    Add another vote for reorganization.  I'm not as versed in MIDI
    as alot of the participents in this file are and I find I'm
    constantly looking up old notes for information.  I'd hate to
    have that info go to a write locked file, or even worse, dissapear
    completely.
    
    I'd also like to see a bit more moderation activity.  Searching
    through 64 billion HR-16 notes to see if a question I had was
    asked before got to be a bit much! :^)
    
    Ralph
    
    

I would say either reorganize (R) or zilch (Z)

Chad

    If we are going to become organized with keywords and all, we should
    also outline a system of keywords.  It turns me off to do a 
    SHOW KEYWORD and get three screens full of uselessness.  Especially
    when such entries as:  ATARI
			   ATARI_ST
			   
			   APPLE
			   APPLE][
			   APPLE_2GS
			   
			   ART
			   ART_QUAD_NOISE_GATE
			   
			   D-50
			   D50
			   
			   DEALER
			   DEALERS

			   CZ-1
			   CZ-1000
			   CZ-101
			   CZ-5000
			   CZ5000
			   CZ_101
			   CZ_5000

	etc. etc. etc.

    If we outlined a system of rules governing the use of keywords
    then we would have a usable system of keywords.  Example of such a system:

	Each manufacturer has a keyword   YAMAHA  ROLAND  ART  ATARI  APPLE etc.

	Things of general interest        SEQUENCERS  RECORDERS
					  EFFECTS    DIGITAL   ANALOG  etc.

	'Business' related things	  FOR_SALE  DEALER  DECMS_BBOARD  etc.

	Miscellaneous things		  PATCHES  USENET  SOAPBOX :-)
					  DECMS   BEGINNERS  ANNOUNCEMENTS etc.

	Whatever else...

   This way, one could do a SHOW KEYWORD, get the subject he wants to look at,
   do a DIR/KEYWORD=aaaaaaa   and note the various notes he would like to look
   at (notes should have descriptive titles -- sort of like having sub-keywords.
   Want D-50 info for example, look under KEYWORD ROLAND and then note the notes
   that have to do with D-50s...) and of he goes looking at D-50 notes.

   This would be organized and would also make it so there weren't 10^6
   different keywords to go wading through, half of which all describe the same
   thing...

  chad


	

I gotta vote reorganize (behave ourselves) or zilch, too.  Keywords,
sensible titles, and separate topics for high-volume traffic are all
good ideas.

If disk space or general untidyness is a problem some of the 'expired'
topics could be deleted (e.g. for sale, concert announcements, LEDS_BIM
meetings from 1986,..).  However, nearly all of my toys are 'obsolete',
so the older equipment and problem notes are still quite useful.

Please *don't* run a weekly directory.  I usually read with a batch
extractor, and 5000+ line files tend to blow the disk quota and farkle
the remainder of the batch job.  A *monthly* directory would be better.

Happy Friday,
Dave

    I change my vote to no change.  I was only kidding before, it wasn't
    a vote.
    What's the matter with an Amiga keyword?
    Tom 8-)
    

    I'll change my vote to no change as well (well, go ahead and delete
    LEDS meeting announcements from 1953 :-)  )
    

    I'm not in favor of keywords, but I am still in favor of dedicated
    notes, archiving really old notes, and emphasis on better titles.
    I pop in and out of Commusic during the day with a spare window.
    I can justify it in that I spend little time at it.  If I have to
    create keywords, I'll skip note entry just because I'll feel the
    time pressure.
    
    Steve

    Lots of the older equipment info is useful - I also agree with many
    of the others - lets organize the for sale - meeting - stuff that
    has a limited life span. Dont start a new one.

re: .42  An honest opinion - and a valid one for myself as well.  Make the
reply title the 'keyword'...

Todd.

    
    
    I vote no change !
    
    
    				Atilla

    Ok, I quit.  Leave it alone.  I'll note in batch.

-b

    
    	I like it the way it is.  

    My vote is for one conference (No MIDI or archive conferences).
    
    This is the only conference I follow regularly, and I like the
    mix of info and entertainment.  Maybe re-using low notes 1-20
    for stuff like FOR SALE, DECMS, DEALER and MFG list,  WHO's WHO,
    would be okay.
    
