Where's ESLdude?

[mayhem13]

I'm hoping Dennis didn't bale out. Regardless if you or I have disagreed with his viewpoint, he's brought some extremely valuable info to the forum and IMO CA is a better place because of him.........

[sandyk]

I'm hoping Dennis didn't bale out. Regardless if you or I have disagreed with his viewpoint, he's brought some extremely valuable info to the forum and IMO CA is a better place because of him.........

I agree.

We had a few differences on line,but offline I had many pleasant exchanges with Dennis.

Overall, we were in agreement on far many more things than those we didn't agree about.

Alex

[esldude]

Thank you gentlemen for thinking of me. I appreciate the compliments.

 

To keep it succinct, I feel that despite his claims to the contrary, Chris' recent guidelines are not balanced or even handed. I intended to watch and decide if they effectively would be or not. When the very next day two posters write:

 

This is a subjectivist thread...........Shut F up! after being given some very rational and not at all controversial hints as to the OP's question......and the OP was one of those who wrote the above statement.....And then Chris does nothing, well it pretty clearly answers wgscott's question as to whether objectivists were welcome at CA.

 

Just for common courtesy regardless of anything else I would have expected some warning from Chris. He has banned people for less. And this after Chris said he preferred minimal moderation, but would be moderating more closely for a period of time.

 

So I won't say I will never take part here again nor that I won't look in from time to time. But I don't feel like beating my head against a brick wall when apparently more than half the people don't welcome the input I have to offer.

 

Many fine people here on CA and I feel I learned more than I have contributed. Thanks to those people.

[JohnMH]

I also miss your lucid posts and hope you don't feel driven away from CA.

 

Best wishes.

[mayhem13]

Thank you gentlemen for thinking of me. I appreciate the compliments.

 

To keep it succinct, I feel that despite his claims to the contrary, Chris' recent guidelines are not balanced or even handed. I intended to watch and decide if they effectively would be or not. When the very next day two posters write:

 

This is a subjectivist thread...........Shut F up! after being given some very rational and not at all controversial hints as to the OP's question......and the OP was one of those who wrote the above statement.....And then Chris does nothing, well it pretty clearly answers wgscott's question as to whether objectivists were welcome at CA.

 

Just for common courtesy regardless of anything else I would have expected some warning from Chris. He has banned people for less. And this after Chris said he preferred minimal moderation, but would be moderating more closely for a period of time.

 

So I won't say I will never take part here again nor that I won't look in from time to time. But I don't feel like beating my head against a brick wall when apparently more than half the people don't welcome the input I have to offer.

 

Many fine people here on CA and I feel I learned more than I have contributed. Thanks to those people.

 

If Chris was in fact aware of the posts you mention ( which were aimed at me!) I too would be a bit disappointed as I was banned for less as well......but hey, I've got a thick skin.....Maybe there's an underlying reason that heavy handed new world CA moderation turned a deaf ear?

[DigiPete]

Thank you gentlemen for thinking of me. I appreciate the compliments.

 

. . . When the very next day two posters write: This is a subjectivist thread...........Shut F up!

 

 

That kind of behavior in uncalled for no matter the reason!!!

 

Did you consider using the "Report Post" button?

Chris may be a rockstar, but he is not super-human ;-)

 

 

Many fine people here on CA and I feel I learned more than I have contributed. Thanks to those people.

 

 

Right back at you!

[sandyk]

Guys

I doubt very much that Chris did see that highly objectionable comment. He may have had business commitments or some other very good reason why he missed seeing that particular post. Others may have ignored replying to those comments, in the expectation that Chris would have intervened.

 

Dennis

Please do not take that omission as evidence that Chris does not want any input from people like yourself.

Regards

Alex

[esldude]

I sent Chris a PM listing post #13 and #14 as those with the comments in that thread. I asked if that is what he had in mind (that I didn't think it was), and if it met the new guidelines.

 

He never even replied to me.

 

I didn't use the report post button, perhaps I should have.

[Paul R]

(*sigh*) Dennis, you are part of the C.A. family - I doubt anyone would want to see you go. So go start a nice controversial thread or two. As my Dad might have said - "Boy, you just ain't happy lessen you are arguing with somebody..." Put a thick North Florida accent on that to get the full flavor.

 

Just remember this is like a family in some ways, and other people get their feelings hurt too. (grin)

 

I would say I could hear you hissing like a teapot over that one (not really ) but I have a bit of an ear infection and I can barely hear myself think right now! Can't tell if that is you or just the hissing in my ears...

 

-Paul

 

 

I sent Chris a PM listing post #13 and #14 as those with the comments in that thread. I asked if that is what he had in mind (that I didn't think it was), and if it met the new guidelines.

