Re: [ARSCLIST] Whacky-Packia outed for what it is -- Amateur Hour in Siberia

["Steven C. Barr(x)" <stevenc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Karl Miller" <karl.miller@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>   As to what is fact, consider the Hatto recordings... how many "Stravinsky"
recordings were conducted by Craft.  What about all of those violin work
actually written by Fritz Kreisler, which he credited to Vivaldi and others.
Thanks to Ernest Lumpe we have identified some of those pseudonomous performers.
By the way, his web page seems to have disappeared! Might not ARSC be a good
place to host some of this sort of information...dare I once again bring up the
idea of some wikidiscographies....
>
"Wikidiscographies" COULD be a valuable asset...IF the persons/institutions
holding the records in question could be inspired to contribute the data!
In fact, we (ARSC, 78-L, and/or other 78-collecting groups) could start
with the "Abrams Files" as a basis...correcting erroneous entries as well
as filling in any "data gaps."

>   I guess I also wonder, how does one insure authenticity. Yet many internet
sources appear to be excellent...like Frank Hamilton's Maria Callas discography
and performance chronology.
>
The quality of an "Internet source" is proportional to the effort used in
creating it! There exist such that are simply poorly edited and thus full
of errors...and there are others which are INTENTIONALLY incorrect (through
any number of reasons). Problem is, they all LOOK exactly alike!

>   It just seems to me that responsible agencies, like academic institutions,
and professional organizations, should redirect some of their resources to
taking a more active role in oversight of online publishing. ARSC, for example,
could consider listing online discographies it has reviewed...certainly a major
undertaking, but it seems like it might be a worthwhile activity...and a
responsibility that could be shared with the membership.
>
Here, copyright questions arise. If an author/compiler is intending to
make money from his/her/its work, its availability on the Internet would
logically decrease that opportunity...something I've thought about in
relation to a digitized version of my Dating Guide...!

>   If a wikipedia exists and is finding an audience, there must be a reason.
>   What seems most interesting to me is that for a majority of the online
searches I do, like it or not, a wiki page is often within the first few hits.
The wiki concept works, on at least one level, visibility, within the context of
the online information environment. Again, the question for me is, how does one
make the digital environment work better?
>
Note that I have corrected...in some cases, added...many 78-record-related
entries in Wicky-Wacky! Since the vast majority of available entries are
at least fairly correct (if in many cases inadequate) it is a simple and
readily available way to answer questions. Obviously, I wouldn't use it
to research a thesis...but if I'm looking for a simple answer to a simple
question, it will usually suffice.

Has there been any "intentional digital vandalism" (i.e. the digital
equivalent of "graffitti tags" with no intent except damaging things
that work...)?! I know there have been mis-postings for political
and other personal reasons...

Steven C. Barr