"Expert Contributor" Status

[john11inc]

I think this would be supremely useful in a number of ways.  Firstly, I'll explain my idea.  Basically, just as there is "silver member, gold member, senior member" etc. below our usernames, I was thinking there should be a place where you can select what type of member you are here.  I know you can put something along those lines in your profile, but nobody ever looks at profiles.  Just off the top of my head, perhaps:

Piano Enthusiast
Student Pianist
Amateur Pianist
Piano Teacher
Amateur Composer

And then "Expert Contributor", which would encompass professional pianists, professional composers, professional musicologists, theorists and music historians, as well as people who have a strong track record of basically knowing their stuff in whatever their field of expertise is.  You could make "Expert Contributor" a moderator-approval based thing; require verifiable evidence of expertise, such as but not limited to recordings, compositions, or a verifiable example of expertise.  Maybe require a minimum post amount: 100, 250, 500, not really sure.  As I said, I think this has more than just the implication of people "knowing who to listen to", so to speak.  I think anyone with an "Expert Contributor" badge would feel compelled to be especially helpful/civil, and it would make this place look a bit less... well, a bit less like it's just a bunch of non-serious people, if you know what I mean.


Just an idea.

[stevebob]

Regarding "expertise," "verified evidence of expertise" and "verified example of expertise":  verified is obviously a key element there.  So is expertise, but I think it's more conceptual than concrete when it comes to the inclusion of non-professionals; "people who have a strong track record of basically knowing their stuff in whatever their field of expertise is" is slippery, and a case can be made, too, that expertise is relative.

In any case, expertise isn't all-encompassing.  It can't be presumed that a skilled musician is an erudite musicologist; a scholar's sphere may be limited to specific periods or styles.  Depth doesn't imply breadth, and vice versa.

Anyway, I think it's a worthy idea.  I'm just saying it might be difficult to arrive at a definition that wouldn't be regarded as subjective and imprecise by many.  But maybe that doesn't matter if expertise is like the famous example of pornography:  even if it can't be pinned down, people know it when they see it?

[oxy60]

You don't need to worry about to whom you listen. There are enough opinions here about any point for you to make up your mind. Remember this is an art form.

[thalbergmad]

It does not take long for one to come to a personal decision as to which members posts one finds of use and which ones one does not, without any labels being applied to individuals.

This suggestion reeks of elitism & judging by the size of some egos on this forum, it would not be long before nils is inundated with requests to be "upgraded".

Expert contributors are capable of stupidity as much as student pianists are capable of incredible insight.

Can't say i like the idea.

Thal

[lostinidlewonder]

I think if you only listen to people with credentials you will not listen to many people in this world. I have had revelations from my very own beginner students and learnt more about the piano discussing music with them than with an expert in the field. That is the thing about talking about Art, it is not about your degree, your intellect etc, it is about what you think and what your personal musical journey has been like.

On pianostreet I have met many people who are NOT professionals and what they say I respect as much as a professor or concert pianist. I also have heard BAD advice from professionals when it comes to music and art, so simply accepting everything a professional says is just as bad as accepting everything someone who is not a pro says. Thus it is useless and irrelevant to know where a person comes from, you should merely listen to what they say and judge for yourself (of course not everyone has the ability to separate truth and fallacies). What is important is that you know what the information someone says does for you personally.

If music was like maths then I think this idea of revealing pros and non-pros would be useful.

[thalberg]

Well I think that an "official" ranking system would cause all kinds of arrogance, fighting, and trouble for the administration.

But I think that an unofficial ranking system would actually be nice.  Each member could just list their degrees, profession, or what they perceive as their proficiency level in piano.  Whatever they want to say about themselves to make it easier for us to know where they are coming from would be fine. 

OR we could have a voter approved ranking system.  That would be super fun.  We could rate each post on friendliness and usefulness.

[stevebob]

Well I think that an "official" ranking system would cause all kinds of arrogance, fighting, and trouble for the administration.

It would disruptive to the present status quo of modesty and temperance.    (I'm guessing that "open letters" to the administration are already troublesome.)

