What happened to the All Steinway School thread?

It's gone! I wonder where...

I anticipated this question… guess I do have good intuition after all.

I made a decision as moderator to remove the thread. My reasons for doing so shall remain confidential for the moment, other than to say that I feel my reasons were justified based on some consultation with Ken and some other parties involved in the thread.

If those individuals feel the need to comment on discussions that went on in a PM regarding this thread, they are free to do so as well.

I know this is a “damned if I do and damned if I don’t” situation… so be it; it goes with the territory.


Please feel free to start another thread with a similar topic if you wish.

Rick

Hi Rick,

I know that being a moderator is a thankless payless and difficult job. I have to say though that whatever single issue there was in that thread, it was chock full of great debate, great content, and most importantly, great factual information.

Pulling the entire thread is like throwing the baby out with the bathwater. There must be another option.

Thanks, Rich… (I think)

I didn’t remove the thread because of the topic… I removed the thread because of the behavior of some of the participants, both in the thread and behind the scenes. Will my actions be the demise or the apocalypse of Piano World or the piano industry? I doubt it.

I serve as moderator at the pleasure of Frank Baxter, whom I admire and respect tremendously. He can remove me as moderator at any time. He has stated that I did the right thing by removing the thread for the moment.

This issue is in Frank’s hands now; I’m out of the equation. He may choose to restore the thread to the open forum and he may not.

Now, whose baby was it that got thrown out with the bathwater?

Rick

I must have missed that part!

Rick decided to pull the thread as a result of a disagreement between Turandot and me. Here is how I see the issues:

In the thread Turandot made a post that stated what he thought were a number my positions. There were about a dozen passages that I objected to most starting with “Steve feels that”, “Steve thinks that”… etc. I objected because, in this instance, Tur was wrong in what he claimed I felt and thought. He was, IMO putting words into my mouth, and his post significantly misrepresented my thinking.

The Internet is a difficult medium in which to accurately express complex issue. It is one thing to criticize someone for being unclear, but quite another to ascribe what one thinks they mean to them.

As I also said in the PMs, I have a great deal of respect for Turandot. I think he is one of the most knowledgeable members of the Piano Forum. His understanding of the industry is both broad and deep. I have told him this in PMs on several occasions. While I don’t believe he had any malicious intent, in this instance however, IMO he crossed the line.

I discussed the matter with Turandot through PMs asking him to either remove the post or edit it using quotes from my posts or to, in some way reflect that these were what he thought my positions or thinking was. He refused. We exchanged a number of cordial PMs over several days to no avail.

I then sent a PM to Rick, Ken and Turandot asking the moderators to intervene and to encourage Tur to edit or remove the posts. It was my position that Tur has a right to his opinions, but not claim that his beliefs as to my opinions are in fact mine. In the PM I said “Sentences like those that begin with "Steve thinks...." Steve's position...", Steve infers' must stop”. I again encouraged Tur to instead use quotes of what I actually said rather than put words in my mouth.

When he again refused to act I asked the moderators consider editing or pull the offensive post. In response, Rick pulled the entire thread.

This was done at a particularly unfortunate time. A representative from Steinway had just joined the thread promising to answer questions and address the issues. While a few questions had been asked, he did not have an opportunity to respond. Also, this was the 4th most active (most replies) post in the history of Piano World, as well as the 20th most viewed. It certainly raised issues that were of great interest to the piano industry.

I don’t really understand Rick’s reasoning in pulling the entire thread based on a disagreement between Tur and me. However, rather than put words in his mouth...

Also, at the moderator’s request Frank is looking into the matter.

How very interesting.



Yes, how unfortunate.

You both should urgently meet to drink some beer togehter.

I would be proud, VERY PROUD to pay the bill for this event as I do estimate both your Steve's and Turandot's contributions to this forum so much.

A Steinway representative? Address a issue, yea that could happen.

Why thanks! Tur and I will be in SoCal in January. You just might get a bill!

It may be unfortunate, but I would consider Rick's comment:





I don't want to get into a mud-wrestling competition with Steve over what was a proper inference to be drawn from what he posted on this thread or what was an unwarranted inference. I wish that he had just accepted the moderators' decision. I think removing the thread was actually in his own best interests, but that's just my opinion. His, of course, may well be different.

Suffice it to say that the moderators decided that they did not wish to remove an opposing point of view from a thread at the private request of a member whose point of view it opposed.

I will also state that never once on the thread did Steve address directly any post I made. He never referred to any differing opinion that I posted at all. However, during the time the thread ran, he initiated three PM tracks with me. The first (sent to me alone) asked me to not explore one aspect of the matter that he considered sensitive. I agreed even though I felt that his account of what went down at Bowie State opened the door to that aspect. The second, which he also sent simultaneously to two moderators, asked, or rather demanded, that some of my comments be removed and alsostated that he deserved an apology. The third was sent to me alone and concerned what he referred to as a minor matter. I did not initiate any private contact with Steve, but I did attempt to work through our differences in a cordial but truthful exchange.

