Jump to content
  • The Computer Audiophile
    The Computer Audiophile

    Audiophile Style State of the Union

    Over the years the Audiophile Style forum has been an invaluable resource to many audiophiles and music lovers alike. This is all due to the contributions from members of the community from around the world, who freely give their time to help others and enjoy this wonderful shared interest we call audiophilia. Whether one's interests are mainly music or gear or a split between the two, matters not. Audiophile Style is about increasing one's enjoyment of music, gear, and the community in general. Nobody needs more negativity in their lives or more judgement of their personal pursuits. The world is full of that nonsense. Audiophile Style is a place to leave all that behind, to forget about one's mentally or physically draining day, and to immerse oneself in that which has brought joy to so many for so long. 

     

    Recently the scales have tipped a bit too far toward snark, combativeness, imposition, and confrontation. All of this is killing the vibe and the culture of Audiophile Style, pushing it more toward the 4chan of audio rather than a place to learn, share, and have fun. When I don't want to read some threads because I know the usual suspects will be on their high horses, something needs to change. When members of the community can't even have an enjoyable conversation without being rudely interrupted by people with an opposing agenda, something needs to change.

     

    We've had a very limited set of forum rules since our inception in 2007. These rules just keep honest people honest. Others find ways to bend them as far as possible, seeking to impose their own view of how this site should be run and what topics the conversations should include. For the most part, more rules won't change behavior. There are folks on the extreme ends of the audio continuum who just can't live with those who disagree, and that's a problem. 

     

    I've always encouraged people to post whatever opinion they hold or facts they have about all audio topics. However, this has to be done either in its own thread or in a thread where the information is desired. Those on the extreme ends just can't live with this either. When given the opportunity to self-police, the extremists can't stop themselves from posting in topics where the vast majority of people have zero interest in what they have to say. It's the equivalent of walking into a classical music party uninvited and putting on a Rage Against The Machine playlist. Sure, it's fabulous music but the time and place are wrong.  

     

    The bottom line is this, Audiophile Style is about increasing one's enjoyment of this wonderful hobby. I look forward to the 99% of members of this community working toward this goal and having a good time. 

     

     

    What's Changing?

     

    There is a new sub-forum called Objective-Fi. This is the place for objective audio discussions. It will be free from subjectivist appeals to authority, anecdotes, and unscientific experience threads and comments. This will free-up the objective-minded members of this community from going in circles trying to explain why something just can't be, for the 100th time. 

     

    This new sub-forum doesn't mean that the rest of the forum is entirely subjective only. Because audio is an inherently subjective pursuit, it makes no sense to create a subjective-Fi sub-forum equivalent to the Objective-Fi sub-forum either. The reality is that life isn't black & white. The other forum areas will continue on as they've been for years. If there is an objective challenge to one's subjective experience, the comment(s) will be moved to the Objective-Fi sub-forum for the discussion to continue unabated. 

     

    In essence the rules haven't changed, but now there is a place for discussions to be had where people on both sides of an issue can examine it and discuss it without turning everyone off and ruining peoples' days. 

     

    Please remember, the problem isn't what's said, it's the place in which it's said. 


    Thanks to everyone who has provided feedback in an effort to bring the enjoyment and fun back into our pursuit of HiFi and great music. Audiophile Style wouldn't exist without the wonderful members of this community

     


    - Chris
     



    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    2 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

    Don't you think it's obvious in most cases? Serious question. 

     

     

    It's "obvious" in a different way to different people.

    For some it's an "obvious" invitation to contribute constructively. Or to challenge conspiratorially. Both of which are socially and intellectually conducive.

    To others it's an "obvious" opportunity to wind people up.

    So yes it's obvious to just about all of us.

    And a pity that "conducive" motives need to be protected, such that everyone can have a good shot at enjoying themselves.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    Just now, pkane2001 said:

     

    Sounds to me like you are deciding on what belongs in which forum based primarily on tone, Chris. If Mans' answer had no snark then it's ok to for the general forum, but if not, then it belongs in Objective one, is that right?

     

    Let's just rename the Objective-Fi forum to "Time-out for misbehaving children".  Seems more descriptive. And yes, that was snark ;)

     

    Thanks for the feedback. I'll take your question as more of a comment expressing your distaste and disagreement with this move. I'd never implement such a system as described. 

     

     

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    1 minute ago, Jim Sylva said:

    When is being snarky ever necessary?

