Sam And the biggest value of the recitals is the discipline required to learn something, polish it, and go through the trauma of recording, knowing that someone is going to listen. That is a value you get without making any comments.
Thank you for your insights, especially this one. Trauma is very accurate!
I am very happy with this discussion, because, even when it was clear for me at PW that no comments were required, I still felt many times that I should at least comment those who commented me.
The problem for me with commenting is that unless I see the notes and listen to several people playing that same piece, I cannot come up with any good comments - except when a piece really captures my heart. And that is not very often the case.
But just like Sgisela, I do listen to all the pieces, and I enjoy listening! So thank you all of you who submitted. 
*
... feeling like the pianist on the Titanic ...
Sam I pay professionals to tell me how bad I play
OMG this comment made my morning! 
It’s so true though!!
I don't want, or need, critical comments from my peers.
This was always my feeling at PW so I was happy we when implemented the thing where you state the kind of comments you want. Which we’re now doing here as well, of course.
I have a teacher who knows where I’m at, what I’m good at, what I struggle with. And who knows the best of my playing as well as the worse. But one time at PW someone made a comment about one of my pieces that, to me, sounded like they thought I didn’t know some detail about how to play. I did, in fact, know that thing they were telling me, but wasn’t able to do it in the recording (red dot syndrome and all that). So rather than being helpful, the comment just made me feel frustrated and bad.
I also always wanted to treat the recitals as a recital, not as a piano lesson. So if someone liked the piece, liked my playing etc., then I would love to know that. But feedback? No, thank you, that’s what I pay my teacher for.
For those who do treat the recitals more like a piano lesson, great, I have no problem with that. So that’s why specifying the kind of comments we each want works so well.
twocats I don't want to be the person who posts a video and then doesn't take the time to listen and comment to everyone else.
You are already not that person! You give support and feedback to so many people.
I've said in the past that I don't care much for posters who like to receive attention but never give it. My strong-ish emotions stem partly from my time as a mod on r/piano, where we had to moderate many Youtube pianists trying to promote their channels. So they would contribute their music to the forum, but not contribute to conversations (other than about themselves). And of course the conversations are what makes forums nice to visit!
Speaking as a regular person and not a mod, the things I like to see recital participants do are:
Anyways I enjoy hearing you play, reading what you've written, and if occasionally you don't have time to contribute in the form of feedback to other recital participants, that's totally understandable.
These are the stats for the February 2025 recital (#3 / #77):
28 PianoWorld total submissions
25 Piano|Tell total submissions
5 equal submissions in both forums
7 performers submitted different pieces in both forums
(48 different submissions in both forums)
navindra You may use the ABF template to specify the Comment Policy:
No Comments Please!
Polite Comments only: no suggestions for improvement please.
General Comments only: Polite, supportive, suggestions for improvement.
Critical Comments: Anything goes!
I have always been confused by "General Comments only: Polite, supportive, suggestions for improvement."
Is general comment the opposite of a specific comment? Then what is an example of a specific comment that people might not like?
Up until just now I interpreted the second part to mean "Polite [comments], supportive [comments], [and] suggestions for improvement." It didn't quite make sense, but I left it alone. I just now realized that it probably means "polite and supportive suggestions for improvement". And maybe "general comments" means "you can also make other kinds of comments that are not suggestions for improvement".
But if so, then I think it needs to be reworded in the template to be clearer. How about "Polite and supportive suggestions for improvement, but no criticism."
With a few more small edits:
You may use the template to specify the Comment Policy:
No Comments Please!
No suggestions for improvement please.
Polite and supportive suggestions for improvement, but no criticism.
Anything goes!
rsl12 I wrote that comment policy for the online recitals in the Adult Beginners Forum at Piano World. It was in response to some of the performers getting upset over what they perceived as unwanted critical comments. Before that we had no comment policy, so it was definitely an improvement. I always wanted to encourage participation as much as possible, with an emphasis on those people afraid of participating because of fear over what commenters would say.