I really don't know why the thread was deleted. At a certain point I quit giving it much attention and quit posting on it. I felt and posted my opinion that it had no central focus. I know from the PM track that the moderators were unwilling to force the actions that Steve wanted. I did not request, plead, or beg for them to take my side in anything.

Had Steve stated on thread that I was misunderstanding his intent, I would have certainly been willing to listen. In all honesty, he had introduced so many elements that seemed extraneous to me, that I had reached the point that I didn't know what his central focus was.

I think the moderators act out of the best interests of the forum. I don't expect them to look out for anyone's specific interests, certainly not mine, and I don't expect them to take sides. I do not question their decision at all. I was pleased that they didn't accede to Steve's demands. I was pleased that they did not bow to pretty intense and persistent pressure.

I don't think I was the reason that Steve felt he could not address any questions to Mr. Bernard. I had stated I would not post on the thread again so that he could develop his issue as he saw fit without any impediment from me. If he felt reluctant to bring whatever was on his mind to Mr. Bernard because of me, that's unfortunate. It was pretty clear that I was gone from the thread and I made it clear in the PM exchange that I would remain 'gone'.

What all this boils down to is that I have no bone to pick whatsoever with our moderators and with their decision..

Okay, ladies and gentlemen of this wonderful Piano World… there you have it. All the cards are on the table (except the one up my sleeve… just kidding ).

Turandot has is right when he stated that the moderator do their best to act in the absolute best interest of Piano World as a whole and not one particular individual or group of individuals.

I did not take the decision to remove the “All Steinway School” thread lightly. I honestly saw not other way of satisfying Steve, a well respected industry pro, without editing Turandot’s post, which I felt would have been censorship and, or favoritism.

Did I throw out the baby with the bathwater by removing the thread, as Rich Galassini said? Maybe. But I’m sure mama was there to catch it so it didn’t get hurt.

Frank may well decide to restore the thread… like I said, it is in his hands now. It is not often something like this goes all the way up the chain to Frank. What ever he decides, you can rest assured it will be in the best interest of Piano World as a whole.

Rick

Debates become so ridiculously heated on Piano World, I wonder if anyone on here ever has the time to practice.

Practice??

Whats that?

Everything, Rich. It is everything.

Okay Rick. I appreciate the fact that neither you nor Ken asked me to do anything at all, and as you know, I didn't ask you two to do anything at all either. However, it seems pretty clear that for whatever reason, Steve doesn't want the thread eliminated. Probably contributors like Sphial, Bob, and Numerian, who put a lot of thought into their posts, don't want their words eliminated either. Not to mention that Rich Galassini just can't get enough of this stuff.

I'll work with Steve in the PM track to hammer something out that works for everyone.

I find the whole way this is being approached somewhat puzzling. If Steve has a problem with how you characterized his position, why doesn't Steve post a rebuttal in the thread presenting his corrections? This is how these kinds of disagreements are handled typically on the forum-- in fact, this probably constitutes a large percentage of the dialogue around here! Short of being the object of abusive or libelous behavior, it does not seem to me that a member, even if a "well respected industry professional" should be able to demand this kind of treatment. Is this really a precedent we want to set? Can we all request this now? ("Hey, I don't like how ____ described my position and s/he refuses to change it. Please change or delete his/her post.") and in order to satisfy this, the whole thread goes since I agree that deleting or editing the post would be inappropriate.

Frankly, if I were Steve, I'd be glad to have this thread deep six'ed as I don't think he did himself any favors with it.

Sophia

p.s. I don't particularly need or want to see this thread revived as I think it had gone into something of a death spiral anyway. I'm more concerned with the principle involved and precedent being set.

As always, any actions by a moderator in situations like this will not please everyone. As far as any precedence being set here, that is certainly not the case… any precedence on PW is set by Frank Baxter in the way of rules and policies of acceptable behavior on the forums. If a moderator does something that Frank does not like or agree with, the moderator is certainly informed about it. So, Frank does keep a check on the moderator’s actions.

The primary reasons for removing the thread has been voluntarily brought to light here… some members agree with it and others don’t. Isn’t that always the way it is?

I actually locked that thread once because of the tone that was developing and I reopened it with a strong caution to the primary players to show a little more civility and respect. My efforts to “tune the tone” were unsuccessful, and in fact, got worse.

Besides, the fat lady hasn’t sung yet…

Frank may decide to restore the thread and he may not. Either way, I think the thread is old news and has been somewhat tarnished.

Rick

To put it mildly. But he got to spread his FUD and got the bandwagoners bashing his competition. Mission accomplished.