But I think that an unofficial ranking system would actually be nice.  Each member could just list their degrees, profession, or what they perceive as their proficiency level in piano.  Whatever they want to say about themselves to make it easier for us to know where they are coming from would be fine.

I thought that's what profiles are for.  If it's true that nobody reads them, it's also true that the preponderance of them are blank.  That situation is mutually reinforcing.

OR we could have a voter approved ranking system.  That would be super fun.  We could rate each post on friendliness and usefulness.

Isn't there one already in place but apparently nonfunctional (i.e., "Do you find this post to be useful")?  Does clicking on "Yes" or "No" have any effect at all?  I would expect it to result in karma points that would affect the number of stars beneath one's username; as far as I'm aware, though, all Gold members automatically have five stars and all Silver members have three.

[pianowolfi]

Clicking yes or no used to have an effect, but this karma system has been cancelled after a while, not long after it had been introduced, because it didn't make sense to most of the members, and the results were more than questionable.

[oxy60]

Academic credentials are fantastic. The people who were most helpful in my life had both the education and the practical experience of working. If those people would identify themselves I would love to hear from them on some of the musical issues brought up here.

I wouldn't trade what my professors taught me for anything but when I took my first church job it was another working organist that gave pointers, tips and arrangements. His advice was very valuable because he too had to prepare a program every week.

[adaubre]

The only way an "expert contributor" status can work is if the person given such a status has their real name as their account and also a link to their education and experience.  Its not enough, in my opinion, for someone to get "expert contributor" status if they are good at collecting different kinds of material from around the internet and reformulating it on a website etc.   "Expert contributors" have to be people with a) a formal education in music up to a pre-determined level (ie: not, for example, grade 8 RCM piano), and b) someone who has shown expert experience in the real world as a performer, teacher or curator (curator beyond cutting and pasting things from online).  I think exceptions could be made for the  education part if the "expert" has shown that he/she has accomplished a great deal in the real world in terms of performance.

Most importantly, an "expert contributor" should be someone who conducts themselves professionally on the board - they would need to since their real names would be attached to everything they say to people.

Having said all that, I personally don't see a need for it.   I think it could potentially serve as a minimizer of those who have a lot to contribute but that "just missed" the status.

just my opinion on the matter.

adaubre

[Bob]

From what I can figure out, someone who meets all that criteria wouldn't be on a forum.  It's not serious enough.  Occasionally maybe or the very few.  There's probably not much in it for them.

[thalbergmad]

I think it could potentially serve as a minimizer of those who have a lot to contribute but that "just missed" the status.

And to those like me that missed by some considerable distance.

Thal

[oxy60]

And to those like me that missed by some considerable distance.

Thal

You don't miss by much. It was you who mentioned that music store in Amsterdam with all those old scores and pointed out a good hotel.

Contributions can come in many forms.

Have you visited that old music store near your hotel at the Valariusplein tram stop? It's worth a look. If you haven't, ask your desk clerk which way to walk.

[stevebob]

From what I can figure out, someone who meets all that criteria wouldn't be on a forum.  It's not serious enough.  Occasionally maybe or the very few.  There's probably not much in it for them.

I believe this captures an essential truth.

[adaubre]

From what I can figure out, someone who meets all that criteria wouldn't be on a forum.  It's not serious enough.  Occasionally maybe or the very few.  There's probably not much in it for them.

I think you'd find that real pros actually would visit and contribute to a forum like this depending on a few things.

For starters:  real names.  There are a number of filmmaking forums, for example, that require real names for all users, or, encourage real names if there is a claim of "expertise" or "professional" etc.   When a real name requirement is put into place, one finds quickly that it is easy to figure out who has real world experience in music (beyond just parroting things from encyclopedias).  Also, with real names, there is much less abusive behavior between members.

I think you'd find that if, say, tomorrow, this forum required real names, that you would not even need any "supreme contributor" status etc. system because you'd know exactly who was contributing and you could decide for yourself how to view their opinions.

In any case, probably, an "expert contributor" under a username only serves to inflate an already over-inflated ego.

adaubre

 

[Bob]

Like listservs, yes.