Of course, PianoTell is free to develop its own comment policy if the one I came up with for PianoWorld is too confusing!
@rsl12 maybe it’s because I’m used to the comment options since they’ve been used at PW for so long, but I feel like they’re clear. Also, with your edits, you removed the parts before the colon, but I think those parts are crucial…
For example, with the second option (the one I always choose), if it just said “no suggestions for improvement,” we lose the sense of saying, comments are encouraged.
To me, the core is:
No Comments Please!
Polite Comments only
General Comments only
Critical Comments
Then the parts after each descriptor function as extra info. So if you think that extra info needs tweaking, I’m ok with that, but I would suggest we keep the descriptors out at the front. How about just adding “no criticism” to the third option? IOW:
No Comments Please!
Polite Comments only: no suggestions for improvement please.
General Comments only: Polite, supportive, suggestions for improvement, but no criticism.
Critical Comments: Anything goes!
ShiroKuro No Comments Please!
Polite Comments only
General Comments only
Critical Comments
I don't have the history with PW that you guys had, so in my mind, all comments should always be polite 
And personally I can't imagine not wanting any comment when you take the trouble to participate, though I appreciate not everybody thinks like me (thank goodness for that).
I confess, I'm extremely partial to rsl's suggestion. Or even, given that "be polite and supportive at all times" should be a core policy and thus a given:
No Comments Please!
No suggestions for improvement please.
Suggestions for improvement, but no criticism.
Anything goes!
Since everyone can post what they want anyway as a comment policy on their own pieces (it's not a drop down selection is what I'm trying to say), if someone wants to add something specific, they can do so anyway right?
That said, I'm okay with anything that gets decided. Just spouting some suggestions here
Sophia all comments should always be polite
I definitely agree with this! That all comments will be polite should definitely be a given.
My only concern is that this:
No suggestions for improvement please
Doesn't give the impression that comments themselves are indeed welcome. Perhaps if it needs to be changed (and I'm not convinced that it does) it could be
Comments welcome, but no suggestions for improvement please.
Regarding this:
Since everyone can post what they want anyway as a comment policy on their own pieces (it's not a drop down selection is what I'm trying to say), if someone wants to add something specific, they can do so anyway right?
This is a good point, but the only reason it's not a drop down menu is because that functionality isn't available. I would suggest that people not alter these comment preferences, because it would get confusing for those responding to have to decipher different comment-requests and make sure there's no misunderstanding. When everyone selects from among the same four options, it reduces the likelihood of that.
So back to the articulation of the core options...
No Comments Please!
Polite Comments only
General Comments only
Critical Comments
I think you're right, @Sophia, the problem (or at least part of the problem) is that all comments should be polite... so I'm struggling with a good way to articulate the difference between options 2 and 3... (and by good, I mean clear and also concise)...
I guess I think maybe I would advocate for this set:
No comments please!
Comments welcome, but no suggestions for improvement please.
General comments only: supportive suggestions for improvement, but no criticism.
Critical comments: Anything goes!
What does everyone think about that?
If people think we need to keep "polite" in there, then this:
No comments please!
Polite comments welcome, but no suggestions for improvement please.
General comments only: polite and supportive suggestions for improvement, but no criticism.
Critical comments: Anything goes!
I'm definitely okay with anything that gets decided. I tend to be a trusting soul that sort of expects to receive the same treatment as the way I (try to) treat others. So far I always picked "anything goes" and no one has chucked me under a bus yet 
Of course we're all humans and none of us are perfect in our dealings with others, but overall, it seems to work well
No comments please!
Comments welcome, but no suggestions for improvement please.
General comments only: supportive suggestions for improvement, but no criticism.
Critical comments: Anything goes!
Would work for me! By adding the explicit phrase "polite" in two of the policies, that might give the impression that "Anything goes" has no need for politeness. But honestly everyone in this forum is mature enough that I can't imagine that ever to happen. Bottom line: in either scenario I don't think the phrase "polite" is needed, except perhaps as a generic guideline.