    Dave

    I vote for a bit more moderator activity. Perhaps this can be acheived
    with a bit more self discipline - why start a new HR16 note when
    a perfectly good one already exists? (no offence - I'm sure this
    is'nt the only example). Anyway, I for one would be quite happy
    to have my note repositioned to an existing topic if appropriate
    - it might help me find info on the topic I did'nt know was there.
    
    BTW, I am also a weekly batch extractor reader (which is why its
    taken me so long to reply to this note), so a weekly directory would
    give my system the same indegestion as CNTROL::GEORGE in .39
    

While I used to think that keeping old FOR SALE notes around was a nice
idea, I changed my mind. Until there is a single "for sale" topic, having
so many old for sale ads around is a pain. I'm going to delete all my old
for sale topics. I suppose if everyone did this, the "information/page of
directory" would go up a little.

/Mitch

ps. I find it quite useful to occasionally think up a word of interest
and to do a dir/title=word on it. Useful (and re-usable) topics usually
turn up. Also, sometimes I just pick a number (say, 600) then do a directory
around there to look for re-usable topics.

Oh,    a dir/author=YOU  will help to locate your old for sale topics.

Yes, YOU.

/Mitch

>Note 1637.14           Roland M-160 16 channel Mixer note       14 of 14
>                        -< LoNoiseM160-HiNoiseCommusic >-
>I wish .2 thru .-1 would just delete themselves...

Oh, I get it... ignore the issue.  What a concept.




-------------------
I certainly don't like having noise in the conference. And I admit that this
very reply is "noisy". But having redundant information and a disorganized
conference is no fun either, and ignoring the fact that redundant topics are
being generated doesn't help.

In note 1637, I basically tried to give some advice on how to use Notes more
efficiently. Why someone wouldn't want that advice, I don't know. Maybe it's
just easier to generate redundant information.

Well, I guess no matter how much advice one puts out, there will always be
new Notes users who didn't get the advice, and until there is a moderator
to move topics around the new Notes users will continue to generate redundant
topics. I'll _try_ to stop giving advice now.  Sorry.

/Mitch

>I wish .2 thru .-1 would just delete themselves...

>Oh, I get it... ignore the issue.  What a concept.

The topic was M160 mixers. This was not a redundant note. Every note seems
to be becoming and "issue" note. I was trying to stick to the topic. I was
trying to ignore the noise. Patronizing sarcasm is one of the main causes
of problems in this conference.

not a happy camper

dave

	Mitch, the issue was not ignoring your advice, which we all listen 
too and respect (that's not sarcasm), but it was the organization of this 
file.  Perhaps it would be best if we could have someone reorganize it, or
start another with a moderator in charge of maintenence.  

--mike--

    I've noticed that too, that notes are self-referential.  It almost
    qualifies as meta-noting, because every note ends up talking about
    noting and the base note.  
    Tom

    One of the main reasons why people seem to write new notes rather
    than reply to existing ones is that it takes too long to find the
    topic or reply that is relevant to them (I know it would take me
    a *long* time even to do a 'dir/title=' on the whole conference !).

    Would it help to have a note maintained (I don't know who by) which
    was just a relatively up to date dir *.* of the conference ? Whilst
    this would be a hugh note, at least you could then do a search on 
    just that one note (which must be fairly fast), and any note or
    reply with the product of your dreams in the title would be listed.

    I realise that this isn't 100%, but at least it would give us remote
    people a chance for a quick (i.e. less than half an hour :-) ) sanity
    check before writing new notes, and it could be further improved by 
    adopting a simple convention where if your reply refers to a piece
    of kit not referred to in the base note title then you put it as the
    title to your note.

 
    Constructively yours,

    Derek.

    Anyone *still* believe that we don't need an active moderator and a
    "For Sale" note?  Sigh.

{grumble}

    I agree with Brad.  *7* new notes, one each per for sale item, is
    ridiculous.  Never mind the "typo correction" replies, that could
    have been eliminated by simply replacing the offending note.
    
    Maybe we should rename the conference "FORSALE"?
    
    len.
    

    After ragging in .56, I logged out - and just logged back in to see
    len's string of responses to FOR SALE notes.  I got a *real* good laugh
    out of it (since I was inclined to post to each one like he did, but
    waited).   &*} 

    No offense to the poster intended - we hope you sell your stuff. But
    how long is this gonna go on before someone takes charge of this?

