PipeChat Digest #2477 - Friday, November 2, 2001
 
RE: membership in the parish--off topic
  by "Emmons, Paul" <pemmons@wcupa.edu>
Re: Battle hymns
  by <quilisma@socal.rr.com>
RE: Battle hymns
  by "Emmons, Paul" <pemmons@wcupa.edu>
Christmas CD from Trinity Wall Street, 911 Fund
  by "William T. Van Pelt" <bill@organsociety.org>
RE: Acoustics 101
  by "Emmons, Paul" <pemmons@wcupa.edu>
Re: Acoustics 101
  by <RonSeverin@aol.com>
St. John's Anglican History and contact info
  by "Daniel Hopkins" <danielwh1@ns.sympatico.ca>
Re: The uninitiated and the layman audiences
  by "douglas morgan" <dkmorgan76209@yahoo.com>
Tour damage tomorrow
  by "Daniel Hopkins" <danielwh1@ns.sympatico.ca>
Re: The uninitiated and the layman audiences
  by "Hugh Drogemuller" <hdrogemuller@sympatico.ca>
Re: New Console Arrives
  by <Myosotis51@aol.com>
IRC tonight
  by <quilisma@socal.rr.com>
Re: membership in the parish--off topic
  by "Bob Elms" <elmsr@albanyis.com.au>
Re: Membership in the parish--off topic
  by <Wurlibird1@aol.com>
Re: IRC tonight
  by "Mack" <mack02445@mindspring.com>
Re: The uninitiated and the layman audiences
  by "Mandy Glass" <amadpoet@lycos.com>
Re: Acoustics 101
  by "Jon" <sparky@CEINetworks.com>
Re: Tour damage tomorrow
  by "Jon" <sparky@CEINetworks.com>
 

(back) Subject: RE: membership in the parish--off topic From: "Emmons, Paul" <pemmons@wcupa.edu> Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2001 12:59:37 -0500   Jim Pitts writes:   >I've been in situations where I was not welcome at the Lord's Table. In one > instance, it was made quite clear that only the "elect and elite" were > allowed to engage in Communion with the Almighty. If one of the > leper-like > uninvited went to the Communion rail, the God Squad clergy would simply > pass > you by. I found it somewhat amusing that these strict legalistic's were =   > offering the Sacraments which consisted of Delaware Punch and wallpaste > wafers. Orthodoxy! Can't beat it. > My question is: given the doctrines that they hold AND the derisive = attitude towards the members of this community that you hold, why in the world would you WANT to to go to Communion there, and what = would it mean to you if you did?   I'm firmly with Bud's careful exposition on this one. While I'm glad that my church now has a so-called "open communion" policy, I hope that we keep our fingers crossed and surround it with cautions and at least a modicum = of instruction. I'm aware of NO well-developed eucharistic theology that supports a casual invitation to the uninitiate. In the early history of = the church, the first part of the liturgy was considered relatively public, including and instructing the catechumens. Then they were dismissed. Rumors of cannibalism arose because the liturgy from the offertory on was = so carefully restricted to the insiders that non-Christians simply didn't = know what was happening. Persecutions and martyrdoms might arise because of these rumors. The modern advice in this situation would undoubtedly be = that they should say, "come in, one and all, eat, drink, see how harmless this is." They did otherwise. The church was growing in those days.   Some hold the objective doctrines of transubstantiation, consubstantiaion, or real presence. These consider it irreverent and dangerous to offer the sacrament to those who do not understand this presence.   On the other hand, an author explaining Protestant eucharistic theology explained that the Catholic concentration on the presence of Christ in the consecrated elements was "not too much for the reformers, but too little!" For them, at Communion time, Christ's presence is in in and among the worshipping community, as an expression and celebration of their collectiveness. In other words, the collective experience is of the = essence. This interpretation, too, makes it difficult to assume that the sacrament can be preserved inviolate in a random gathering of people who have no collective concept of what is going on.   Whatever Communion is, it belongs to the group. You don't necessarily = join any group simply by walking in off the street.   Paul      
(back) Subject: Re: Battle hymns From: <quilisma@socal.rr.com> Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 10:28:03 -0800       Alan Freed wrote:   > Paul remarks: > > It is part of the progressive emasculation of the church (see _The > Church > Impotent_, by Leon Podles) > > Alan begs: Tell me more! > > Paul again: That season [the 'gesimas] has completely disappeared from > the calendar! > > And Alan: I think Bud's people still have it.   Sure do ... that's when we get to sing all the "fight songs" ... I particularly like "Christians, Dost Thou See Them?", which the choir INVARIABLE choreographs ("dost thou see them?" ... hands to head a la Indian scouts; "prowl and prowl around" ... sneaking up and down the = stalls a la Snidely Whiplash) ... FORTUNATELY, we're in the BACK (grin).   > > > And Paul: Freemasonry is undergoing a revival, > > Alan incredulates: Really? Is that true? >    
