TubeNet

Lately it seems there are some that want to talk about cell phones here.

Don't know about you, but I am sick of cell phones going off at the wrong times. Just did a concert where a cell phone went off during the Barber "Adagio for Strings." I've heard them go off during some people's masterclasses - when I do a session, I tell everyone to turn them off and even check mine in front of everyone. Still some idiot's phone always rings! My brother gave me a cell phone blocker (illegal here, he bought it in Japan), I've used at times (it is the perfect crime in a grocery store!) and even keep it in my computer bag.

Here's my thing - I enjoy walking into a rehersal, concert, class or most musical events with the phone turned off. I don't care if I'm out of touch, yes I've had some clients pissed off because they couldn't ask me a stupid question at their convenience but I don't care, I'm there to play and not get bothered by the rest of the world.

For you people who refuse to turn the thing off at the right time, why do you like pissing off everyone else??

I shut mine off because of courtesy and respect to others at anything that's music related. I remember I played a recital last spring and during one of the slow movements of Effie a cell phone went off. Man I was PISSED!!! Naturally, it made it to the recording. If I could find that person I'd beat the crap out of them. GRR!!!







Ralph

***

I always put mine on vibrate. It is a rare exception that the ringer is on, unless I'm at home and the phone is on a shelf across the room.

If I'm "on call" for whatever reason (work or family) I'll find the seat nearest to the least conspicuous possible exit, and only leave once I'm certain it's an emergency. My kids will send text messages if they need to contact me and I'm in a place where I can't talk to them. I can receive their message and respond to them without disturbing anyone (also requires turning off key-stroke beeps). I can also wait for someone to leave voicemail, then discreetly listen to it to determine whether there's really an emergency, or just someone calling to chat.

If I'm not "on call", I'll still leave it on vibrate. If a call comes in, I know it; then at intermission I can see who called and call them back. If it's off (or blocked ) then I don't know that someone TRIED to call, let alone WHO tried to call, which is frustrating.

The problems occur when people leave their phones in audible mode, or sit in the "choice" seats (front & center) and then get up to take a call (or try to "quietly" take it without leaving ).

There are also some real cell-phone nazis out there, who get irate if someone, no matter how quietly, has the audacity to use a cell phone in a restaurant. Yes, it is rude to take a cell-phone call in a restaurant and speak loudly or yammer on endlessly (the latter being more rude to dining companions than to other patrons). But a restaurant is not a silent place; people are carrying on conversations all over. To simply take a call (with ringer on vibrate, of course), tell the baby-sitter where the Shrek-2 DVD is, and get off -- why is this a problem?

Common sense is greatly lacking where cell phones are concerned: rude behavior in movies and musical performances; intolerance by people who really AREN'T being affected, because someone else, earlier, WAS rude; and don't even get me started on drivers who get so involved in a cell-phone conversation that they become oblivious to what's going on around them.
___________________________________
Joe Baker, urging good manners and common sense, and opposing "zero tolerance".

Joe Baker wrote:Common sense is greatly lacking where cell phones are concerned

Common sense is no longer common.

Not just cell phones, but in most human experience.
Curtousey is also a long forgotten behaviour.
Pagers were almost as bad. Again people couldn't (wouldn't ?) be bothered to use the vibrate function. And most who carried them didn't need to be contacted anytime, any place.

I'm with bloke. I want a jammer. Put them in preformance/lecture halls. Post signs warning they are in use.

People survived for a long time without cell phones. I think we would make it another hour or two. Remember when few people could afford them? How did the rest of us get by?

Personally I seldom carry one. Only when I might be needed in an emergency, like out of town/on the road for business. No one know where I might be at a given time. Even then the ringer is off.

When I leave home I tend to not want to be contacted. It's bad enoght getting constant calls at home and work, I don't want it in the car, or suitting at lunch. Give me a little private time!

Brian wrote:Don't know about you, but I am sick of cell phones going off at the wrong times.