Reading this as a software developer, it basically means, there are 3 different kinds of comments:
In therory, every comment can contain a set of those comments, meaning we have 8 comment permutations in total (23=8). We assume, that everybody who allows suggestions for improvements is maybe open for flattering comments, too. And everybody who allows for criticism is open for the other two as well; this makes up the list of we currently have.
** software developer mode=off **
What I do not like is this list without further explanation:
No Comments Please!
Polite Comments only
General Comments only
Critical Comments
No Comments Please! Ok, this one is clear.
Polite Comments only All comments should be polite. Actually, shouldn't this be a forum rule? I mean even critical comments can be polite. IMO, this does not make too much of sense.
General Comments only What are general comments? And if this is something different than a polite comment, then polite comments are not allowed? IMO, this is nonsense.
Critical Comments Maybe the 2nd best out of this list. But actually it means all kinds of comments, including critical ones. And of course flattering comments, too. Still, I would stick to the original phrase: "Critical comments; anything goes"
Another finding is the difference between suggestions for improvement and critical comments.
An example for suggestion for improvement is: "You should play this piece slower, because then it would sound nicer."
An example for citical comment is: "This piece was played too fast. I have heard slow versions, and they sound nicer."
Basically both comments are the same. If one gives a suggestion for an improvement, it contains a critical comment as well; indirectly.
If I would make this list, it would shrink it to this:
And to get rid of the word "flattering"
WieWaldi I think what’s missing in your three options is the distinction between comment without playing feedback/suggestions, and comments with playing feedback/suggestions. And making that distinction was one of the biggest reasons these comment options were creating at PW way back when.
I think it’s important to keep that distinction, so we really do need four options.
So I do think this is the best approach:
ShiroKuro
No comments please!
Comments welcome, but no suggestions for improvement please.
General comments only: supportive suggestions for improvement, but no criticism.
Critical comments: Anything goes!
@rsl12 you started this 
what do you think, now that we’ve had several comments about it?
(Comments about comments, har… 
)
Respectfully I disagree to you, because
ShiroKuro comment without playing feedback/suggestions,
"only positive comments, please" resembles this. Of course, we can add the "without playing feedback/suggestions" as further explanation.
ShiroKuro and comments with playing feedback/suggestions.
"all comments; anything goes" is my take on that. This includes playing feedback, supportive suggestions for improvement and of course critics.
ShiroKuro I think it’s important to keep that distinction, so we really do need four options.
No. Three is enough. The fourth option "Critical comments: Anything goes!" is no difference to my 3rd option "All comments; anything goes". I already stated that criticism and suggestions for improvement are actually the same. There is no difference. You may argue that criticism isn't polite, that criticism is harsh. But this should be a general forum rule, anyway. And if someone writes a negative comment like "I didn't like it!", then this person is offensive. No matter what comment-policy we have. And because we are all adults, I strongly believe, this won't happen anyway.
Another reason I would stick to 3 very distincitve bullet points over 4 points with a mushy separation: It is not a dropdown box - everyone can extend with own words if this isn't detailed enough.
Anyway: "Critical comments: Anything goes!". Is this the request to write only critical stuff? Feel free to use the language as you want?" Or does it mean I want to read criticism, but if you want to write kind words, it is ok as well.
I'd stick to my short take:
No comments, please
Only positive comments, please
All comments; anything goes
The detailed take would be:
No comments, please.
Only positive comments, please no criticism or suggestions for improvement .
All comments; anything goes! Even critical comments.
What a lovely discussion, thank you rsl for starting this! So, after thinking it over, I would agree with WieWaldi.
ShiroKuro distinction between comment without playing feedback/suggestions, and comments with playing feedback/suggestions
I am actually getting a little puzzled about this too now. Could you mention an example (without getting too personal of course, lol) of why this distiction is so very important that it's the sole reason for implementing them as separate rules? Because I am not able to come up with any scenario where this becomes an issue.