(back) Subject: RE: Battle hymns From: "Emmons, Paul" <pemmons@wcupa.edu> Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2001 14:11:03 -0500   >>It is part of the progressive emasculation of the church (see _The = Church Impotent_, by Leon Podles)   >Alan begs: Tell me more!   I can only recommend-- seriously-- that you get and read this book. I disagree with a small percentage of it, but in general I hadn't read anything on any subject in several years that struck me as such an eye-opener.   >>And Paul: Freemasonry is undergoing a revival,   >Alan incredulates: Really? Is that true?   See _Time_ magazine, May 25, 1998, p.64.   (P.S. I am not a Mason, at least at present. However, a friend is, who would like to see me as one, too. My response was that I just didn't see what Freemasonry could do for me that the church couldn't. That was a = year or two ago, before I read Podles' book. Suffice it to say that I have = lost any tendency I may once have had to write this and similar organizations = off as silly, worthless, or obsolete. Perhaps it has, if simply by default, a more appropriate place in the life of men than it did fifty years ago.)   Paul    
(back) Subject: Christmas CD from Trinity Wall Street, 911 Fund From: "William T. Van Pelt" <bill@organsociety.org> Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2001 14:13:36 -0500   Dear Lists,   The Naxos CD label has produced a fine recording from the choir of Trinity Wall Street, Owen Burdick, organist and director of music, the sale of = which benefits the September 11 Fund. It is available for $4.99 on the opening page of http://www.ohscatalog.org   OHS has lots of them in stock, the OHS purchase having sent money into the 911 Fund, with the thought also that they may be regarded as appropriate gifts for choristers, friends, etc.   The recording is entirely new, having been made at Trinity Church in February, 2001.   Bill    
(back) Subject: RE: Acoustics 101 From: "Emmons, Paul" <pemmons@wcupa.edu> Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2001 14:51:55 -0500   >High audio frequencies, with their short physical wavelengths, are more easily reflected and / or absorbed by smaller surfaces than low = frequencies.   That is the way I hear it, too.   Now my question:   Similar statements are made about most sound-absorbing material in the = room: they soak up the high frequencies more than the the low frequencies.   It is possible to install sound-absorbing material that is more = even-handed. This is better for music as well as unamplified speech, but because it is more expensive it is seldom found.   So, in the typical case, if the room is dead, it absorbs the high frequencies in particular.   Why, then, do we also say that in such rooms top-heavy organ design or voicing is usually unsuccessful, and a more foundational approach is = needed; whereis the reverberent rooms are the ones that like a brilliant sound source?   Paul    
(back) Subject: Re: Acoustics 101 From: <RonSeverin@aol.com> Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2001 15:55:05 EST   Hi Paul and list   Most rooms may have an annoying echo that can be over come simply using colorful liturgical hangings and banners. This is usually more than enough to solve what ever problem acoustically that can occur in a building. What we have mostly is over kill, detrimental to music and the spoken word, only to be compensated by an over driven PA system. Huge American and European churches and cathedrals for nearly 2,000 years relied upon the acoustics to carry the spoken word and the music. The pulpit was stationed high up at the crossing with a parabolic reflector behind the speaker to reflect the word throughout the building. Since the advent of electricity man has endeavored to micro-manage the acoustical environment to the detriment of both music and the spoken word. Carpeted floors, Wool on the walls, fluff ceilings, padded pews, pillows have all been used to create what modern decadence now calls perfect acoustics. The term becomes an oxymoron, as perfect acoustics indicates an aliveness by the very term acoustics implies.   To expect great musical results, from sung music by a choir, or that played on a pipe or digital instrument in such a room in such a state, will be a constant source of disappointment. Filling the church with people as we are of a want to do creates a nasty black hole for sound. The sad part is, congregations spend ten's of thousands of dollars to someone to cover this up. It takes the pipe organ budget, and in many cases 30-40 years later an electronic is finally discarded for a pipe = organ. This when the pipe organ could have been built on the heals of the completed church. I marvel at the total lack of common sense.   Regards,   Ron Severin  
