What is wrong with Piano Society? (Part 2)

I understand the new software is disruptive and, while it will minimize the time needed to administrate this site, it may decrease activity hopefully just in the short run.

Changing software is like operating on a sick patient. It is better to do when the patient is healthy, but it always seems to be done when the patient is most vulnerable which complicates recovery. Members have to learn a new system and may not want to. Other members may not like change and not feel as at home with the new layout. The changes to look and layout of the site are unintended side affects of the update. The goal is simplifying and eliminating many adminstrative steps.

In Part 1 of the "what is wrong" discussion, we talked about a committee of artists to evaluate recordings. Who would like to be on this committee? Please let me know, and I will upgrade your account.

Please continue to give feedback on how you would like to see the evaluation of new recordings go. Todo items I have are to:

1) Rename the Audition Room to the Submission Room.
2) Create a committee of evaluation members
3) Force all posts to the Submission Room to be associated with a poll to which evaluation members can vote in.

Hopefully we will get some new submission and the changes have not scared everyone away. And hopefully it is understood that the software changes are a small part in the greater plans to democratize and streamline the Piano Society submission process.

Richard

 

Re:

"1) Rename the Audition Room to the Submission Room.
2) Create a committee of evaluation members
3) Force all posts to the Submission Room to be associated with a poll to which evaluation members can vote in."

1. I think it's imperative that whatever the Audition Room is to be called (Submission Room still sounds a bit Marquis de Sade to me) the sub-forum description clarifies its purpose i.e. for recording library submissions, not for general feedback.

2. I'm happy to be on the committee, but must add the caveat that I would much prefer to stick to the late Classical and Romantic eras in terms of evaluations, as that is where the vast bulk of my experience lies. I also have to give advance warning that I may be very busy in the next few months - I am likely to have a recording project pending outwith this site and will need to devote a lot of attention to it. Though with the current rate of submissions, I'm sure I'll have enough time..

3. I agree whole-heartedly with the comments by Francois in the example submission voting poll thread. A 1-5 evaluation is much better than a binary yes/no.

 

1. Was there an alternative preferred to Submission Room? I can see it could seem like odd verbage. I can go back to Audition Room if that is preferred or another option.
2. I am waiting for anyone else to wish to be on the committee. I think maybe we could assume all members with upgraded "Artist" profile are valid voters.
3. I am looking into ways to make the poll be automatic. The built in options do not work perfectly to what we are looking for.

 

Hello everybody,
Thanks Richard for all your efforts. It is great to see the begining of a PS renaissance !
As for the evaluation committee, I would be pleased to participate. But I cannot guarantee that I will evaluate all the submissions. Actually, I don't think we have to make the vote a mandatory duty (which solves Andrew's point about his preference for a certain repertoire). And I don't know if we have to limit the number of voters, or if all PS members shouldn't have the right to vote (like in a democracy where all citizens, even those who are not able to read/write, may vote !). Finally, I had a glance on the trial you've launched in the Audition Room. I'm a little puzzled
- with the yes/no option regarding the three questions;
- with the fact that the result is public.
I think I have already explained that public votes are not common in real democracies...
Otherwise I have recorded three piano pieces yesterday. I have to edit the recordings, but I should be able to submit them in the coming weeks. That would be an opportunity to ask for a vote. Of course, a member who is submitting a piece cannot vote on it, can he ?

 

Thank you for the feedback!

Yes. Thank you for confirmation that voting should be anonymous. I hope you can deal with the binary system instead of the rating system for the moment. I may not be able to make that update quickly.

Lol. I am not sure if I can restrict you voting on your own recordings without customization.

Richard

 

That's a good idea. Richard Jordan, is there a way to make it so that the 'information' tab is the default when someone clicks on an artists profile?

 

Good idea! Working on this..

 

Try now!

 

Yes, that's much better!!