-b

    
    ...and my apologies to any that I annoyed with those postings. You
    can be sure that was *not* my intent. Any suggestions on how to
    do better next time will be heeded. If such suggestions have already
    been posted. I could use a pointer to them. With the thousands of
    topics and responses in this notes file I finally had to give up
    and SET SEEN to a very recent date.
    
    	regards, and regrets,
    	Mark
    

Suggestions for future "for sale" ads...


1. Post one note, write disabled, have replys mailed to your personal node
2. add any updates as replys to your own note and keep the topic write locked
3. when your items have been sold, delete all replys, then the base note,
   it will then disappear from the topic directory, but will not necessarily
   save any disk space due to disk fragmentation
4. all noters agree not to "reply" to for sale ads; instead respond to the
   noter via email
5. include all asking prices, contact info, equipment in the base not

Request...

Could we do this to the current flurry of ads topics? Delete everything
and start over. This would require cooperation of everyone who replied
to the topics to delete their replies?

Question...

Should I take another poll about the MIDI conference I mentioned in a
previous note? I have it set up, and we could select several active noters
as moderators. The system is a high availability 8350. It is networked
thru SHR. Or, we could request that Jim Ravan select someone like Dave
Blickstein as a comoderator if both are willing?


dave

>    Request...
>
>Could we do this to the current flurry of ads topics? Delete everything
>and start over. This would require cooperation of everyone who replied
>to the topics to delete their replies?
 
    Oh, please don't do that!  Then all that stuff will show up in our
    unseen maps again....
    
    Willie

    > Or, we could request that Jim Ravan select someone like Dave
    > Blickstein as a comoderator if both are willing?
    
    These days, COMMUSIC is about the only file I read with any regularity.
    It is also, IMO, the most in need of organization.  I am frustrated
    by the inability to find notes on an almost daily basis.
    
    Considering these things, I would quite happy to act as co-moderator
    of a *NEW* conference such as MIDI.   In fact, once (or perhaps
    I should say "if") the problems with the noteserver on DREGS get
    cleared up, I might even be able to host it as well.
    
    But my offer is limited to a new conference.  Trying to organize THIS 
    conference is not a task for mortals such as myself.  
    
    	db

    Acutally, I'd even go as far as to try and organize *this* conference
    if someone would give me moderator priv. 

    As for the new conference on DREGS ... well, the link time to DREGS for
    me is too darn slow for me.  Remember those of us in the field.

    And no offense taken, Mark ... how are you supposed to know where or
    how to put things? 

-b

    
    
    Well
    
    Back from Holidays and DECworld to the same old issues. I am sure
    that Mt Hastings now feels suitably admonished and would not dare
    inflict this kind of pain on us "sensible" noters again. 
    
    I stil vote for self moderation and freedom of choice.
    
    But then I've always been a democrat as well.
    
    					Paul.

    
    
    er sorry thet was Mr Hastings....
    
    Still feeling like a democrat !
    
    I don't care I've had *my* Holiday.
    
    					Paul.

    Re 67
    
    Is that a Social Democrat, a Social Liberal Democrat, or a Democrat
    Democrat? 
    
    Richard.

    
    A conservative Democrat.
    
    
    				Paul (Positively Tested !)

    Isn't that like military intelligence?

-b

    
    
    2 things.
    
    1st, Yes *What* do you know about English Politics.
    
    2nd. Aren't "military" and "Intelligence" Mutually exclusive.
    
    					Regds. Atilla.

    2 things.

    1st, nothing, except I know who Maggie Thatcher is.

    2nd, that was my point about a "conservative Democrat".

    Attila, maybe - but don't expect me to call you "hun".  &*}

    Well, it's official.  I'm a moderator. 

    Would all conference participants please review the first 10 topics in
    this conference for useful information?  Anyone finding something that
    they feel should be kept around should post the topic.number here (and
    why they want to keep it around) by the end of today or tomorrow. 

    I'm gonna try and clear out the first several notes for things like an
    organized list of keywords, a For Sale note and anything else I can
    think of. 

    Let me know - and all suggestions are welcome (but subject to being
    ignored 8-). 