(back) Subject: St. John's Anglican History and contact info From: "Daniel Hopkins" <danielwh1@ns.sympatico.ca> Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 17:21:44 -0400   ANGLICAN NET NEWS Electronically Serving Anglicans throughout Nova Scotia & Prince Edward Island Sender: ang_netnews-owner@chebucto.ns.ca Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ang_netnews   The Anglican Net News is compiled weekly at the Diocesan Office. If you would like to submit material please e-mail Jan Connors at jconnors@nspeidiocese.ca or FAX 425-0717.   To subscribe or for change of email address for the Net News list server please email Jack Tattrie at cappe@ns.sympatico.ca   Issued date: November 2, 2001     It is with great sadness that we learned of the devastating fire at St. John's Anglican Church, Lunenburg on All Saints' Day, November 1, 2001. Following is a Historical and Architectural Survey prepared by Dr. Brian Cutherbertson, Diocesan Archivist:   ST. JOHN'S ANGLICAN CHURCH, LUNENBURG AN HISTORICAL AND ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY -------------------------------------------------------------------------= --- -- Founding of Lunenburg and First Church Service On the first Sunday, 17 June 1753 after the settlers- most of whom came f= rom the German Palatinate, French- and German-speaking Swiss Cantons and Montb=E9liard- arrived in Lunenburg, the Reverend Jean Baptiste Moreau he= ld the first service. He continued to conduct services on the "Parade" in t= he open until the completion of St. John's Church on the Parade in the following year.   St. John's Church 1754-1840 As built in 1754, St. John's conformed to the classical meetinghouse styl= e. Until they erected their own churches Lutherans and Presbyterians used th= e church for their services. Among the most popular of the rectors of this=   period was a Swede, the Reverend, Paulius Bryzelius, who preached in Engl= ish and German. His sermons were so moving, they caused many to shed tears. Gothic Revival   =46rom 1840 until near the end of the 19th century, St. John's was remark= ably transformed from a small meetinghouse into the much enlarged and architecturally arresting Victorian Gothic Church in which generations ha= ve worshiped. In the interior the flat plaster ceiling was opened and a hammer-beam roof installed. The congregation had Solomon Morash, a communicant and master craftsman, employ carpenter shipwrights to enlarge=   the chancel and put in new aisles. These renovations from the 1870s and 1880s created one of the most beautiful church interiors in the nation. = In the words of the Historic Sites and Monuments Board of Canada report: "St= =2E John's Anglican Church is extraordinary example of Gothic Revival architecture in Canada".   Lunenburg has the oldest tradition of interior decorative painting in Nov= a Scotia. The painting done inside St. John's was magnificent in its effect= , especially that of the ceiling of the chancel done in dark blue with gold=   stars. Beautiful stain glass windows, some dating from the 1870s added to=   the beautiful and spiritual effect that St. John's had on worshipers. Recognition   In 1993 the Province of Nova Scotia declared St. John's a registered heritage property. In 1995 the Historic Sites and Monuments Board of Can= ada declared St. John's a national historic site as a "distinctive example of=   the Gothic Revival style in Canadian Church architecture, and the buildin= g is an important anchor, symbolically and physically, in the town plan of Lunenburg". ~ Donation may be forwarded directly to: St. John's Church C/o PO Box 238 Lunenburg, Nova Scotia B0J 2C0 ~ In solidarity with the Church of St. John, Lunenburg, whose building was destroyed by fire on Hallowe'en, The Cathedral Church of All Saint has designated to the Congregation of St. John's, Offerings received at Chora= l Evensong 7pm Sunday, November 4th at the Cathedral Church, Tower Road, Halifax.    
