Re: Request for feedback on 'lobbying' paper

[Janek Warchoł]

2013/4/23 David Kastrup <address@hidden>:
> Janek Warchoł <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> 2013/4/23 David Kastrup <address@hidden>:
>>> But what word are we spreading?  "Can it work with our existing
>>> scores and data, possibly through MusicXML?"  "No, but if it could,
>>> it would likely be the best at it."
>>
>> yeah, that's bad.  But it's not like Lily has only "potential"
>> capabilities: scores can be done using it, with good results.
>
> Sure.  But interoperability is not something we can truthfully advertise
> as a capability when nobody is working on it or even planning to work on
> it.  Not even when we have full agreement that it would be nice.

yes.

>> Bottom line: i'd also like the situation to be better before starting
>> serious "adverstising".  But if we wait too long, we won't arrive at
>> anything.
>
> We won't arrive at anything by advertising, either.  Particularly not by
> focusing our advertising on the things we are bad at and painting them
> in a wrong light.  That's just a recipe for a disappointed user base.

Agreed - we should advertise things we're good at.

>> In other words: if we practice too long, we'll miss the performance.
>
> I am more worried about us practicing other instruments and pieces than
> on the concert announcements.

agreed. let's just change concert announcements and get back to work ;)

best,
Janek