http://ecn.ab.ca/~brewhaha/Sound/MSixths.mp3 DATA 35,27,2,24,40,6,45,27,2,30,50,4 DATA 55,33,2,36,60,4,65,39,4,42,70,4,0,0,4 ' How is it that the above numbers, which approximate the western scale, ' in stereo, in parts a constant major sixth (5:3) apart... DATA 60,35,2,30,40,6,54,45,2,27,50,4 DATA 54,55,2,48,60,4,54,65,4,60,70,4,0,0,8 sound a lot like the above series? Hint: you need to multiply all of them by 66/35 to render them. Complete source (or the equivalent in a key for ladies) available upon request. I like the first series better, because both parts are more interesting than the scale, while in the second version, one part basically is Doh-Ray-Mee.
Ok, that post was totally off topic. You're on moderation now.
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 12:10 PM, Jay Litwyn brewhaha@freenet.edmonton.ab.ca wrote:
http://ecn.ab.ca/~brewhaha/Sound/MSixths.mp3 DATA 35,27,2,24,40,6,45,27,2,30,50,4 DATA 55,33,2,36,60,4,65,39,4,42,70,4,0,0,4 ' How is it that the above numbers, which approximate the western scale, ' in stereo, in parts a constant major sixth (5:3) apart... DATA 60,35,2,30,40,6,54,45,2,27,50,4 DATA 54,55,2,48,60,4,54,65,4,60,70,4,0,0,8 sound a lot like the above series? Hint: you need to multiply all of them by 66/35 to render them. Complete source (or the equivalent in a key for ladies) available upon request. I like the first series better, because both parts are more interesting than the scale, while in the second version, one part basically is Doh-Ray-Mee.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
So, every time I post a new topic, I will go on moderation? _______ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_intervals_in_5-limit_just_intonation
"Steve Bennett" stevagewp@gmail.com wrote in message news:b8ceeef70909172024q121c6b6co8ef07b31e5bf8c76@mail.gmail.com...
Ok, that post was totally off topic. You're on moderation now.
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 12:10 PM, Jay Litwyn brewhaha@freenet.edmonton.ab.ca wrote:
http://ecn.ab.ca/~brewhaha/Sound/MSixths.mp3 DATA 35,27,2,24,40,6,45,27,2,30,50,4 DATA 55,33,2,36,60,4,65,39,4,42,70,4,0,0,4 ' How is it that the above numbers, which approximate the western scale, ' in stereo, in parts a constant major sixth (5:3) apart... DATA 60,35,2,30,40,6,54,45,2,27,50,4 DATA 54,55,2,48,60,4,54,65,4,60,70,4,0,0,8 sound a lot like the above series? Hint: you need to multiply all of them by 66/35 to render them. Complete source (or the equivalent in a key for ladies) available upon request. I like the first series better, because both parts are more interesting than the scale, while in the second version, one part basically is Doh-Ray-Mee.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
2009/9/18 Jay Litwyn brewhaha@freenet.edmonton.ab.ca:
So, every time I post a new topic, I will go on moderation?
Every time you post a new topic which is not relevant to this mailing list, yes.
Steve Bennett wrote:
Ok, that post was totally off topic. You're on moderation now.
That seems unduly harsh for one post which your personal opinion judges off-topic
Ec
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 12:10 PM, Jay Litwyn brewhaha@freenet.edmonton.ab.ca wrote:
http://ecn.ab.ca/~brewhaha/Sound/MSixths.mp3 DATA 35,27,2,24,40,6,45,27,2,30,50,4 DATA 55,33,2,36,60,4,65,39,4,42,70,4,0,0,4 ' How is it that the above numbers, which approximate the western scale, ' in stereo, in parts a constant major sixth (5:3) apart... DATA 60,35,2,30,40,6,54,45,2,27,50,4 DATA 54,55,2,48,60,4,54,65,4,60,70,4,0,0,8 sound a lot like the above series? Hint: you need to multiply all of them by 66/35 to render them. Complete source (or the equivalent in a key for ladies) available upon request. I like the first series better, because both parts are more interesting than the scale, while in the second version, one part basically is Doh-Ray-Mee.
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 4:11 AM, Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net wrote:
Steve Bennett wrote:
Ok, that post was totally off topic. You're on moderation now.
