I said: The threads listed in the "FAQ" list DO NOT necessarily provide perfect answers or solutions to the problems involved in the pieces/techniques with them. There exists no perfect pianist, so rediscussing certain matters can add new views to them.
xvimbi said: Yet, there are questions that DO have straight-forward, exclusive answers to them.
This is the fine line we have to draw here, I've seen people being directed to threads that answer nothing (well the one about Maksim, at least), and if this is taken to extreme, where's the benefit? Or whose is it? The ones' that are too "lazy" to answer again, or the ones that were too "lazy" to search for the answer themselves? Not everyone has much experience of using forums like this, and when they enter they can at first barely figure out how to post. Of course, if someone posted crap like you gave example of, I wouldn't care if the administrator deleted it. There has to remain a code of behaviour to certain degree for the forum to maintain it's informational value and not turn into piles of garbage "info".
If someone asks a trivial question, you COULD answer them or direct them to another thread, OR do both and as the bottomline add that its more complicable to do a little searching before posting.
And for god's sake, there are search engines.
Use them, educate others of them.
But don't put all responsibility on search engines and the Internet, cause then there's probably not one justified question that looks for a definite answer (opinions excluded) on this forum.
Berhard raises a good point. He has spent hours posting valuable information here of what I suspect is hardly a fraction of his knowledge and experience as a player/teacher.
Can't we all help him out here, and do our own searching?
Yes indeed, Bernhard's contribution to this community is invaluable and I respect him for that. This doesn't mean I'll start taking everything he says as trivial truth or the only way of seeing things. I don't value opinions by face of the representer of them, I value them by their actual self-supportive weight. Also, Bernhard isn't responsible to answer every stupid question that a random ADHD pre-teen posts here. However, if I was to not bring out the point that the topics that have been discussed on the forum, haven't probably reached their perfect form as information packages yet, I agree with Bernhard in that:
a) People should search before asking.
b) If you have nothing to add, no views, anything to the old topic, you can redirect the asker to an older thread.
c) You COULD ignore, or reply with "Try the search feature."
"A" is unquestionable truth, yet not everyone comes to think of this, or can't figure out the most effective search strings.
"B" will motivate people to do what Bernhard calls infinite loop, and even if someone had something to add, the new topic is already dead before it began.
"C" sounds a bit ineffective, yet there are posts that would only deserve a reply like this at most, more preferably deletion of whole topic.
I still think that if the topic wasn't discussed thoroughly just a short while ago, it can be rediscussed again. If you don't feel motivated to participate cause you think the old threads provide perfect answers and solutions to the problem, you can ignore this new thread. I support the idea of gathering a FAQ, but the threads in their current forms aren't applicable for this, somebody needs to do some heavy editing and filter out the most valuable information out of the pile of unnecessary comments and remarks, and even then there exist questions that don't have direct answers to them. What if Bach was told to "read the FAQ" on keyboard playing that stated that using the thumb is illegal, and he'd be forced to satisfy himself with this solution?
Topic: Have we reached the limit?