For example a comment such as "Overall very smoothly played, but you might want to bring out the phrases more", where would that fit? Or "You might want to play it a little faster, this is a marching tune." Or "It was a bit uneven here and there, a metronome could be helpful". Or "Try to bring out the melody more by playing the RH a little louder while keeping the LH down."
Would those be critical, or fall into supportive suggestions for improvements? Or where does it go from "suggestion for improvement" to "critical comment"? I'd say that depends on the tolerance level of the player. Which could lead to some hurt feelings, if the commenter has a higher tolerance level than the player.
With WieWaldi's three points, a suggestion like above could only be mentioned if they pick "even critical comments". Because if they pick the one before, they want no suggestions whatsoever. Couldn't be clearer. They all fall into the 3rd category:
WieWaldi No comments, please.
Only positive comments, please no criticism or suggestions for improvement .
All comments; anything goes! Even critical comments.
Which leaves the second one (only positive comments) for nothing but praise... "Well played", "I enjoyed that very much" or even "What a lovely painting on the wall behind your piano".
I think we all agree that "oh boy, your tempo was all over the place and your fingers are as elegant as sausages" is unacceptable, period. I have NEVER seen such a comment anyway, I too believe we're all way too mature to say that! So even "critical comments" should be courteous and gentle, as well as politely stated.
Sophia ShiroKuro distinction between comment without playing feedback/suggestions, and comments with playing feedback/suggestions
I am actually getting a little puzzled about this too now. Could you mention an example (without getting too personal of course, lol) of why this distiction is so very important that it's the sole reason for implementing them as separate rules?
The distinction between comment without playing feedback/suggestions, and comments with playing feedback/suggestions might look something like this:
Sophia "Overall very smoothly played, but you might want to bring out the phrases more", where would that fit? Or "You might want to play it a little faster, this is a marching tune." Or "It was a little uneven here and there, a metronome could be helpful". Or "Try to melody more by playing the RH a little louder while keeping the LH down."
I would call these mostly "supportive suggestions for improvement," although I suppose when there's less "you did this really well, but could improve on that" and mostly only "you could improve on that" then it maybe shifts from "supportive feedback" more towards "critical comments." But as you say
I'd say that depends on the tolerance level of the player.
There's a lot of fuzziness in the boundaries between "supportive feedback" and critical feedback."
ShiroKuro The distinction between comment without playing feedback/suggestions, and comments with playing feedback/suggestions might look something like this:
I think we can agree on that. The line between both is very clear.
My point is the difference between Comment w/ (supportive) feedback and Anything goes/critical comment. You wrote two similar examples, but the latter one had a harsher tone. And more of the suggestions/critics. Albeit, the phrase "You might try bring out the dynamics more." is a critic about missing dynamics. Just phrased very politely. And this is what I'd expect anyway in a forum.
ShiroKuro Thanks so much for providing those examples
So, taking them one by one, I'll ty to match them to WieWaldi's suggested scale:
ShiroKuro "wow, I really enjoyed that, it's a beautiful piece and you played it really well"
That would fall under "Only positive comments, please no criticism or suggestions for improvement ."
"wow, I really enjoyed that, it's a beautiful piece and you played it really well. You might try bring out the dynamics more."
"This piece is supposed to be a march, so I recommend you practice with a metronome and make sure you bring the tempo up. Also, the second half is supposed to be forte, but it sounds like you're barely playing mezzopiano. So you really want to work on the dynamics as well"
Those two would both fall under "All comments; anything goes! Even critical comments."
But, thinking about it some more, you could even change his guideline to something like "All comments; anything goes! Suggestions for improvement welcome."
This actually emphasises the fact that the performer would appreciate pointers on how they can do better. It's really not necessary to include the "critical comments" phrase, because suggestions for improvement are by definition critical. And we already established that we all need to be nice at all times too ^_^
In that case, we might be able to simplify the comment policy even more:
No comments, please.
Only positive comments, please no criticism or suggestions.
All comments; anything goes! Suggestions for improvement welcome.
How's that?
