[rfu-automation] Re: No consensus on moving the automation computer into the studio this weekend

[John Anderson]

Wow. That is the most f*cked-up interpretation of consensus I've  
encountered yet.

You've picked an opportune time to raise objections that were hashed  
out, repeatedly, on e-mail and in meetings. At every stage you've had  
the chance to block, ask for mediation to find compromise, all sorts  
of alternatives.

I thought we'd reached such a compromise by agreeing to set up a  
production-room terminal for you to maintain the automation program.  
Just because that cannot be done at the exact same time as the  
automation computer itself is moved into the studio should not force  
changes to the rest of the project. The terminal install will happen,  
most likely when Dan gets back from California, where I understand  
his stay has been temporarily extended.

However, given the way things work around the IMC, you'll get your  
way, because I'm not about to come to blows over all of this. So, I  
guess when I go to unplug the machine and move it into the studio,  
you can physically block the door, and your words will be law.

Congratulations. It's been great working with you.

-John

-----------------------
John Anderson: DIYmedia
http://www.diymedia.net


On Jun 30, 2006, at 8:17 PM, Gary Cziko wrote:

> John et al:
>
> On 6/30/06, John Anderson <phlegm at diymedia.net> wrote:
> Great. We can still move forward with our original plan, which you  
> and everyone else who attended our meetings consented to.
>
> As I mentioned earlier, I agreed to moving the automation studio  
> into studio if remote access was provided in the control room.  
> Since we are unable currently to provide the remote access, it is  
> not possible, by definition and logic, to move forward with the  
> original plan.
>
> In addition, other things have changed since the original plan,  
> including the option of adding safe-harbor material to the  
> automation system.  Another development is the use of iTunes to  
> download files for certain automated programs and the likely use of  
> Scheduled Tasks to switch between daytime and safe-harbor muscic  
> lists, all which makes things a bit more complicated to keep the  
> automation system running properly. I would be more than happy to  
> show anyone  how to manage the automation system and would be happy  
> to share responsibility for this aspect of the station's operation.  
> But I don't think that knowing how to run the automation system  
> should be a requirement for a show host who wants to play some  
> tunes from local music library that we have put on disk.
>
> I plan on moving the computer into the studio tomorrow once  
> everything is wired up. If you'd like to tweak the automation,  
> until we can get a terminal in the production room for you, I guess  
> that means you'll have to come into the studio like the rest of us  
> do. From Monday through Friday, from 2-4p, the studio is presently  
> unoccupied. There's plenty of time for you to do what you feel you  
> need to do.
>
> Weekdays 2 to 4 is seldom convenient for me. Evenings are usually  
> better when live shows are being broadcast from the studio.
>
> I am not worried about the music. I am assuming you have already  
> worked out a system by which the automation knows what to play and  
> what not to play? Are things labeled as clean or dirty, perhaps  
> sequestered into master folders?
>
> This has not been worked out.  It is still in the development stage  
> which will require more than usual access to the automation  
> computer. The automation group feels it needs to get general  
> consensus from WRFU membership at the next general meeting about  
> adding safe-harbor material to the automation system before  
> proceeding with this.
>
> Also, might I remind you that our initial plans for the studio  
> called for an integrated system. Training people to start/stop  
> ZaraRadio I do not expect to be difficult, even if there are some  
> hiccups. This is a volunteer-driven, community radio station, and  
> foibles are to be expected.
>
> More than simply starting and stopping ZaraRadio is involved.
>
> I could accept the added risk of "foibles" if I could see  
> compensating advantages. But I see none as we can easily set up  
> ZaraRadio and sound files in the studio without compromising the  
> operation of the automation computer.
>
> Indeed, I can easily imagine that most show hosts would prefer  
> being able to use the studio computer for music and not having to  
> worry about messing with the automation system at all. All they  
> have to do now is move a slider up and down. Things will be  
> considerably more complicated if the same computer is used both for  
> live shows and automation.
>
> The bottom line is that I am opposed to moving the automation  
> computer into the studio this weekend for the reasons I have given  
> above and in previous messages. The system has been working well,  
> provides about 76 hours a week of programming to WRFU and I have  
> been primarily responsible for keeping the automation system  
> running. So while you may belittle my work and involvement in WRFU  
> because "I don't come into the studio like the rest of us," I think  
> my preference should be given some weight in this matter.
>
> WRFU is supposed to operate by consensus. And there is no consensus  
> here on what would be a major change in the station's current mode  
> of operation.
>
> And please don't keep repeating that you plan on going ahead with  
> the "original plan" for which there was consensus, because moving  
> the automation machine into the studio without remote access from  
> the production room was never part of any "original plan" that I  
> ever agreed to.
>
> --Gary
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/archive/rfu-automation/attachments/20060701/7deb6c2e/attachment.html