     

    It's not a necessity, but an indulgence :)

     

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    10 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

     

    That's not it. I was following up on your answer to Mans, and it made little sense to me in the context of what you described. Sorry if I tried to use some humor to illustrate the point.

     

    To restate: is it OK to have objectively-sourced information posted in the subjective area of the forum? Ever? Or can it be done but only without snark? Or only if the subjective audience doesn't mind the answer? And is it the whole audience, at least 10 readers, or any one who complains that triggers the move to Objective-Fi? When and how is the decision made that an answer doesn't qualify for the subjective part of the forum?

    Hi Paul, this is where people are going to have to be comfortable with a little gray in their lives. Nothing is black and white. 

     

    In a USB cable listening experience thread, even if someone was totally nice about it, the place isn't right to "show" people why they can't be hearing what they're reporting. 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    3 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

     

    It's not a necessity, but an indulgence :)

     

    I agree.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    20 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

    To restate: is it OK to have objectively-sourced information posted in the subjective area of the forum? Ever? Or can it be done but only without snark? Or only if the subjective audience doesn't mind the answer? And is it the whole audience, at least 10 readers, or any one who complains that triggers the move to Objective-Fi? When and how is the decision made that an answer doesn't qualify for the subjective part of the forum?

     

    These seem fair questions to me.

     

    I am not any authority here. But my suggestion would be to imagine being at the dinner table with your in-laws - knowing CC is standing by as doorman/bouncer. Think of the presence of the in-laws not so much a stifle, but an opportunity to *really* impress.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    22 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

     

    Hi Chris,

     

    That's makes sense, but I'm still missing something. How is this any different than what was already in place?

     

    It was already the case that the owner of the thread could declare it as subjective-only. And, if someone misbehaved on such a thread, the owner could remove their posts. Others could complain to you and also get these posts moved/removed.

     

    With the change, I'm still unclear as to what and where I can post, since it is, as you say, a gray area. And if I have to worry about offending someone's sensibilities by sharing my knowledge and experience (without snark) then I'd rather go elsewhere. I can always count on at least one person to disagree with everything I post, even though he's on my ignore list :)

     

     

    The difference now is that the interjections or fundamental disagreements now have their own sub-forum and there's a sub-forum for people to start objective conversations in a place free from, as some call them, anti-vaxxer style comments. 

     

    We tried giving the OP the ability to police threads with limited success. We tried telling people to create their own threads if they disagreed with something their comments would be seen as a thread-crap. There's no silver bullet. Now, we can move comments and threads into a place where everyone knows they are allowed. 

     

    If you're unclear where to post you have the option of asking me (probably time consuming for both of us), doing your best to select the right spot, or just giving up on the new rules and going elsewhere. Seems to me the risk / reward of the middle option isn't too terrible and will likely help us all get to a happy medium. That said, if the change is a bridge too far, I understand. 

     

     

     

    19 minutes ago, mansr said:

    The implication here is that only the awful, terrible "objectivists" ever misbehave. The nice, friendly subjectivists are only trying to help when they are repeatedly rude, belittling, and condescending, even after being told to go away.

     

    Not at all. Perhaps you missed all my examples of SandyK's inappropriate posts and the fact that this now gives you a place free from his snark and anger. There are many threads with "objectivist" OPs who have mod rights to the thread. They wanted this just to remove his posts. 

     

     

     

     

    18 minutes ago, mansr said:

    It's quite clear to me now. We're only allowed to speak at the kids' table.

     

    If objective information and science is what you consider the kids table, it's a table I'd be happy to sit at. 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    1 minute ago, Norton said:

    If this is simply notice that “objectivist” incursions into  threads which are clearly about subjective experience (e.g. “what’s the best sounding USB cable you have heard”) will be moved, that seems fair enough, as does moderating other off topic or antagonistic contributions.

     

    But if this means that threads which have an objective thrust from the outset (e.g.”what’s the best measuring DAC”) can only be started  in the one subforum, or if objectivist responses to a neutral thread (e.g. “is there a difference between USB cables”) are also moved, that seems unfair to me.


    I appreciate where you are coming from, but what’s good about this forum is the breadth of opinions and approaches.  I certainly think more critically about audio choices now because of objectivist contributions (at their best).

     

    I'm with you 100%

     

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Create an account or sign in to comment

    You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create an account

    Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

    Register a new account

    Sign in

    Already have an account? Sign in here.

    Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...