I agree. I hate hearing cell phones going off in concerts OR rehearsal.

One night at rehearsal, a cell phone rang and our director asked the player to please turn it off. His response was, "It's tax season and I need to answer the phone!". Director told him he needs to make a decision--come her to play with your phone turned off--or just don't come to rehearsal! He turned it off.

(Since he plays Eb clarinet, it wouldn't have been a big deal if he left )

A Cell phone blocker does just what the name says - it will kill a cell call with some companies. It is illegal in the U.S. but a great thing to have. I've been known to block calls during some sessions.

How about the big pet peeve - those Nextel's with the walkie talkie feature where you hear both sides of the conversation yelling at each other.

I find it ironic that modern technology is increasing the isolation between people, when the vision of many was to bring us closer together by making communication easier.

With the advent of television and computers and automobiles, it became easy to live in the same house for 20 years and not know the people living next door. Now, we have personal communication devices that enable us not only to escape being civil in face-to-face encounters, but also to completely ignore the person sitting next to us in a plane or in a theater.

No sense in getting irked about it--you can't un-ring a bell.

O brave new world that has such people in it.
Hug me till you drug me, honey;
Kiss me till I'm in a coma:
Hug me, honey, snuggly bunny;
Love's as good as soma.

Chuck(G) wrote:I find it ironic that modern technology is increasing the isolation between people, when the vision of many was to bring us closer together by making communication easier.

With the advent of television and computers and automobiles, it became easy to live in the same house for 20 years and not know the people living next door. Now, we have personal communication devices that enable us not only to escape being civil in face-to-face encounters, but also to completely ignore the person sitting next to us in a plane or in a theater.

No sense in getting irked about it--you can't un-ring a bell.

O brave new world that has such people in it.
Hug me till you drug me, honey;
Kiss me till I'm in a coma:
Hug me, honey, snuggly bunny;
Love's as good as soma.

Chuck, it's not often I disagree with you on matters such as this, but let me give you another perspective.

It's true that the automobile and (to a lesser degree) the computer have allowed us to select companions based on criteria that are in some ways superior to mere geographic coincidence; and it's a shame the extent to which neighbors don't even TRY to get to know each other any more in some places. In our neighborhood in Texas, everyone knew everyone. I knew the names of every man, woman, boy, girl, dog and cat within five houses of me, at least. In my current neighborhood, we know the couple across the street. Sort of. Our neighbors each have their circle of friends at work, church, club, etc., and don't care to socialize with the neighbors. But I don't think it's the case that these people don't HAVE relationships; they just aren't based on geography.

As to the cell phone: I don't necessarily think cell phones change the way people are; they merely become an expression of a person's manners or lack thereof. Well-mannered people use courtesy with or without their cell-phones, while boors annoy people with whatever is at hand.
________________________________
Joe Baker, who believes technology mostly amplifies our nature.

If I get your drift, Joe, you think that things are better because folks need not have relationships with people who are close to them geographically, but rather with people who are just like themselves.

In other words, one need not even be tolerant or display common civility or concern for others not sharing their beliefs or values or general appearance, even if they live next door to us.

So, how is this better? How does this go toward creating a world full of understanding and tolerance?

Its true that the cell phone conspiracy is growing. (Think about it, they don't ring until the middle of the most emotional part of Asa's Death, or the solo section of a great pianist playing Lush Life).

However, I am one of those few who are required by job, (and by law) to be reachable 24 hours a day.

Mine stays on vibrate no matter what. When the chief, D.A., or other law enforcement agency calls, I have to respond. There will be no time that it is off, and it has to be answered.

When it is possible, I stay close to the door. When I am in rehearsal, I excuse myself and return the call. My conductors understand this, because there might be a time that I am needed to assist them.

What gets me are the one or twom musicians that are always checking on a gig during a break in their parts, or between selections. They are reaaallllyyyy impressive.