 

He never even replied to me.

 

I didn't use the report post button, perhaps I should have.

[Daudio]

I was the one who posted, the others were quotes. My post was in response to this message:

 

Originally Posted by mayhem13

"CA has become a bit cynical so maybe this question is outta line but...

 

ARE YOU KIDDING' ME!'"

 

 

And, Dennis, you didn't post all of my post, nor do you seem to understand what was going on in that thread.

 

My post has been deleted (so Chris did something), so I will reconstruct it as best as I can:

 

"This is a subjectivist thread. If you don't have anything to contribute, Shut the F up!"

The OP asked a subjective question, and was looking for a subjective answer. Interestingly, Julf contributed some constructive comments from the objective side, and only got a little snarky

 

After all the recent subjectist/objectivist battles, and the Civility thread, I just got kindda mad at someone belittling subjective terminology (which has formality and history, re. the Stereophile Audio Glossary link). It was rude, out of line, and had no place in a 'subjectivist' thread. Just the kind of disrespectable behavior that damages the CA community. and sometimes you have to go a little overboard just have to get someones attention...

Of course objectivists are welcome at CA, just not rude, immature behavior. That should be obvious.

 

So if I need to be banned, so-be-it. The S/N ration has been going down here of late with all these useless squabbles and nasty posts.

 

 

... the very next day two posters write:

 

This is a subjectivist thread...........Shut F up! after being given some very rational and not at all controversial hints as to the OP's question......and the OP was one of those who wrote the above statement.....And then Chris does nothing, well it pretty clearly answers wgscott's question as to whether objectivists were welcome at CA.

 

Just for common courtesy regardless of anything else I would have expected some warning from Chris. He has banned people for less. And this after Chris said he preferred minimal moderation, but would be moderating more closely for a period of time...

[mayhem13]

Interesting.........deleted huh.

 

Now back to our scheduled program.

[Paul R]

Hi Dave - I think you were pretty brave, speaking up honestly about something that aggravated you. It resonated with some other folks too. Part of what makes us all so different and interesting I suppose.

 

Makes it worthwile to spend time hanging out with each other.

 

But it is probably time to let it go now, yes? Goes for me and other passionate people here too, I think.

 

Paul

[Brian A]

...Many fine people here on CA and I feel I learned more than I have contributed. Thanks to those people...

I must admit my participation on this site too has dropped down to 'lurker' level. It's just a personal interest thing; I am happy with the new level to which I've raised my system and I've focused back on the music rather than the equipment.

 

To me, the zenith was the Null Test thread, where I really enjoyed bantering with esldude. Thank you for that. (I've always smiled at the moniker, which my brain sees as "English as Second Language Dude").

[mayhem13]

I was the one who posted, the others were quotes. My post was in response to this message:

 

Originally Posted by mayhem13

"CA has become a bit cynical so maybe this question is outta line but...

 

ARE YOU KIDDING' ME!'"

 

 

And, Dennis, you didn't post all of my post, nor do you seem to understand what was going on in that thread.

 

My post has been deleted (so Chris did something), so I will reconstruct it as best as I can:

 

"This is a subjectivist thread. If you don't have anything to contribute, Shut the F up!"

The OP asked a subjective question, and was looking for a subjective answer. Interestingly, Julf contributed some constructive comments from the objective side, and only got a little snarky

 

After all the recent subjectist/objectivist battles, and the Civility thread, I just got kindda mad at someone belittling subjective terminology (which has formality and history, re. the Stereophile Audio Glossary link). It was rude, out of line, and had no place in a 'subjectivist' thread. Just the kind of disrespectable behavior that damages the CA community. and sometimes you have to go a little overboard just have to get someones attention...

Of course objectivists are welcome at CA, just not rude, immature behavior. That should be obvious.

 

So if I need to be banned, so-be-it. The S/N ration has been going down here of late with all these useless squabbles and nasty posts.

 

My post had absolutely nothing to do with you and your innate response was totally outta line......bottom line. If I would have responded in like I would have been suspended or banned...all things not being equal.

 

And again, the actual POINT of THIS thead concerns Dennis and his recent lack of participation. Your post 'was' water under the bridge.

[mav52]

ESLdude come on down, your missed.

[mitchco]

ESLdude come on down, your missed.

 

+1

[chg]

Are objectivists unwelcome or are guys who constantly cause trouble unwelcome? Your minds are so consumed with your agenda you can't even see the difference. Stop trying to hide behind this accusation about objectivists not being welcome. It's just a smoke screen and guilt trip that a few of you use so that you can continue your destructive agenda unchallenged. Nearly every thread started, or reply made by some of the trouble makers (who happen to be objectivists) are clearly intended to start trouble. Even this thread started by mayhem13 was made with an agenda. If he really wanted an answer to his question he could have sent a PM, but instead he started a thread knowing full well that his intention was to criticize CA a few posts in.

