[Smt-talk] Decisions

[Locke, Ralph]

Jeff Perry says that "bad internet traffic tends to drive out good Internet traffic."  He illustrates this by voting with his feet and announcing that he is unsubscribing to SMT-talk, and he urges us to do the same.

I will not do the same.

If I don't like a thread, I stop reading it.  (The Subject lines were very helpful in this regard in past days.)

I certainly don't think that it was wrong for the original person to tell us about the instance of sexist language (cloaked in teasing humor, as sexist and other prejudicial language often is).  That's part of consciousness-raising, in my opinion.

I don't see anything wrong with how SMT-talk is being run.  Of course, I'm not an SMT member (rather, AMS, IMS, and Soc. for Amer. Music).  So I have no real say in these matters.  But that's my two cents.

Best,
Ralph Locke


Ralph P. Locke
Professor of Musicology
Senior Editor, Eastman Studies in Music (University of Rochester Press)
Eastman School of Music
26 Gibbs St.
Rochester NY 14604-2599
USA
Tel.: 585-274-1455
Fax: 585-274-1088 ("for R. Locke")
Emails with large attachments: Ralph.P.Locke at gmail.com
General email address (which I read more regularly): RLocke at esm.rochester.edu
________________________________
From: smt-talk-bounces at lists.societymusictheory.org [smt-talk-bounces at lists.societymusictheory.org] on behalf of Jeffrey Perry [jperry at lsu.edu]
Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2014 9:06 AM
To: smt-talk
Subject: [Smt-talk] Decisions

It’s interesting to recall that the current thread began with a posting telling us that after a conference presentation that most of us had not heard, a questioner used a term that most of us had never heard of. We were then enjoined under no circumstances to use this term.

Predictably, a lengthy series of trolls and counter-trolls ensued. Lost in the shuffle were several posts about the actual chord progression that was ostensibly referenced in the original posting. Also lost were several reminders that SMT has non-sexist language guidelines in placethat, in any event, would prevent such sexist provocations as the original bit of terminology from making it into a peer-reviewed venue.

As I noticed back in the early ‘90s, bad internet traffic tends to drive out good internet traffic; eventually, almost every online discussion venue becomes unusable, if it lasts long enough. We’ve reached that point with this list, friends. I’m unsubscribing and I urge you to do so as well. The SMT Publications Committee will have to tackle this in Milwaukee.

Does smt-talk exist to enhance conversation about published work? Does it take the place of published work? Is it a forum for discussion of life as a music theorist? Is it intended as a bridge between card-carrying music theorists and others with an interest in the field? These questions were never answered, and for a long time this was OK as long as the list conveyed more information and good, clean fun than noise, ill will and vitriol. Thathasn’t been the case for quite some time.

To allow this forum (smt-talk) to continue, spreading heat without light and without a clear mission, would be criminal. Its multiple conflicting purposes are now fulfilled in any of a number of different ways: social media sites dedicated to music theory (as any given person understands the term) are not hard to find.

I won’t say “See you later,” as I communicate with many of you in other places. But please consider this a plea for some serious decision-making by SMT. It’s way past time.


Jeff Perry
Professor of Music Theory
277 Music and Dramatic Arts
School of Music, College of Music & Dramatic Arts
Louisiana State University
jperry at lsu.edu / (225) 578-3556 (voice) / (225) 578-2562 (fax)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.societymusictheory.org/pipermail/smt-talk-societymusictheory.org/attachments/20140501/e63e1520/attachment-0003.htm>