(back) Subject: Re: The uninitiated and the layman audiences From: "douglas morgan" <dkmorgan76209@yahoo.com> Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2001 13:31:19 -0800 (PST)   Dear Ron:   Again you've hit the nail on the head.   Several years ago, I went to a recital that was played on a large, good organ in a hopelessly dead room by a keypunch operator who could play all the notes and none of the music. He started the recital with one of the most boring contemporary "compositions" I have ever heard. This noise went on and on, and finally ended. Alas, there were four movements; this was only the first.   Let's rectify this situation by presenting our programs not to academic organists, but to the general public in an interesting and musical way. They may be uninitiated, but they are the ones who pay for the organs and recital programs -- not the academic organists.   D. Keith Morgan   A man, who was sitting behind me, didn't want to come in the first place, but his wife dragged him down. At the end of this 20-minute fiasco, he turned to her and said, "This is the last time I'm ever going to an organ recital even if it takes this marriage to the divorce court." --- RonSeverin@aol.com wrote: > Dear Douglas and list > > I strongly second your post. When I, as an organist > go to a recital > the expectation is a variety interesting music, > registrational color, etc. > I have a good ear for what the layman likes to hear, > which appeals to > me also. Cacophony, dissonance, and utter decadence > in some so > called modern writing is noise and nothing more. The > Hindemith > Sonatas are dissonant but the writing is > contrapuntal, colorful, and > interesting to listen to. Something of that genre > sprinkled into a concert > is welcome and fun. I like warhorses, soft > introspecive pieces, Bach, > 18th century French and English pieces, Franck, that > kind of stuff. > People will come to a concert to hear organ music > especially if the > performer has a reputation for a well balanced. > interesting program. > People want to be touched in a variety of ways in a > single concert. > There are many 20th century composers who write well > crafted > music, and should be sprinkled into a concert as > well. People like > transcriptions. Strictly academic, heavy concerts > have been killing > off interest of people who would ordinarily attend, > even organists. > IMHO organists who play concerts, the most > successful of which, > communicate verbal program notes, and interact with > the concert goer. > Enthusiasm is contageous! > > Regards, > > Ron Severin > > "Pipe Up and Be Heard!" > PipeChat: A discussion List for pipe/digital > organs & related topics > HOMEPAGE : http://www.pipechat.org > List: mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org > Administration: mailto:admin@pipechat.org > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: mailto:requests@pipechat.org >     __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Find a job, post your resume. http://careers.yahoo.com  
(back) Subject: Tour damage tomorrow From: "Daniel Hopkins" <danielwh1@ns.sympatico.ca> Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 17:39:24 -0400   Sorry for keeping this thread of sorts going.But I might just add that = tommorrow I am going to be visiting the Church site in person.I hope to be = able to get a better perspective at least to the magnitude of what has = happened. Again thank you for your patience. Its possible that they might be able to salvage some of the organ The way the church burned its possible that some may have survived.If so = ,An Organist and a church member and I are going to check things out and = try to speed up the recovery rate Is there any pointers that I should pass on to them on removal of a = possibleywater damaged chest s and console If anything ,the chests and under may just be salvagable . I dont know = ablout the pipes I expect there is heat and water and smoke damage.Well = anyways tomorrow will tell. Is the sooner the better to remove a water damaged chest or is it any use = to even think of saving it?      