 

As far as the ridiculous comparison between the two threads mentioned: The shut the F up comment was only made after mayhem13 was told numerous times to stop with his objective agenda. Obviously some objectivists have a hard time controlling themselves and keep right on badgering, so eventually, the OP was forced to be more blunt. On the other hand, mayhem13 was suspended for telling someone to stick a cable up his arse, simply because the other member refused to bow down to his objective beliefs.

 

Mayhem13- I don't even know why you joined an audiophile site? You've made it clear numerous times that you hate everything about the audiophile hobby. You hate the term audiophile, you hate the industry, the people, subjectivists, the reviewers', hi-end speakers/components, cables, tweaks, you criticize this site every chance you get, you criticize Chris. The only reason I see that you joined was to criticize and cause trouble and occasionally attempt to steer a few members toward your objectivist ways.

 

Chris has much more patience than I do, if I were him I would just ban the trouble makers (who happen to be objectivists) just because I'd be absolutely tired of your BS and drama.

[mav52]

wow drama at its finest

[mayhem13]

wow drama at its finest

 

Thanx!....with the cloudy sky's and unseasonably cold weather that passed in last night I needed a good laugh!

 

Where can I get those motion smileys?

[4est]

Are objectivists unwelcome or are guys who constantly cause trouble unwelcome? Your minds are so consumed with your agenda you can't even see the difference. Stop trying to hide behind this accusation about objectivists not being welcome. It's just a smoke screen and guilt trip that a few of you use so that you can continue your destructive agenda unchallenged. Nearly every thread started, or reply made by some of the trouble makers (who happen to be objectivists) are clearly intended to start trouble. Even this thread started by mayhem13 was made with an agenda. If he really wanted an answer to his question he could have sent a PM, but instead he started a thread knowing full well that his intention was to criticize CA a few posts in.

 

As far as the ridiculous comparison between the two threads mentioned: The shut the F up comment was only made after mayhem13 was told numerous times to stop with his objective agenda. Obviously some objectivists have a hard time controlling themselves and keep right on badgering, so eventually, the OP was forced to be more blunt. On the other hand, mayhem13 was suspended for telling someone to stick a cable up his arse, simply because the other member refused to bow down to his objective beliefs.

 

Mayhem13- I don't even know why you joined an audiophile site? You've made it clear numerous times that you hate everything about the audiophile hobby. You hate the term audiophile, you hate the industry, the people, subjectivists, the reviewers', hi-end speakers/components, cables, tweaks, you criticize this site every chance you get, you criticize Chris. The only reason I see that you joined was to criticize and cause trouble and occasionally attempt to steer a few members toward your objectivist ways.

 

Chris has much more patience than I do, if I were him I would just ban the trouble makers (who happen to be objectivists) just because I'd be absolutely tired of your BS and drama.

 

With all do respect, not all of the trouble makers are in either "camp". I think Chris' stance of letting the OPs opening statements/questions dictate the course of the thread is not only appropriate, but clearly implies that all viewpoints are potentially welcome. The sooner we stop "dividing" and looking for differences, the sooner we can be back in business.

[mav52]

mayhem check your PM

[Paul R]

With all do respect, not all of the trouble makers are in either "camp". I think Chris' stance of letting the OPs opening statements/questions dictate the course of the thread is not only appropriate, but clearly implies that all viewpoints are potentially welcome. The sooner we stop "dividing" and looking for differences, the sooner we can be back in business.

 

I agree 100%. Well said Forrest!

 

I agree completely, Even though I am often the target for some of the more agressive types when I disagree with their conclusions. Forrest is right.

 

Paul

[4est]

What I find hilarious is that around here I would considered subjective, whereas in my day to day life I would be considered objective. I feel that a lot of the polarized perceptions around here ought to be tempered with considerations such as that...

[Boris75]

ESLdude come on down, your missed.

 

+1

[Julf]

Interesting.........deleted huh.

 

Popped in to see if anything has changed - clearly not, but noticed the whole exchange that made me leave, and that I referred to in my last posting, has been deleted. Sort of makes the dramatic tome of my parting shot totally pointless. The really funny part is that a search on words like "scientology", "aggression" and "Helsingius" still point to the Computer Audiophile is all about increasing our enjoyment of this wonderful hobby thread - but can't be found anywhere inside the thread.

 

In any case, this message will probably be deleted as well, but I guess I have drawn my own conclusions... To quote Paul:

But it is probably time to let it go now, yes? Goes for me and other passionate people here too, I think.

.