Vocalist.org archive


From:  "Dre de Man" <dredeman@y...>
"Dre de Man" <dredeman@y...>
Date:  Tue Nov 28, 2000  2:46 pm
Subject:  Re: [vocalist-temporary] RE: ADMIN: list moderation?


Dear Isabelle and co-vocalisters,

first of all: I'm very glad you're back.
Secondly: my vote: I'm all for moderation, by (a person like) you.

I have been serioulsy thinking about signing off myself, in the last couple of
weeks, and I would have done so, if this moderation issue had not come up. To
be frank, the atmosphere of vocalist has so much changed in the last couple of
months, that it is simply not a nice place to be anymore.

This is partly due to the fact that some people are fighting their personal
fights here and are quite rude, but I think it has much more to do with a
certain lack of respect. Respect for other's people opinions, but even more,
for the experience and knowledge of other's, that many vocalisters could
benefit from.

As far as I understand it, the list consists of four kind of people (and also
benefits from the fact we have those different species):

1. Those with as prime example Lloyd, who are well schooled, trained and
experienced teachers or singers.
2. A group of young professional singers, or students who nearly, or just
finished their studies and some very advanced amateurs who perform
professionally regularely.
3. Those who just started their studies at a conservatorium, or are 'better'
amateurs.
4. People without neither much training, nor much experience.

Now the diffcult thing is, that members of all those groups can write
interesting things, but that despite that, the members of the different groups
have more or less implicite different roles. It would be very strange, if
somebody who just had three singing lessons, is going to tell somebody who just
got his or her first role at the Met, how to cope with the rather high
tessitura of the new role. Yet this is, slightly exagerated what is happening
sometimes.

Besides that, there should be some kind of a balance: if there are many 'group
4' emails a day, the list is not very interesting anymore, at least if both the
answers and the questions come from group 4-ers, or - even worse - if it ends
up with discussions like: ' I want to stay a virgin like Britney Spears, you
too?' (For most of us this not very interesting, because it might already be
too late to have a choice.)

Even worse is the situation where one person writes many emails, and reacts to
almost any issue that is brought up - and this is a situation we seem to have
seen lately quite often. I also think this is what you were thinking about,
when you wrote a mail a couple of weeks ago, suggesting to limit the amount of
mails one person can send per day. This is also a bit difficult, because a
certain person could have an issue that is very important for him or her at
that moment, like Jocelyn Gooch
wrote.

If the list would be moderated, it would also be good to have a couple of
'nettiquette' rules published, so that if your mail is moderated, you can read
them first to understand why this might have happened.

I also think it would be a very good idea, if everybody would ask him or
herself, what the value of their attribution to the list might be, other than
to make their point, before sending a mail. If there is any: great. If there is
no, well...;). Of course we are all human, and I've sent some mails in the
past, I would not send again, or not in the same words. On the other hand: some
spontaniously should remain, and I must also say that in a couple of cases, I
did not send a mail where I think it might have been better if I would have
done so.

All in all: I'm for moderation and I would be very glad if all vocalisters
would succeed in being moderate enough to make moderation not necessary. And
yes: I think a lister who's mail has been moderated or refused, should get some
kind of standard mail to tell him or her so.

Best greetings,

Dre



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


emusic.com