Tom Mason

I think Chuck is right...

Chuck wrote:"With the advent of television and computers and automobiles, it became easy to live in the same house for 20 years and not know the people living next door. Now, we have personal communication devices that enable us not only to escape being civil in face-to-face encounters, but also to completely ignore the person sitting next to us in a plane or in a theater."

When we first moved into our current neighborhood 20 years ago, everyone knew each other because all the homes were new. Then as some neighbors moved out and others moved in, we tended not to get to know one another. We kept to our circle of current friends through phones, clubs, church, etc.

That all changed after 2 hurricanes came thru here in 3 weeks time last year (Frances & Jeanne). No one had electricity for 8 days, phones were out, and even cell phones died after 2 days (after batteries @ cell towers ran down). We all got to know one another again... helping patch roofs, cutting down trees, hauling them and broken fences out to the street. About 2 months later when the storm recovery was over, we had a block party (barbecue) to celebrate our 'survival'. It's sad that it sometimes takes a disaster for neighbors to get together again.

Rick (hoping this hurricane season is not like last year's)

Joe Baker wrote:I always put mine on vibrate

Tom Mason wrote:Mine stays on vibrate no matter what

...and they say romance is dead!...

Tom Mason wrote:However, I am one of those few who are required by job, (and by law) to be reachable 24 hours a day.

I really don't understand that. Who would be required to be on call 24/7, and by law no less?

On call for a day or 2 at a time is different. Then you stay where you can be reached, then somone else is on call.

I had a call job once. I didn't do anything those days. Sure I had a pager, but then you had to find a phone, to see what you were needed for. So I just stayed home, or close, and read a book or watched movies.

I would never have attened an activity while on call. Arrange schedules arround those activities. So you have practice on Tuesday for 8-10. Fine, either don't be on call Tuesday night, or get somone else to be on call from 8-10.

Seriously. What would you, or better still the chief or D.A., do without the cell phone or pager?

Chuck(G) wrote:If I get your drift, Joe, you think that things are better because folks need not have relationships with people who are close to them geographically, but rather with people who are just like themselves.

Then you definitely do NOT get my drift. I said that it's different, and that this difference has advantages and disadvantages. I prefer "both", as it was in my old neighborhood. I really miss hanging out in a neighbor's yard with a tall glass of iced tea, watching the kids play, in addition to gathering with souls of a like mind and common interests. I'm just saying that this change is not the death of human relations that you implied, but merely a metamorphisis.

Chuck(G) wrote:In other words, one need not even be tolerant or display common civility or concern for others not sharing their beliefs or values or general appearance, even if they live next door to us.

So, how is this better? How does this go toward creating a world full of understanding and tolerance?

Yikes!! I've never said that, never thought it, and would artue against it vehemently. I'm merely saying that it's human CHOICE to foresake the neighbors for other social groups, not some mandate of technology.

BTW, if "general appearance" refers to race or age, this has been the exact opposite of my experience. The groups to which I choose to belong -- church, band boosters, etc. -- are far more diverse racially (and, of course, economically) than my neighborhood, and at least as diverse in age. Here in the neighborhood, it's about 85% white, incomes within probably a $20,000 a year range from highest to lowest. In other groups in which I choose to participate, the racial and economic makeup is FAR more diverse. We are more likely to share common values, morals, and in some cases political bent, but are definitely more diverse in other ways.
_______________________________
Joe Baker, who thought he had been clear that he prefers "both".

ThomasDodd wrote: I had a call job once. I didn't do anything those days. Sure I had a pager, but then you had to find a phone, to see what you were needed for. So I just stayed home, or close, and read a book or watched movies.

I would never have attened an activity while on call. Arrange schedules arround those activities.

