<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); "><div><div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; "><br></div><div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; ">Dear friends and colleagues,</div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; "><br></div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; ">Sorry for a very long email; for those who look at all, I've tried to facilitate skimming.</div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; "><br></div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; ">Like many subscribers to the list, I've been seriously disturbed by the recent conversation on sexism and related issues; smt-talk is looking like the wild west, with generally lawless behavior and misbegotten attempts at frontier justice.</div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; "><br></div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; ">I don't believe that this is representative of our society, and my own very selective sample of face-to-face interactions suggests that in other areas things are getting better, not worse. When I was first attending SMT as a grad student, 10-15 years ago, I found it rather offputting. It seemed to me that many of the questions after papers were either trying to poke holes in the thesis offered or else trying to display the questioner's own knowledge of the area, often without great relevance to the paper. When I returned this year after a long hiatus, the questions I heard were very frequently encouraging to the presenter, and the ethos of the q+a was that it was a time for building up, not tearing down. I came away with a greatly improved perception of SMT.</div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; "><br></div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; ">And there have been very positive aspects of the society on display even in this recent discussion, seen in those who calmly explained issues of sexism without accusing anyone of malice or ill will, or in those who humbly apologized for unintentionally offensive posts.</div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; "><br></div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; ">Nonetheless, <u>I see three ways in which recent events show that smt-talk requires some kind of format adjustment</u>.</div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; "><br></div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; ">A) People have been hurt, in at least three ways</div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; "><br></div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; ">- some have been offended by remarks that were very understandably perceived as sexist, regardless of their intent</div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; "><br></div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; ">- some have undergone a painfully public education on a sensitive topic (until now it never occurred to me to be thankful that my own education on these matters took place privately, and not in front of hundreds(?) of colleagues)</div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; "><br></div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; ">- emails have been sent off-list (i.e. without moderation), directly to posters, that challenge them or in some way comment negatively on a highly sensitive topic. This sounds to me a lot like harassment. It's an oversimplification to speak of "sides" in this issue, but people on both "sides" of the discussion have received these emails.</div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; "><br></div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; ">B) The viability of the list is threatened</div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; "><br></div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; ">Others seem to know other online forums where they can access this kind of expertise. I don't. I greatly value much of what I have learned through this list, and I have a question that I've been planning to send out as soon as I can find the time. I want this list to continue to reflect an amazing breadth of knowledge, and (obviously) the more people that leave, the less it does.</div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; "><br></div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; ">That said, I have complete sympathy with those who have left. Like most of us, I would think, I run pretty close to what I consider to be maxxed out. If smt-talk causes me psychological distress, and if this makes me less efficient (and both of these things have happened as a result of this discussion), then at some point I have to question if it's worth it. I don't blame those, for whom the psychological distress has been greater, who have already jumped ship.</div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; "><br></div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; ">C) The list in its current state is (in part) harming, and not serving, the goals of SMT</div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; "><br></div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; ">That significant numbers of people can feel that an SMT-sponsored discussion is not a safe space, some of whom leave and some of whom tolerate it reluctantly because of other gains, cannot be good for the health of SMT.</div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; "><br></div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; ">--</div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; "><br></div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; ">So far most of the responses to this situation that make specific suggestions fall roughly into two groups: "It's broken, so let's scrap it" and "It stinks, but it's worth it" (the latter sometimes with tips for dealing with it).</div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; "><br></div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; "><u>It seems to me that the list is very valuable but that it's current state is not working. I think we need to find a way to adjust the format of the list</u>. </div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; "><br></div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; ">One of the many laudable things that Donna Doyle has said is this: "<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: medium; ">It seems to me that, as a Society, as we move forward, we must continue to try to ensure that, at least, we do no harm. " </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: medium; "><u>Here are two suggestions of how we might do that</u></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: medium; ">. </span></div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; "><br></div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; ">1) add another layer of moderation for sensitive topics</div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; "><br></div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; ">Moderating the list is a huge job and I can't see adding to that. But perhaps when posts touch on sensitive topics (and maybe also when the rhetorical temperature is getting heated) the moderator could pass them along to someone else (or to a small committee?) for more careful review. This person would be encouraged to set a high bar for civility and sensitivity. This could help prevent offense, and it could allow processes of education to take place in private. </div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; "><br></div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; ">I am not suggesting some kind of p.c. thought police who would eliminate some viewpoints, but rather a mechanism to ensure a high level of civility in discourse. When some people have said that we should be discussing these issues in 21st-century terms, I take this to mean not that old-fashioned views should be silenced, but rather that some topics are now widely (but not universally) known to require special sensitivity, that the cultural conversation on these issues has been going on for decades, and that contributions to that conversation should reflect an understanding of its current state.</div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; "><br></div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; ">2) restrict off-list communication</div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; "><br></div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; ">Clearly this shouldn't be overdone: much off-list discussion is entirely benign; one of the purposes of the list is to foster relationships and conversations that can continue off list; and even on sensitive topics, some people will want to offer positive feedback to posters without entering a gladiatorial arena.</div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; "><br></div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; ">But I would suggest that on sensitive topics, it be a requirement that all negative or challenging responses be sent only to the list, so that they go through the more-extensive moderation process. </div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; "><br></div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; ">I think of two mechanisms to help this to happen:</div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; "><br></div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; ">a) let all emails from the list come from the list as sender, and change [Smt-talk] to [Smt-talk: Sender] or [Smt-talk: Sender's last name]. </div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; "><br></div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; ">This is cumbersome, and maybe someone knows a better technical solution. But currently, as Gregory Karl observed, if you hit "reply" the email goes directly to the original sender, and sending it to the list requires some extra work. This is the reverse of the way it should be.</div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; "><br></div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; ">b) People who receive off-list emails that they find offensive can forward them to the extra moderators; if the extra moderators agree that the message is inappropriate, the sender can get their list privileges suspended (clearly this should include receiving mail from the list, not just sending to it).</div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; "><br></div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; ">So those are my suggestions. Perhaps other people have ideas that would more effectively serve the same ends. But I do think that we need to do something. The memberships of the society and of the list are constantly being renewed, and we can expect a constant influx of people who, for whatever reason, missed what happened in the 1990's (or in whatever other decade for other similar issues). I don't think we can afford many more incidents like this last one.</div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; "><br></div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; ">John</div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; "><br></div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; "><div><div>___________________________________<br>John Paul Ito<br>Assistant Professor of Music Theory<br>www.andrew.cmu.edu/user/johnito/<br><br>School of Music<br>Carnegie Mellon University<br>5000 Forbes Ave.<br>Pittsburgh, PA 15213<br><br>412.268.1246<br>412.268.1431 (FAX)</div></div></div></div></div></div></body></html>