I agree on this one with Rich. My question to Rick is: If pulling the thread has anything to do do with fear of Steinway's legal department.
Rich said it; a lot of good factual info. These type of threads help to educate buyers at all levels. Including institutions.
Isn't the whole purpose of a Forum? To discuss and offer opinions.

I respectfully disagree. There was a lot more FUD than "facts".

That was and remains my intent.

Kurtmen, you and Rich are welcome to start another "all Steinway school" thread if you like. I had my reasons for removing the thread.

If Frank decides to restore it to the open forum, you guys can go at it again; but don't PM me and ask me to edit or delete the post of an opposing view from another member.

I wish you guys could read each others minds, and then you would know exactly what the other meant to say instead of what you actually said.

I wrote a song entitled “I can read your mind baby”. (Actually, it is one of my favorites )

Rick

Turandot's post mentioned earlier in this thread was, if I remember it correctly, particularly obnoxious and judgemental besides putting words in Steve's mouth.

It consisted of a series of numerous "Steve thinks" statements followed by a particularly rude one liner at the end of the post.It read like a prosecutor's summary at the end of a trial. Just in terms of its tone alone I think the post should have removed.

It's unfortunate that the main issue of the lengthy thread i.e. the transparency of the ads for All Steinway Schools(by Steinway or by the schools themsleves)was never answered by the Steinway representative who joined the disucssion late in the thread. The rep never answered whether those ads contained a clear explanation that the All Steinway School designation could include high percentages on Boston and/or Essex pianos.

I support Rick in pulling the thread.

The few facts (if any) contained in the thread were buried in needless, immature, ongoing arguing. Therefore I no longer visited the thread, so any facts that may have been presented were missed.

I have too many other enjoyable activities to bother reading this nauseating garbage. Don’t get me wrong, I still find PW for the most part informative and interesting.

Perhaps because it contained around a dozen accusations of the form "Steve thinks". Answer every one and then go on with back and forth on every one of those?

The whole tone of that post was IMO obnoxious and judgemental in the extreme. I remember being quite shocked when reading it.

plover,

Your efforts to stir the pot are noted, but in this case the soup has gone cold. The post you are referring to began with a conditional: 'if you accpept all the facts and suppositions presented on this thread, the following would seem to be correct'. I'm paraphrasing here because I don't have access to the post. I did not accept all the facts and suppositions. As an example, I did not accept that the invoice on the Fort Mead chapel piano had any bearing on the topic. I did not accept that the dollar amount of the Bowie State award to Steve's competitor had an bearing on the topic either. I did not accept the supposition that Steve was acting out of sour grapes.

The post ended with two questions posed to Steve. One asked if that was about it. The other asked if those were his expectations. I was not speaking for Steve. I felt that much of the information he supplied was very informative. but that unfortunately much of it seemed unrelated to the topic of All-Steinway schools. It left the door open to questions of what his intent was. I never believed he was simply out to 'get' Steinway because of losing a sale. He knows that. I was concerned about the perception that some of his statements allowed for.

Steve and I have been over this ad nauseam. He understands the difference of opinion. So do I. There is nothing, absolutely nothing that you can do here with this sort of post except to re-affirm once again that your main interest in many of your post responses is the people who made the posts.



I agree with you 100% that it is unfortunate, but there were few questions asked and stock answers were given. In all probability another thread will probe the issue further without all the extraneous topics. I don't think now is the right time, but I certainly agree with you that there is much more to this topic than what was presented.

My post has nothing to do with wanting to "stir the pot". Notice again how you misunderstand my post, as you apparently did with Steve's posts, but stated your misunderstanding as fact and in a negative tone. My post has to do with responding to your posts in this thead and the other one.

I do remember you saying something to effect that "you don't think he acted unethically, he just had poor judgement". Is that your idea of a complement? If you need to make such a statement why not do it in a PM?

I cannot reread the post but I do remember you making a long list of "Steve thinks" statements that were mostly presenting his views in a bad light. So you made a long list of accusatory and negative statements and end with "Is that about it?". Kind of like a prosecutor saying to a defendent "you killed your wife, dismembered her body, and fed it to the dogs. Is that about it?"

I respond to the content your posts based on their continually arrogant and judemental tone. I think if Steve thought it was just a "difference of opinion" he wouldn't have requested that you change the post or asked the moderators to remove it. If someone explains that you said he said such and such but that was not what he meant, why wouldn't you change it?

I disagree that the Ft. Meade post was off topic.

One of the key issues raised was the transparency of Steinway's marketing. Apparently, in Turandot's mind that topic was limited to the All Steinway School program. I saw it as a broader issue.

The Ft. Meade post was another example of the confusion between Steinway & Sons pianos and the Boston and Essex lines.

[For those who don't know: the Ft. Meade Chapel issued a bid for a "Steinway Grand Piano in ebony, with matching bench,Model Boston GP-163".]

While I can see Tur's position, I think the example was on topic.