So if your kid has a band concert, or the lead in the school play, and you're on call, and either no one is able to take your shift, or the company doesn't allow swapping shifts, or perhaps (often the case for me) no one else in the company has the skill set to sub for you, you'd just miss the concert? Such is your revulsion to cell phones? I know this is twice in two days you and I are on opposite sides, but danged if I can understand that stance. I may have to prepare my kid for the POSSIBILITY that Dad may have to step out or even leave, but I'm not just going to stay home from the get-go.

I'm on call 24x7 myself, in a sense. I get a work-related call off-hours perhaps every two weeks; have to actually go in immediately perhaps twice a year. But I'm expected at least to return calls within an hour or two. I'd never get to go ANYWHERE if I couldn't take my cell phone with me!

Seriously. What would you, or better still the chief or D.A., do without the cell phone or pager?

They would be less available than they are now -- in other words, not as good. But the technology exists now, so why waste time trying to figure out what they'd do without it? To hearken back to an earlier post of mine, you don't see doctors discussing a patient with an infection wondering what they would have done without antibiotics; they use the tool that's now available to be BETTER than they used to be.
________________________________
Joe Baker, who is amazed at the hatred some people have for cell phones.

quote:

I really don't understand that. Who would be required to be on call 24/7, and by law no less?

On call for a day or 2 at a time is different. Then you stay where you can be reached, then somone else is on call.


I am a band director in one of the local school districts. I am also a police officer in a local agency. My police job requires that I am able to be contacted 24/7. This is also state law in Arkansas. Fire, EMS, and certain state officials are also covered under the law.

In some states, physicians are covered by this type of law, especially if they are emergency room attendees. It does not matter if you are on or off shift, or on the list to be called or not.

Joe Baker wrote: I prefer "both", as it was in my old neighborhood. I really miss hanging out in a neighbor's yard with a tall glass of iced tea, watching the kids play, in addition to gathering with souls of a like mind and common interests. I'm just saying that this change is not the death of human relations that you implied, but merely a metamorphisis.

WARNING - LONG RAMBLING DIALOG AHEAD

My experience has been that diversity has been shunned for the convienience of association with likes.

For more than a decade, the neighbors made it a custom to have a once-a-year neighborhood potluck. Very informal, bring something, chat, eat, leave if you want.

With the real-estate boom of the last 7 or 8 years, a bunch of new (very ostentatious) housing has been constructed in the neighborhood (mostly inhabited by members of the medical community). When the invitations to the new members of the neighborhood went out for three years running, not a single RSVP was returned. So the potlucks died out--there was simply no "getting to know" your new neighbors.

A couple of years ago, the new neighbors asked the county to abandon the right-of-way to our road in exchange for allowing an automatic gate on it. I only became aware of the effort when I was asked to donate land for the gate and the required turnaround. I asked why a gate was necessary and the response I got was "to preserve the exclusive nature of our neighborhood". I opined that most possibly the folks they were trying to exclude were pretty much like me and that they'd be better off putting the gate further up the road. Maybe they could get one of their "exclusive" members to donate the needed easement. The county ruled that without my cooperation, the project was dead. I can be a really contentious bastard when I want.

Two winters ago, we had one of those freak snowstorms with freezing rain that brought big Doug firs down across the road. Our exclusive neighbors thought nothing of driving through front yards to get around the treefalls. When three of us "old timers" grabbed our saws and cleared the road, cutting and stacking the wood neatly, we didn't even get a wave from the Mercedes drivers--and it was hard work too. We could have used more helping hands.

If you walk through the subdivision any time on any day of the week, it's eerie. You may see the yard service, but no residents. I suspect they're squirreled away in their media rooms, doing heaven knows what.