-b

  MY 3� worth.  I don't like conferences with just 1 FOR SALE note.  It makes
  it hard for me to reference replies to a certain note (eg.  that YAMLAND
  F-892iE Super SQM synth for sale in 345.378 [it now being .762] is now
  priced for ...)  It is like spaghetti code.  I would like the rule to be
  similar: enter a for sale note that contains all items, phone, address, asking
  price, etc. (like was mentioned a day or so ago as a rule) 
  
     or
 
  Have each person assigned ONE note for their personal for sale use, with
  later sales (by same person) being placed in the same note.  Newcomers
  could just make a new note and stick with that one, while we old fogeys
  can go back to the last time we tried to sell something.  A conference
  wide header should always point to the note declaring the RULE on FOR
  SALE.

CHad

RE < Note 1514.74 by NORGE::CHAD >

	Why would you want to keep a for sale note around?  

	Dan

    Hey, would it be good to also move db's 1523.1 note to the beginning,
    too?  'Course, by now I have the number memorized ...
    
    Steve

>RE < Note 1514.74 by NORGE::CHAD >
>
>	Why would you want to keep a for sale note around?  
>
>	Dan

You wouldn't necessarily want to but it happens all the time.  Look in any
notes file where someone might want to sell something and I'd guess that
there are a lot of *old* for sale notes.

I personally like the idea of allowing each noter his/her own note for for
sale from them and they are responsible for keeping it tidy.  Of course, the mod
erator should not allow them to start a new for sale note if they already have one.

Chad

    I just read thru the first 15 topics in here.  Looks like the only
    potentially useful ones are 7 (Musical Notation Editor Query) and 10
    (DX7/9). 

    Both topics are kind of old news, are are pretty useless except for
    historical purposes.  Unless someone squeaks, the 1st 15 topics will be
    write-locked shortly and will be used by yours truly to attempt to
    clean things up a bit. 

-b

    The following is a list of "For Sale" notes in the conference.  Would
    the authors please take a minute to review these notes and decide if
    they are obsolete?  Send mail to DYO780::SCHAFER regarding the
    disposition of these notes.  Active "For Sale" notes will be relocated
    at some point in the future.  Right now I'm just trying to determine
    whether these are "active" or "dead". 

    Also - it seems to me that a few noters have left for various reasons.
    If you see a person in the list that has left DEC, send me mail. Thanks
    for your help. 



(moderator)	324, 749, 607, 1564, 1469, 921, 573, 1561

AZORIAN		1693, 1677, 1413, 1657, 1539 
BARTH		729
BEFUMO		1557
BLICKSTEIN	1541, 1503, 1433 
BOTTOM_DAVID	1065
BOULMIER	867
BULMER		706
CALLAHAN	1536   
CALLAS		380    
CHAD		1663
COHEN		455
COTE		959
CROWLEY		1251, 1472, 1662 
DAVIS		449, 418 
DEHAHN		1298
DESHARNAIS	411
DIMA         	1486
DPOWELL      	872 
DREHER       	1407
DUBE         	515, 533, 978, 673 
DUPRE        	1545
EATON		406, 587, 887, 829, 1660 
FEHSKENS     	122 
FULTYN        	898, 899
GLORIOSO     	1383
HASTINGS	1691, 1586, 1687, 1690, 1688, 1689 
HERDEG       	1090
HYATT        	438 
JKMARTIN      	1427, 1444
JOHNSON      	1084
JWILLIAMS    	1633
KIP           	1520
KLOSTERMAN    	1579
LAING        	1560, 1568
LINCE        	1498
LYNCH        	1484
MACKAY       	1670
MALIK        	691, 75
MCATEE        	1430
MINOW         	1294
MORRIS       	1475
NELSON       	1473
NICKERSON    	1679
NORCROSS     	890, 881
CSA5::OPERATOR	710
ORSI         	1685
P_DAVIS      	1526
RAPHAELSON   	1398, 1636
RATASKI       	931, 597
REVCON1       	1125
RIES          	685 
ROSS          	741 
SAVAGE		181, 289, 443, 583, 680, 105 
SCOTT         	1034
SIMONE        	1002
SPEED        	1318, 1118, 142
T_ROBERT     	1155, 1348, 1649, 329
WARNER		1443, 1508, 1530, 1507 
WJOHNSON     	540, 651, 1099    
YERAZUNIS     	1036

    Upon re-reading the first several replies to this topic, I noticed that
    not a few people read this conference via batch extraction. 

