Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site pyuxn.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!pyuxww!pyuxn!rlr
From: rlr@pyuxn.UUCP (Rich Rosen)
Newsgroups: net.news.group,net.music,net.audio,net.misc
Subject: Re: Request for net.music.classical news group
Message-ID: <602@pyuxn.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 27-Apr-84 18:34:59 EST
Article-I.D.: pyuxn.602
Posted: Fri Apr 27 18:34:59 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 28-Apr-84 10:24:08 EST
References: <639@ihuxn.UUCP> <233@iwu1c.UUCP>
Organization: Bell Communications Research, Piscataway N.J.
Lines: 43

> I second the motion for a classical music newsgroup.  I don't subscribe
> to net.music because it contains little of interest to me.  I'm sure
> there are many other classical music enthusiasts out there who feel the
> same way.  This would be the ideal place for technical discussions of
> musicological topics.

First off, I resent the notion that musicological topics are only of relevance
to classical (whatever that is) music lovers.

Second, about the above paragraph.  I agree completely with most of it.
I agree that net.music contains little of interest to this person.  I
agree that there are many others who feel the same way.  And I have absolutely
no sympathy for their plight.

Why?  Because they bring it on themselves.  All these classical music lovers
and hardly any contributions to net.music?  If you're going to be netnews
voyeurs (auyeurs??) and expect other people to submit all the articles, then
you're missing the point of the group.  It's a *participatory* medium!
The content and character of a newsgroup is determined by what articles get
contributed to it.  Even a request for information would be nice.  We've
been through this mill too often before (and net.records is somehow still
around despite a unversal agreement on that part of the issue??), and
I'm sure there are more than a few people out there who don't want to bring
it up again.

So, you want to see classical music articles, you've got to submit them.
We're not hiring creative authors from the outside.  *WE* are the authors
of the articles.

By the way, in case you haven't noticed, there is a very interesting
ongoing discussion concerning modern minimalism in this very newsgroup
right before your very noses!  Imagine that!  Discussion of classical
music in net.music!  And there were those who said it couldn't be done...

P.S.  About that minimalism discussion re John Cage.  Cage is one of
the biggest artistic charlatans of our age, who has made the resulting
sensual result of the artist's work less important than the "artist's
conception and ideas".  Utter poppycock!!  There, more discussion of
classical music!!  (Well, of a supposed classical musician, anyway...)

-- 
Never ASSUME, because when you ASSUME, you make an ASS out of U and ME...
					Rich Rosen   pyuxn!rlr