PANEL decisions

[mcb]

You who may not have noticed, DP, but my comment was in response to one of SC's.

On the contrary, NT, you completely failed to respond to SC's point, which was to question the reliability of your suspicions as to the identity of panel members. It looked to me as though you were merely reproducing unfounded slurs made in ignorance on a blog whose author would be unlikely to know. Did you have some other reason for believing you knew who the panel members are, and did SC's response alter your view?

[NorthernTenor]

You who may not have noticed, DP, but my comment was in response to one of SC's.

On the contrary, NT, you completely failed to respond to SC's point, which was to question the reliability of your suspicions as to the identity of panel members. It looked to me as though you were merely reproducing unfounded slurs made in ignorance on a blog whose author would be unlikely to know. Did you have some other reason for believing you knew who the panel members are, and did SC's response alter your view?

Actually, mcb, I haven't said here or elsewhere who I think may be members - hence my remark about SC's assertion being wrong, and my observation that this pattern is not uncommon.

[Nick Baty]

let's stick to the issue on the thread,

Good idea Dom P. The thread was started by Presbyter who suggested:

I thought it might be useful to post some decisions of the anonymous "gang of five" to help composers.If you have any useful feedback to post, please do.

Of course there won't be any more feedback for a couple of weeks as the panel now doesn't meet until 3 May.

[NorthernTenor]

let's stick to the issue on the thread,

Good idea Dom P. The thread was started by Presbyter who suggested:

I thought it might be useful to post some decisions of the anonymous "gang of five" to help composers.If you have any useful feedback to post, please do.

That rather begs a question or two, Nick. Occasional remarks on the wider context ground the thread in reality, and don't in any way prevent useful posting and discussion of the Panel's decisions and suggestions. Who knows - such scrutiny might help the Panel in its work.

[Nick Baty]

let's stick to the issue on the thread,

Good idea Dom P.

After all, the initial idea was to share feedback.
There are plenty of other blogs tearing the Church apart without us joining in.

[NorthernTenor]

There are plenty of other blogs tearing the Church apart without us joining in.

Oh dear. Now what might Dr. Johnson have said in these circumstances?

[Nick Baty]

Any feedback from the Panel's meeting on Tuesday?

[JW]

I submitted something for the recent meeting but haven't heard anything yet. Is everyone else in the same boat? Has something gone amiss?

[alan29]

I submitted something for the recent meeting but haven't heard anything yet. Is everyone else in the same boat? Has something gone amiss?

Me too

[presbyter]

I understand that Martin Foster is meeting with Bishop Hopes later this week. We are all waiting patiently in joyful Hopes.

[Southern Comfort]

I understand that Martin Foster is meeting with Bishop Hopes later this week. We are all waiting patiently in joyful Hopes.

Perhaps we are even awaiting the blessed Hopes......

[presbyter]

Decisions are being sent out. No "withheld" in my most recent batch. Phew!

[mcb]

I had a 'withheld: editorial' - in my Great Amen I had Amen, Amen, Amen. Fixed now (to Amen, amen, amen.), so hopefully it will be third time lucky. (I also had a stray full stop that was supposed to be a comma in my Agnus Dei.)

But - horror! - my Permission to Publish sheet from Bishop Hopes has a typo in it. Does this mean it's invalid? I'm thinking of sending it back for correction.

[presbyter]

I had a 'withheld: editorial' - in my Great Amen I had Amen, Amen, Amen. Fixed now (to Amen, amen, amen.

What's incorrect about Amen, Amen, Amen. ?

[presbyter]

Summary of principles, I quote -

The Guide for Composers provides guidance.

In regard to the repeated "Amen" above - and other words such as "Hosanna" - where's the guidance? Composers, publishers and the panel would not have to waste time on "withheld editorial" decisions if clear guidance was available to follow.