(back) Subject: Re: The uninitiated and the layman audiences From: "Hugh Drogemuller" <hdrogemuller@sympatico.ca> Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 17:28:16 -0500   Dear List,   I would like to come down on the side of balance in organ recital programing and performance. I think there is a place for both major works and some of the popular old war horses many of which are written around the use of a solo trumpet stop. I have real trouble with a program that is =   nothing but odds and sods lifted from major works presented with a = razzle dazzle approach that does no more than show off the performers tremendous abilities to have hands and feet flying up and down the keyboards in perfect time with no audible wrong notes. I left such a program about a week ago at the intermission. The performer =   was inaugurating a new organ that was touted to be one of the first French =   Romantic instruments by a well known builder of electronic organs. It = had the resources, some 50 plus stops over 3-manual plus pedal. Yet no major work of French Romantic literature was programmed ! A very verbose description of the material being presented that took about 15-minutes in the middle of the first half of the program didn't help. So I still don't know how well this organ does on the literature for which =   it is apparently designed. Some how I felt that the whole exercise was directed to the members of the Church to make them feel good that they had made the right decision to purchase this instrument. Musically the whole event was no more than smoke and mirrors. By the way, I think the instrument is quite good and it was enhanced by a favorable acoustic .   HD    
(back) Subject: Re: New Console Arrives From: <Myosotis51@aol.com> Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2001 17:33:11 EST   LLWheels@aol.com wrote:       > > http://www.webphotos.iwon.com/list_photos.asp?mi=3D3&smi=3D1&a=3D35588 > > I hope you enjoy the photos.     Larry,   Congratulations on the new baby! :-) Excellent photos, and great = captions.   Vicki  
(back) Subject: IRC tonight From: <quilisma@socal.rr.com> Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 16:18:35 -0800   9 p.m. Eastern time ... be there or be the topic of the gossip (grin).   Bud    
(back) Subject: Re: membership in the parish--off topic From: "Bob Elms" <elmsr@albanyis.com.au> Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 16:15:53 -0800   We had an experience in my city where the RC priest told the congregation at an ecumenical service in his church that he would serve all, and that it was up to the consciences of the non-Catholics as to whether they partook. We were later told that the Bishop hauled him over the coals. I still play at that church frequently but do not take communion with them. When I play at the local Anglican Church I am quite welcome to share in their communion. My home church is Uniting Church in Australia, a union of Methodist, Comgregationalist and most Presbyterian Churches. Bob Elms.     > I've been in situations where I was not welcome at the Lord's Table. In = one    
(back) Subject: Re: Membership in the parish--off topic From: <Wurlibird1@aol.com> Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2001 19:33:28 EST   Paul Emmons responds:     >My question is: given the doctrines that they hold AND the derisive = attitude >towards the members of this community that you hold, >why in the world would you WANT to to go to Communion there, and what = would >it mean to you if you did? (snip) <<   Admittedly I hold neither the academic nor ecclesiastic credentials to prosecute this subject from a position of authority. The doctrines of the =   congregation were not fully known by me until I made it known that I would =   truly desire to partake of the Sacraments during Communion. The derisive attitude to which you elude was a product of the reception I received, not = a precursor to my previously stated intentions nor desires. As a born again =   Christian, baptized and confirmed in the Christian faith, and possessing a =   penitent heart for sins committed, I did not feel that I was about to = partake of the Sacraments unworthily, as the Scripture so commands. None are = worthy except by the Grace of our Lord Jesus Christ.     >Whatever Communion is, it belongs to the group. You don't necessarily = join >any group simply by walking in off the street. <<   My presence hardly qualified by this example (to which I concur, incidentally). I was at the time serving for two months as replacement organist for this church and my Christianity and its attributes were thoroughly examined prior to my appointment.   My crack about the Delaware Punch and wafers would be out of line except = that these were the elements used and consecrated. Some literalists, certainly =   the subject congregation, appear to have exceptions to literal practice.   Was I offended? Yes! At the time I was very young and naive. Did I make = an issue of it? No! And I completed my appointment with no reference to the =   matter, though I must confess that playing "soft music" during Communion = as required might be considered by some as the offering of an infidel. = Maturity broadens one's wisdom and brings a greater degree of understanding, I = hope.   After Paul's comments, I returned to Bud's eloquent writing on the = subject. This may be one of those rare times when everybody is correct; Bud in his dissertation, Paul in his observations, the subject church in its firm position, and myself in admitting my lack of fundamental understanding in = the knowledge of the matter.   Now, don't we all feel better? :)   Best wishes, Jim Pitts  