About three years ago, I went off searching for an old dog of mine who didn't make it back from a walk. After walking several miles, I finally found him, stuck in the mud in a bed of rushes. I managed to get him out of the mud, but not before I got pretty muddy myself. Much relieved, I walked home with him, and discovered an empty vodka bottle that someone had carelesly tossed out of their car window. I picked up the bottle (I pick up roadside trash when I can) and proceded home. On the way up my road, I was passed in the opposite direction by a new Jag and a new Mercedes, both of which gave me a wide berth with wide-eyed neighbors peering out the windows. Naturally, I waved a greeting. They didn't know me and I've always wondered if they called the sherriff saying that some drunken dirty bum and his dog were menacing them.
================
I guess what I'm getting at is that when we can choose our relationships, we'll choose the easy ones by our given nature. Wealthy folks don't want to deal with folks who have less. Evangelical Christians (boy, do I have another story about them) don't want to deal with Hindus. Republicans don't want to deal with Democrats.

And in our modern world, it's easy not to.

And that makes us less tolerant and less understanding and less aware of that there, but for the grace of God, go we.

The worst cell interruption while performing was while I was playing the VW, right after the first high F in the 1st movement cadenza , a cell phone started ringing during the brief silence that naturally occurs in the music. It was a cutesy Carribean steel drum ringtone that was NOT ANSWERED OR STOPPED for the entire cadenza. Prolly the only VW cadenza in history with a tropical themed accompaniment.

When I'm teaching, privately or classroom, I threaten my students by saying that if their phone rings audibly, I will be the one who answers it. I haven't had a problem yet.

Don't know what to tell you Chuck. I'm certainly not a wealthy Mercedes-drivin' member of the medical community! And as an evangelical Christian, I've always been taught that I should go out of my way to meet, understand, and love others -- ESPECIALLY those who believe differently than I do. I've been very good friends with quite a number of Hindus, as well as Muslims**, Jews, atheists, Buddhists and an Animist or two (not to mention MA, of whom we're all very fond, and whose beliefs are ... certainly different!)

My Church has certain beliefs in common, of course. But I'm not aware of any pervasive political or relious belief that my community band, or the band boosters, or my co-workers have in common (well, we ARE in the Bible belt, so nominal Christianity of various sorts is "pervasive", but no moreso in my associations than in the region overall). On the contrary, political debate is common in all the above groups (including the church). We do have shared interests and goals, but a wide variety of personal beliefs. I just don't see the phenomenon you've described at work here.

The neighborhood I live in is well-kempt but certainly not ritzy (the only "lawn services" in my neighborhood are the guys who LIVE here and WORK for lawn services), and not many of these houses have a two-car garage, let alone a media room. It's not an economics thing here, and I don't get any sense that people are cloistering themselves around others who share their own religious and political thoughts -- in fact, from the limited contact I've had with my neighbors, I can't see any sign that any of them HAVE any religious or political thoughts, if indeed any thoughts at all. The guys who like to fish hang out with other guys who like to fish. The auto mechanics hang out with other car guys. The bikers hang out with other bikers. I'd assume that there are probably Dem and Rep members of all those groups, as well as a variety of different religious beliefs; and I doubt seriously that any of those are discussed much.

My wife and I moved to Knoxville 2 1/2 years ago, and at the time pretty much took what we could find in our price range. When my son graduates HS we'll be moving, probably to a smaller town nearby, and high on our list of priorities is a neighborhood where people get out and spend time with one another. We've certainly learned that it is much harder, when first moving into an area, to make connections when you can't make them among neighbors. I definitely share your wish that neighbors would make some time for one another. But I also appreciate the ability to spend time with people who understand and share my interests.
______________________
Joe Baker, who notes that Tubenet is the ultimate example of association according to a shared interest, without regard for geography (or age, economic class, race, religion, political views, etc), thanks to the wonders of technology.

** -- the one religious group that I HAVE observed being REALLY closed are some devout Muslims we used to live next door to. The men were willing to talk with me, and even eat with me (in a restaurant), but would neither enter my home nor invite me into theirs, nor would they permit their wives to have any interaction with me or my wife. One of the women used to sneak over during the day to visit with my wife, but if the men had found out she would have been in trouble.