who for reasons I'll never fathom seem to enjoy savaging their colleagues over something as generic as a recommendation of a website resource?

So merely posting a caution that a website should only be used as a tool and that we should be mindful to not just use it in the same way that many use the commercial publisher's magazines is now "savaging our colleagues?"

I think that you also vastly overstate the importance that other people give to this forum. You imagine that "newbies" come here with baited breath to learn everything that they need to know and must be quite dispirited to see discension within the ranks. The reality is that people trying to learn google around and probably see this site as one possible resource out of 100 - each with people with opinions. And they read some, sifting through them all and come to their own conclusions.

I don't think that a forum of any kind hosted by any organization is or should be there to tow the party line of that organization and present a united front.

Actually, if you're so worried about the CMAA's image, maybe the site should just be delinked from the main CMAA page and warnings posted at the top that say "This page is simply a public forum; anyone may express an opinion and not all or even most represent the CMAA."

I have to say, I've been lurking here for a while and I find most of the discussions perfectly pleasant and informative, if sometimes a little eccentric, but eccentricity isn't uncommon among musicians.

I agree with David Andrew's assessment of the drift the CMAA forum, though I wonder if an open meeting of colloquium attendees is the answer. It seems the nature of the comment box to give anger, self-promotion, misinformation, and vindictiveness an outlet. Just read the comments that now follow articles featured in the on-line editions of major newspapers. I also wonder how the CMAA forum can be policed any more than it is. Richard Chonak does, after all, have other interests and responsibilities in life.

The forum does of course provide a service. Many church musicians live isolated from musical colleagues and find the on-line contact to be therapeutic, and we all at one time or another benefit from the information, support, and kind words of people encountered on the forum. But the forum has the capability to misrepresent the noble intentions of the organization. It should be noted that many talented persons crucial to the success of the CMAA colloquia, and Catholic music in general, rarely, if ever, post. Maybe more of us should ponder the virtues of their example.

@PGA...while I respect your point of view, I think perhaps you UNDERESTIMATE the importance of the forum. I was one of those newbies seeking information.

A little backstory...I grew up in the church. I got guitars and liturgical dancing, folk music etc...I was in my thirties before I ever encountered adoration or learned to pray the rosary. In my late 30's I went to my first Extraordinary Form Mass (although it wasn't called that). The Mass was beautiful, but the people had a siege mentality that projected much bitterness towards holy Mother church. I didn't share that bitterness, but fell in love with the music. That led me to seek information, which eventually led me here to the forum.

If at that time, I had encountered the type of rhetoric that frequently appears here currently, I would not have given the people here much credibility. I wasn't looking for compromise, or for justification of using inferior music in the Mass. To be fair I also wasn't looking for help as a sacred musician. (I wasn't there yet).

I was simply looking for some information that would help my husband and I choose a church to take our children to.

It was in the reading of THIS FORUM, that I discovered the reform of the reform, and the need for people of faith to step up and 'take up the standard' of restoring sacred music to the liturgy. (As some of you know I've actually returned to school in my old age to get a music degree so I can help do that.)

If I had witnessed the kind of sarcastic savaging of colleagues that happens here right now, I wouldn't have bothered. I would have drawn to the conclusion that the cause was lost, and put my energy elsewhere. I don't suggest this forum to new people seeking information anymore. I don't want to scare them off. Think about that.

@ Randolph...the fact that those who really do have credibility don't post here, is actually part of the problem. I understand that they don't have time. (REALLY, I do.) But the fact remains that the public face of CMAA is the forum. The general public and new musicians form their opinions based on what they read HERE. It might be helpful if the leadership could come here more often and lead the discussion.

This is my perception, as usual, YMMV.

The recent thread with the newbie/seminarian is a case in point. Something went wrong, and I wondered if I should continue posting here because of the overall tone that ensued. Yes, he was wrong, yes he vented inappropriately, yes the regular posters said nothing too far out. Yet there was a cumulative effect of ganging up on someone, and a bewildering ride through declarations of orthodoxy, heresy and points in between. How many of us really have to jump in to tell someone they are wrong?

You fix a bent nail with a tap in the other direction; you don't pound it in with a sledgehammer.

Yes, that was a surreal thread, but some of that presented honestly, if oddly, because of the history of mirth over MJM's infamous and now pricey RT Gradual. I had a bit of difficulty wondering if the poor fellow was truly serious, I mean it was about "the same pitch."
But David was a champion and took care of the need.
About his proposal, I think (and always have) the colloquium could benefit by a well-managed "Town Hall" meeting every year. The after dinner presentations have always seemed a little awkward. I mean there's only 200+ folks, how hard could it be? And I do believe CMAA likes to self-refer as a grass roots movement, but there's a certain amount of "Who's Who in Trad Music" self-promotion that is not unlike bfrancks hyperbole about NPM conventions. IMO, FWIW.