(back) Subject: Re: IRC tonight From: "Mack" <mack02445@mindspring.com> Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 20:09:09 -0500   In addition, RTRFM is back on Real Player directly as in the past join us = for gossip and Theatre Organ Time.   Cheers, Mack   11/2/2001 7:18:35 PM, quilisma@socal.rr.com wrote:   >9 p.m. Eastern time ... be there or be the topic of the gossip (grin). > >Bud > > >"Pipe Up and Be Heard!" >PipeChat: A discussion List for pipe/digital organs & related topics >HOMEPAGE : http://www.pipechat.org >List: mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org >Administration: mailto:admin@pipechat.org >Subscribe/Unsubscribe: mailto:requests@pipechat.org > >        
(back) Subject: Re: The uninitiated and the layman audiences From: "Mandy Glass" <amadpoet@lycos.com> Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 19:37:38 -0600   If y=92all will forgive my rambling impressions of this thread...   I've been dragging my mom, who has no formal training in music, to = concerts for the last six years and have heard all sorts of comments from = her as to what she likes or dislikes. What I find interesting is that when = we go to an organ recital, she tends to like both the warhorses and the = more "elitist" music (to maintain the terminology of this thread. When you = come down to it, if the "laymen" don't know the difference between = "academic" music and audience-pleasing showpieces, then IS there any = difference?   I probably shouldn't post a remark like that, but what the hey, it's = Friday. :o) Mandy       Make a difference, help support the relief efforts in the U.S. http://clubs.lycos.com/live/events/september11.asp  
(back) Subject: Re: Acoustics 101 From: "Jon" <sparky@CEINetworks.com> Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 20:48:06 -0500   Remember, the organ MUST have an "ahh" vowel sound. If you take away the brightness of the "ahh" you lose everything... Regardless of room = acoustics.   ~jon   On 11/2/01 2:51 PM, "Emmons, Paul" <pemmons@wcupa.edu> wrote:   >> High audio frequencies, with their short physical wavelengths, are more > easily reflected and / or absorbed by smaller surfaces than low = frequencies. > > That is the way I hear it, too. > > Now my question: > > Similar statements are made about most sound-absorbing material in the = room: > they soak up the high frequencies more than the the low frequencies. > > It is possible to install sound-absorbing material that is more = even-handed. > This is better for music as well as unamplified speech, but because it = is > more expensive it is seldom found. > > So, in the typical case, if the room is dead, it absorbs the high > frequencies in particular. > > Why, then, do we also say that in such rooms top-heavy organ design or > voicing is usually unsuccessful, and a more foundational approach is = needed; > whereis the reverberent rooms are the ones that like a brilliant sound > source? > > Paul > > > "Pipe Up and Be Heard!" > PipeChat: A discussion List for pipe/digital organs & related topics > HOMEPAGE : http://www.pipechat.org > List: mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org > Administration: mailto:admin@pipechat.org > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: mailto:requests@pipechat.org > >    
(back) Subject: Re: Tour damage tomorrow From: "Jon" <sparky@CEINetworks.com> Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 20:52:35 -0500   Let them scrap the organ. Insurance should cover a new one. Oh wait! insurance is not set up right (as is the case in most churchs). I still think you should scrap it all. If it is a poor church, they probably = would be better off with an electronic (preferably not an allen hehe). If the opposite is true, they will pool their resources to rebuild what is = damaged.   ~jon~   On 11/2/01 4:39 PM, "Daniel Hopkins" <danielwh1@ns.sympatico.ca> wrote:   > Sorry for keeping this thread of sorts going.But I might just add that > tommorrow I am going to be visiting the Church site in person.I hope to = be > able to get a better perspective at least to the magnitude of what has > happened. > Again thank you for your patience. > Its possible that they might be able to salvage some of the organ > The way the church burned its possible that some may have survived.If so = ,An > Organist and a church member and I are going to check things out and try = to > speed up the recovery rate > Is there any pointers that I should pass on to them on removal of a > possibleywater damaged chest s and console > If anything ,the chests and under may just be salvagable . I dont know = ablout > the pipes I expect there is heat and water and smoke damage.Well anyways > tomorrow will tell. > Is the sooner the better to remove a water damaged chest or is it any = use to > even think of saving it? > > > > "Pipe Up and Be Heard!" > PipeChat: A discussion List for pipe/digital organs & related topics > HOMEPAGE : http://www.pipechat.org > List: mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org > Administration: mailto:admin@pipechat.org > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: mailto:requests@pipechat.org > >