That seems unduly harsh for one post which your personal opinion judges off-topic
Ec
Jay has long danced on the edge. This post on musical theory is not even remotely related to Wikipedia. I, for one, support moderating him - the mods will let through any missives from Jay which are actually half-way relevant to wikien-l.
Ok, that post was totally off topic. You're on moderation now.
That seems unduly harsh for one post which your personal opinion judges off-topic
Ec
It doesn't matter if the judgement is "harsh". In my opinion, people should get only a handful of warnings for blatant mailing list abuse before they are put on moderation, anyway. If they've been a borderline case for quite some time, as it seems to be the case, OF COURSE there shouldn't be any warning. AGF only goes so far before the "assumption" wears off.
Emily On Sep 18, 2009, at 7:29 AM, Gwern Branwen wrote:
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 4:11 AM, Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net wrote:
Steve Bennett wrote:
Ok, that post was totally off topic. You're on moderation now.
That seems unduly harsh for one post which your personal opinion judges off-topic
Ec
Jay has long danced on the edge. This post on musical theory is not even remotely related to Wikipedia. I, for one, support moderating him
- the mods will let through any missives from Jay which are actually
half-way relevant to wikien-l.
-- gwern
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Steve Bennett wrote:
Ok, that post was totally off topic. You're on moderation now.
I think perhaps I'd ponder if we needed to be told on-list that someone was going on moderation. Is it productive or counter-productive to publicly announce that fact. I suppose if there was an argument to be made for openness, some technical wizardry could automate it so that either a list of moderated posters is maintained or an automatic post is made to the list to announce "so and so" has been placed on moderation.
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 8:34 PM, Surreptitiousness
I think perhaps I'd ponder if we needed to be told on-list that someone was going on moderation.
Yep, it's a good question, and I did ponder it. FYI, at around the same time, I placed another user on moderation, and didn't announce the fact.
Arguments for announcing it: - re-iterates policy for other users - sometimes seems to produce a "thank god for that" effect from other annoyed list members
Arguments against announcing it: - tends to create further off-topic discussions like this one - can feed trolls (ie, giving more attention to them in a public forum) - can hurt feelings
Steve
2009/9/22 Steve Bennett stevagewp@gmail.com:
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 8:34 PM, Surreptitiousness
I think perhaps I'd ponder if we needed to be told on-list that someone was going on moderation.
Yep, it's a good question, and I did ponder it. FYI, at around the same time, I placed another user on moderation, and didn't announce the fact.
Arguments for announcing it:
- re-iterates policy for other users
- sometimes seems to produce a "thank god for that" effect from other
annoyed list members
Other pros:
* Prevents lots of "can we put this user on moderation, please?" messages. * Stops other people being confused when the now moderated person's emails start coming through in bunches several hours after they were sent.
Personally, I am in favour of such announcements. If you aren't announcing it publicly, it is an absolute must to inform the affected person privately - I was moderated on foundation-l once a while back and the first I knew of it was when my emails started bouncing back as being held in the queue.
On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 3:15 AM, Steve Bennett stevagewp@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 8:34 PM, Surreptitiousness
I think perhaps I'd ponder if we needed to be told on-list that someone was going on moderation.
Yep, it's a good question, and I did ponder it. FYI, at around the same time, I placed another user on moderation, and didn't announce the fact.
Arguments for announcing it:
- re-iterates policy for other users
- sometimes seems to produce a "thank god for that" effect from other
annoyed list members
You can add to the advantages that it can also produce a "why did you moderate *him*?" response from list members. I got an e-mail from the other user you placed on moderation, and I was puzzled as to why he had been placed on moderation. I think that if the person you moderate objects to it, and wants it announced on the list, you should do so. If they are prepared to stay under moderation without it being made "public", then that is fair enough.
You can also add "increases transparency".
I have no idea how many people are on moderation on this list. Some numbers might help there. I would also ask how many people are subscribed to this list, but that might be rather a low figure. Are there public stats anywhere for this list?
Arguments against announcing it:
- tends to create further off-topic discussions like this one
- can feed trolls (ie, giving more attention to them in a public forum)
- can hurt feelings
None of those are that convincing. It is too easy to label people trolls when they might merely be difficult.
I agree with Thomas (Dalton)'s points as well.
Carcharoth
2009/9/18 Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net:
Steve Bennett wrote:
Ok, that post was totally off topic. You're on moderation now.
That seems unduly harsh for one post which your personal opinion judges off-topic
It is not one post. Most of Jay's posts are like this one.