There sure is way too much of many things. I'll mention one here:

* Reaction: Many of us have cherished opinions and preferences, and some of us are very energetic about asserting them when someone expresses a contrary opinion. Sometimes the contrary opinion is only given in passing, so the clash of views takes the thread off its original topic. It would be better to abstain sometimes and ask oneself: do I really need to post this?

This is a web forum. It is not 60 minutes. We all post things in real time. We all speak our opinions. Sometimes things are said about an individual or to a person that may not be in good form. In general, I feel this forum moderates itself well, and chonak watches the Ps and Qs. The latest thread about two composers was edgy, I agree, so it is important that we do maintain the protocol. I think that is the job of moderator and he does it well. Maintaining semblence of order is very difficult in real time, so it will never be 'clean'. Things will get messy here and there, but the freedom we have to voice our candid thoughts to me seems invaluable and far outweighs the mishaps from time to time.

If someone really wants to learn about chant and propers, the CMAA MAIN PAGE is the place to get comprehensive collections, documents, and information. Not a forum of opinions and ideas, be it this one or another.

And I've never seen - NEVER SEEN - a situation where someone posted something here asking a genuine question and was not given honest, real advice, usually in an unfailingly kind way.

And if someone's feeeeeeeelings are hurt by being "ganged up" on by people whom they don't know on an internet forum, they should probably see a psychologist. The other side of not "ganging up" is that someone might see one comment disagreeing with them and think "Only one person feels that way; no one has agreed with them."

I've been "ganged up on" here and on other internet forums. And I couldn't care less. I'm still here, stating my opinion, taking heat where people disagree. It's called life.

One final point - a discussion at the Colloquium? Why, because all the "important people" from here will be there? As though everyone attending are the ones with the real say?

This has already manifested one negative attribute of this forum though: The ability to OVER THINK something to death.

On preview:

I've also met opposing viewpoints, but on the whole, any criticism I've encountered has rarely been vicious or personal. Quite frankly, I welcome opposing viewpoints and don't feel an idea or concept is worthy of belief unless it has been thoroughly vetted.

THIS.

I don't disagree with you Chonak, but such a person is free to fire back and say "No, I don't feel ashamed. Go read the documents. What I'm saying squares with them 100% and I stand by it 100%." Or some such thing.

I do think that people should moderate themselves towards less "shaming" - although in recent cases it has been TOTALLY appropriate.

There are lurking "newbies" who come here seeking information, advice and guidance but generally discover that far from well-reasoned and clearly expressed ideas, responses, recommendations for resources, etc., they stumble upon what I've come to describe as a "poo throw at the primate house." Perhaps that's not the most "professional" description, but I think it hits the nail on the head.

For the OP, I also TOTALLY DISAGREE with this paragraph.

What I see are discussions every day where people are given resources (I've been the recipient many times of music scans and the like from generous people here), receive job advice on navigating their situation, and generally experience community.

Far from what you claim, I see the vast majority of responses and posts being written with "well-reasoned and clearly expressed ideas" etc.

If you want to REALLY see a "poo throw and the primate house" go to the news blogs. There the commentary is infantile, uneducated, and generally not worth reading.

Because we're probably all verbophiles which is closely related to being musicphiles. In other words, I think we all love to communicate ideas, be they musical or non-musical.

More from Howard Gardner's multiple intelligence theory:

Linguistic intelligence involves sensitivity to spoken and written language, the ability to learn languages, and the capacity to use language to accomplish certain goals. This intelligence includes the ability to effectively use language to express oneself rhetorically or poetically; and language as a means to remember information. Writers, poets, lawyers and speakers are among those that Howard Gardner sees as having high linguistic intelligence.

Musical intelligence involves skill in the performance, composition, and appreciation of musical patterns. It encompasses the capacity to recognize and compose musical pitches, tones, and rhythms. According to Howard Gardner musical intelligence runs in an almost structural parallel to linguistic intelligence.

The 'routine reminders' that appear (randomly displayed) in discussion threads now include a disclaimer: opinions here are those of individuals, not CMAA.

I just don't see what is to be gained by this comparison.We could be great at discourse, not just not-egregious, if you know what I mean.

Very valid point, PGA. Rudeness and depravity reign supreme in public discourse, along with pornography. I rarely go "below the fold" on websites these days. Does anybody else notice how things rapidly devolve when you go beyond the first webpage even on the most conservative (political) websites?

This forum is a haven of respectability, civility and sanity in comparison.

But what if someone started turning the RED BOLD into a sort of weird joke?

[Dear User, That is a really great point. Furthermore, you are the most awesome member of this forum, and everyone should agree with you all the time. --admin]

(NB: I hope I'm making sense here, and not looking like an idiot.)

I've noticed something.

I think we are a very passionate people here. That is, we passionately believe in our cause(s); and sometimes passions can get the best of one. Sometimes it seems, people come here and vent among colleagues, because, for different reasons (say, politics within the parish community, lack of like-minded-ness among local musicians, etc.) they can't vent to anyone else. Which I find to be understandable at times. We are all capable of blowing our stacks or 'throwing a spittle-flicked nutty', every now and again. I am sure that I have done it.

Occasionally, there may people who when corrected about certain errors, don't accept the correction (whatever form it may take) and go bonkers. (I think we've seen some of that lately.)

IIRC, we've had these discussions before about more moderation, trying not to 'offend people' too much, etc. and we have a good long discussion, and there might be a change (like the little reminders about etiquette) and then things go on normally as before. And then something happens and we have the moderation discussion again.

I think, we can agree, that the last thing we want here is poor RC marking up every post like an high school English teacher. Next thing we'll be going after split infinitives. I hope that we are all adults here (well, more or less--sometimes we can be childish) and can accept what people have to say, even if we don't agree. Of course, if someone posts something that is particularly egregious then, well, it has to be dealt with by the admin, as has happened recently; but why do we have to turn Chonak into a nursemaid/censor so that people don't get hurt feelings? (Warning may offend people who are easily offended: ) I mean, really, are people today so easily offended by the slightest thing that we have to post warnings before we write? [Edit: posted at the same time as Julie, didn't see her 'warning' signs. LOL] I hope that we all re-read, more or less, what we write before we post, and after we post, and hope that we're saying what we mean, and that we recognize if our own writing is out of place and correct it. Though everyone occasionally gets a case of 'foot-in-mouth disease'.

Now, I might not agree with everything that Melo, or Chuck, or Ben, or Julie, or Adam, or Kathy say, but, why get offended? What does it prove? Does it help me to get into a huff? Does it help you? Why am I asking so many questions?

Well, there it is. Here endeth my long rambly rant of incoherence. Thanks be to God.

Warning: You are about to encounter the opinions of real, flesh and blood, passionate thinking humans. Then there should be two buttons:

I Accept Human Beings | I Do Not Accept Human Beings

thank goodness you didn't call everyone here "Men"!

Right, he's just speciesist, not sexist :oD

(Save the Liturgy, Save the World)

I think what is needed is more kindness. Musical people are very detail oriented. We have to be. Some of my best teachers were the most difficult to like because they were so brutally honest. Perhaps we would do better as colleagues if we could avoid the ad hominem remarks and stay on point a little more.

One of the problems in the church these days is that by being far too extreme in our criticisms, we alienate the very people we should be trying to convert. Like it or not, the only reason I ever came to this forum was because of its association with CMAA. I would expect that those who post would remember at the very least to be polite. If I said some of the things to a colleague in court that I've read here, I'd be sitting in a cell. Diverse opinions on music are wonderful and great knowledge of dogma is fine but courtesy and decorum are more important to discourse than either of them.

Time for another novena to the forum patron, St. Bitch-n-Moan.

I support the idea that postings on this forum should be written with charity, or "kindness," as kenstb mentioned.

I, like David, am cognizant of the newbies who come to this forum seeking information. As Julie and PGA have mentioned, I think that "opposing viewpoints" can allow for thoughtful discussions about topics and can help issues to be throughly analzyed from many points-of-view. The intellectual model of free, open discussion will ensure that the information discussed remains correct and accurate (such as by quoting from the liturgical documents when appropriate) for the sake of those who reach this forum through a Google search.

I think it is important to emphasize our commonality, both here on the forum (for those who are unable to attend Colloquium but still post) and in a potential town hall meeting at an in-person gathering. As Salieri mentioned, we are a very passionate people. We all are, I hope, going in the same general direction to the same place, and I think it is useful to remember that important point. There just may be different roads or methods to get to where we're going. We all have unique environments and situations that affect what we are able to do at any given time. But we all are (or should be!) on the same "team."

Jeffrey:

Yes, but we are not.

This forum goes through periods of good and bad. It changes frequently. Whether your opinion is that this is a bad period or a good period, it will be a different place in 4 months.

Get rid of the moderation and the rules. Let this place be a wild jungle of sacred music and allow folks to police themselves through discourse and dialogue (both public and private). Don't ban people, let everyone who has been banned back, etc.

Find beauty in chaos.