    Well, for those doing this who don't use some other tool, I've hacked a
    quick and dirty together to help read the extracted stuff (assuming
    that you used ENOTES to retrieve the info).  It's basically a NOTES-like
    front end emulated in EDT.  It ain't perfect, but it beats $ TYPE. 

    If anyone is interested, send me mail and I'll tell you where it is. 

-b

> < Note 1514.73 by DYO780::SCHAFER "Brad ... DTN 433-2408" >
>                                -< Cleanup time. >-
>
>     Well, it's official.  I'm a moderator. 

Congradulations and  good  luck.  I'm looking forward to reorganization.

     I hope you are able to keep up  with  all  the  new notes that will
     have to be relocated.  (I do hope you  are  planning  on relocating
     new  topics  which  belong  in  old topics, and I will  trust  your
     judgments - you have my support).

>     Would all conference participants please review the first 10 topics in
>     this conference for useful information?  Anyone finding something that
>     they feel should be kept around should post the topic.number here (and
>     why they want to keep it around) by the end of today or tomorrow. 

I think topics 11 and 15 should  be kept around ("MIDI, what is it?" and
     "Computer Music Journal" respectively).  The only topics that I can
     think of that should be "up front/maintained" are:

1 Welcome
2 For Sale
3 Wanted
4 The Commusicians
5 The Commusic Tapes
6 The DECMS
7 The DECMS BBS
8 Notes Conference Issues

/Mitch

RE: .81

    None of the information in topic 11 is pertinent anymore.  The address
    and phone number (not to mention the membership cost) have changed. 

    There'll be a whole list of dedicated topics right up front to keep
    noise level in the conference down.  One of those topics will include
    the info listed in topic 15. 

    Stay tuned, and thanx for the input.

-b

> < Note 1514.82 by DYO780::SCHAFER "Brad ... DTN 433-2408" >
>     None of the information in topic 11 is pertinent anymore.  The address
>     and phone number (not to mention the membership cost) have changed. 

The info may  no  longer  be  true,  but the topic is still valid.  Some
     people believe that  if the info in a topic is no longer true a new
     topic should be started  to  update  the  info.  I beleive that the
     info should be updated in the original topic. Vote for me.

In this particular case, I'd say do what you have  to  do  to  make  the
     front  of  the  conference  organized.    The  "MIDI,  what is it?"
     question has  been  raised  since  then  a  few  times  (with  less
     appropriate titles) and  I  would guess that the latest IMA address
     is around somewhere.

/Mitch

----
oh, and I hope you're  into making titles more informative.  you have my
     support.

    The following FOR SALE notes are still outstanding.  Any notes not
    deleted or replied about by next Friday will be unceremoniously
    deleted. 

    PLEASE take time to scan this list to see if you have a FOR SALE note
    outstanding.  If so, mail me and let me know what to do with it - or if
    there are no replies, blast it yourself. 

    Next week, "WANTED" notes. 
+----
AZORIAN		1693, 1677, 1413, 1657, 1539 
BARTH		729
BEFUMO		1557
BLICKSTEIN	1541, 1503, 1433 
BOULMIER	867
BULMER		706
CALLAHAN	1536   
CALLAS		380    
DAVIS		449, 418 
DESHARNAIS	411
DIMA         	1486
DREHER       	1407
DUPRE        	1545
FEHSKENS     	122 
FULTYN        	898, 899
GLORIOSO     	1383
HASTINGS	1586, 1687, 1688, 1689, 1690, 1691
HERDEG       	1090
HYATT        	438 
JKMARTIN      	1427, 1444
JWILLIAMS    	1633
KIP           	1520
KLOSTERMAN    	1579
LAING        	1560, 1568
LINCE        	1498
LYNCH        	1484
MACKAY       	1670
MALIK        	691, 75
MCATEE        	1430
MINOW         	1294
MORRIS       	1475
NELSON       	1473
NICKERSON    	1679
ORSI         	1685
P_DAVIS      	1526
RAPHAELSON   	1398, 1636
RATASKI       	931, 597
REVCON1       	1125
RIES          	685 
ROSS          	741 
SAVAGE		181, 289, 443, 583, 680, 105 
SCOTT         	1034
SIMONE        	1002
SPEED        	1318, 1118, 142
T_ROBERT     	1155, 1348, 1649, 329
WARNER		1443, 1508, 1530, 1507 
YERAZUNIS     	1036