Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Memorial to the BBS

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ TubeNet BBS ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Jay Bertolet on March 22, 2004 at 09:44:13:

In Reply to: Re: Re: Re: Re: Memorial to the BBS posted by Steve H. on March 22, 2004 at 00:15:48:

Again, just like Old Slowfinger posted, I think this is flawed logic. Let me pose to you a what if:

4 years ago, I was not in the market for a new horn. The horns I had at the time were wonderful. I covered all the repertoire I needed to cover and I had no complaints at all with the ease of coverage. Then, in large part because of postings on Tube-Net, I found myself with access to a used Nirschl 6/4 CC. I decided to try the horn mostly because I was curious, not because I had much real intention to buy the horn. Fortunately for me, I'm not the sort to jump on bandwagons or to be swayed by what the Joneses are doing these days. I tried the horn, fell in love, and bought it. That horn has become my main instrument.

A nice story. The relevance? I would not have gone looking in a separate section of the BBS to find the horn. Like I said, I had no initial desire to buy a new horn. I had no idea such a horn would even fit me. Almost the exact same thing happened when I acquired the Miraphone 184 CC that I used for quintet playing. The horn became available, through a posting on Tube-Net, and then I contacted the seller and worked out a deal. I had no desire to buy the horn prior; it was discussions on Tube-Net and a dialogue with the seller in particular that facilitated the deal.

I haven't looked much at the new BBS. I have read the discussions about it. It appears that one of the "nice things" about the new setup is the compartmentalization of topics. Several posters have commented on how nice it will be to not have to scroll through unwanted topics. That line of reasoning seems foolish to me. It is no effort at all to not read topics whose headers you have no interest in. If anyone is suggesting that the act of scrolling past unwanted threads is bothersome, I would suggest that more than a new BBS system is needed for such a person to be happy.

Change, in and of itself, is not necessarily a good thing. I think we, as a society, are often too quick to endorse new products. We often dismiss the years of proven service an older, time tested product delivers. Change is only good if it is for the better. In light of the comments so far, it appears that the new system is not roundly considered as superior. Why is that? The unfortunate thing is that Sean will have to risk the continued existence of Tube-Net to find out. If enough folks fail to migrate to the new system, the new system will be less than the current one. I see no way to predict the outcome of that gamble. As I stated in my earlier post on this subject, it would be a terrible shame to lose what Tube-Net currently is. I sincerely hope that doesn't happen.

My opinion for what it's worth...

Follow Ups: