Should blind testing discussion be banned on CA? POLL

[kumakuma]

So I pasted the quote into Google to see the rest of the poem, and at the bottom of the first page of results comes an advertisement for "Male Breast Reduction L.A - Gynecomastia Specialist‎."

 

Google takes your recent searches into account when deciding what ads to show you.

[kumakuma]

BTW, has UltraM set a new record for fewest posts before getting banned?

 

I think we have a winner.

 

His first post was anti-JRiver and his second was anti-American so I suspect we were seeing the (short) return of Amar/CAT/Antonie.

[PeterSt]

But then UltraM was testing us a bit in the blind. At least that's how it came to me from his last post.

[Daudio]

has UltraM set a new record for fewest posts before getting banned?

 

Another banned individual ? Or just another ghost lost in the history of Oceania ?

[kumakuma]

Another banned individual ? Or just another ghost lost in the history of Oceania ?

 

His posts are still in the other thread with "Banned" underneath his name so it looks like Chris stuck his head on a pole as a warning to others.

[PeterSt]

Banned.

But KK just said it.

[christopher3393]

I *very* seriously doubt a new user code of conduct would help (would we even agree on what it should say?). After all, everyone supposedly already knows the Golden Rule, and that's probably the most succinct and to the point code of conduct I know

 

Zigong asked, "Is there a single word that can serve as the guide to conduct throughout one's life?"

The Master said,"It is perhaps the word shu. Do not impose on others what you yourself do not want [others to impose on you.]"

 

---Confucius Analects, 15.24

 

(Shu has been understood as a kind of empathy or consideration towards others by projecting oneself into 'other people's shoes')

 

What a fine thing to practice!

[Daudio]

it looks like Chris stuck his head on a pole as a warning to others.

 

How would we know: that it happened, that it is a warning, and what we are being warned against ??? Unless Chris breaks his silence and says so, most don't know, some know a little, nothing learned or resolved

 

I think that the information blackout on these issues is unhealthy to the forum. What possible good does it accomplish ? We've heard the complaints about the lousy behavior of the powers that be on the SteveHoffman forum, and others. I'd rather not see CA go down that same road. Transparency is healthy !

[alfe]

 

We've heard the complaints about the lousy behavior of the powers that be on the SteveHoffman forum, and others. I'd rather not see CA go down that same road.

 

I think we are already there.

[The Computer Audiophile]

I think we are already there.

Can you explain why you think that?

[jtwrace]

I think we are already there.

 

Really? I was thinking today that Chris might need to interject more or have mods here. It's gotten out of control the last few months. IMO of course.

[alfe]

Can you explain why you think that?

 

It's weird situation few posts this evening, nobody understand what's going on.

Thread vanishing, thread closed so many of us asking for an explanation and no return from your side.

I like CA and it's first time for me to be a forum member and because valuable people are posting here they deserve more consideration.

[mayhem13]

What would be the benefit of further transparency? Chris has already expressed some pretty significant restraint in policing what he believes to be an intelligent, self serving forum experience. It's pretty evident that it takes quite a bit to get banned here and if I might add.....

 

IMO the recent actions were taken with the sole purpose of getting the membership back in track with what this forum is about. It's clear our moderator doesn't expect or even want us all to agree on important things in audio. Discussion and debate when either benign or heated can be beneficial to both poles of the viewpoint. Passions run deep within audiophiles so sometimes a tear is shed or a proverbial nose gets bloodied. So what? Get over it and carry on.

 

Everyone who's spent time here and been involved in some of the more intense discussions can clearly testify that there's been some most valuable information posted during the skirmish. Objectivists and Subjectivists alike take something.....either an enlightenment to a bit of tech or an insight into the other sides viewpoint. I submit that it's only the extremists on either side who remain vigilant and IMO are ultimately responsible for the banning of members. If you can't see common ground on the horizon, move on past with silence instead of engaging unreasonable or rude behavior. Make your point, post your opinion......and sail off into the sunset.

[The Computer Audiophile]

What would be the benefit of further transparency? Chris has already expressed some pretty significant restraint in policing what he believes to be an intelligent, self serving forum experience. It's pretty evident that it takes quite a bit to get banned here and if I might add.....

 

IMO the recent actions were taken with the sole purpose of getting the membership back in track with what this forum is about. It's clear our moderator doesn't expect or even want us all to agree on important things in audio. Discussion and debate when either benign or heated can be beneficial to both poles of the viewpoint. Passions run deep within audiophiles so sometimes a tear is shed or a proverbial nose gets bloodied. So what? Get over it and carry on.

 

Everyone who's spent time here and been involved in some of the more intense discussions can clearly testify that there's been some most valuable information posted during the skirmish. Objectivists and Subjectivists alike take something.....either an enlightenment to a bit of tech or an insight into the other sides viewpoint. I submit that it's only the extremists on either side who remain vigilant and IMO are ultimately responsible for the banning of members. If you can't see common ground on the horizon, move on past with silence instead of engaging unreasonable or rude behavior. Make your point, post your opinion......and sail off into the sunset.

Well said mayhem.

[sandyk]

So another nay sayer gets banned huh?

 

......good job everyone, goo job! The kingdom of the Elitist Curmudgeons is once again secure and all is right with the world. Your illustrious sargeants of arms DAudio and SandyK have one again been victorious over the evil minions of science and rationality. Long Live The King!

 

........this is some real Dark Ages shit right here lads. - Mayhem13

 

 

 

 

And posts like this are helpful ?

[Allan F]

What would be the benefit of further transparency?

 

Unless we are talking about the NSA (careful they may be listening) or the CIA, how can more transparency ever be a bad thing?

 

IMO the recent actions were taken with the sole purpose of getting the membership back in track with what this forum is about...

 

Bravo, so you have expressed your opinion. How does that substitute for the moderator telling us if that was his sole purpose or whether there were other factors that played into his decision?

 

With the greatest of respect, Chris, alfe's reply to your question in post #209 is an honest and valid one, and raises questions shared by a lot of members of this Forum. Many have complained about all the informative posts that were deleted when the presence of the originator of the offending thread was eliminated. What is wrong with explaining why those posts were not or could not have been retained? Absent more information, it looks like a situation of throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

 

Again, with respect, complementing Mayhem on his reply is no substitute for disclosure or openness. While as host of this site you certainly have no obligation to reveal how the "trithio drama" played out, I don't see how sharing that information can be harmful. Rather than have people speculate and grumble, wouldn't more transparency be consistent with and contribute to "furthering the goal of increasing our enjoyment of our wonderful hobby".

 

Please understand that creating controversy with this post is the furthest thing from my mind. Rather my wish and hope are to assist in putting this unfortunate episode behind us.

[PeterSt]

Originally Posted by mayhem13

What would be the benefit of further transparency? Chris has already expressed some pretty significant restraint in policing what he believes to be an intelligent, self serving forum experience. It's pretty evident that it takes quite a bit to get banned here and if I might add.....

 

IMO the recent actions were taken with the sole purpose of getting the membership back in track with what this forum is about. It's clear our moderator doesn't expect or even want us all to agree on important things in audio. Discussion and debate when either benign or heated can be beneficial to both poles of the viewpoint. Passions run deep within audiophiles so sometimes a tear is shed or a proverbial nose gets bloodied. So what? Get over it and carry on.

 

Everyone who's spent time here and been involved in some of the more intense discussions can clearly testify that there's been some most valuable information posted during the skirmish. Objectivists and Subjectivists alike take something.....either an enlightenment to a bit of tech or an insight into the other sides viewpoint. I submit that it's only the extremists on either side who remain vigilant and IMO are ultimately responsible for the banning of members. If you can't see common ground on the horizon, move on past with silence instead of engaging unreasonable or rude behavior. Make your point, post your opinion......and sail off into the sunset.

 

Well said mayhem.

 

Where did I see this before.

Must count.

 

Now I must think of something even more useful to say but I guess I already tried hard. That thread found itself closed, so all must be in there I suppose. Subject closed ?

[christopher3393]

Passions run deep within audiophiles so sometimes a tear is shed or a proverbial nose gets bloodied. So what? Get over it and carry on.

 

Respectfully, this is the only statement I really object to in your post. But it is a strong disagreement! If this statement is being endorsed for this forum, I believe this would be very unwise for numerous reasons and would make it very difficult for me to continue participating in good conscience. I am very interested in what others have to say about this, especially Chris.

[sbgk]

I don't understand why discussions about DBT are so popular on a forum supported by advertising. Are DBT proponents more likely to spend money ? Not from my experience, unless it's for room correction. Do potential buyers really want to read arguments between people who don't hear any differences and those who do ?

[esldude]

I don't understand why discussions about DBT are so popular on a forum supported by advertising. Are DBT proponents more likely to spend money ? Not from my experience, unless it's for room correction. Do potential buyers really want to read arguments between people who don't hear any differences and those who do ?

 

Oh pretty simple really. Those who 'think' they hear a difference feel much more special when they can face off against those who hear there is no difference. Hence it is really good for a site supported by advertising.

 

You get all this hoopla over whether or not something is better. People with good systems want to see if it is. They get it and 'hear' the difference making themselves and those selling the goods happy. Making them feel they need to go dispute those naysayers. All one big happy positive feedback loop about negative feedback.

[mayhem13]

Respectfully, this is the only statement I really object to in your post. But it is a strong disagreement! If this statement is being endorsed for this forum, I believe this would be very unwise for numerous reasons and would make it very difficult for me to continue participating in good conscience. I am very interested in what others have to say about this, especially Chris.

 

Respectfully Chris, i get your reservation and the instances are NOT literal, frequent or AVOIDABLE. Not being clever but sometimes to make an omelet, you gotta break a few eggs. lol. It all depends on how passionate the member might be. I don't think the post i type condoned such instances, but we're all big boys here and can wipe our own noses. Locking down threads and banning members isn't the solution either. Agreed?

[PeterSt]

Oh, now what. Can't be because my counter went towards the wrong direction. OK, nice.

 

Maybe it can be about banning members into the universe and locking down threads. And I think I spent a few words on that in a thread which got locked without clear reason other than "not useful". Ok, then tell me what *is* useful because such a thread, I'd say, would be honored with some explanation since it was right down into the subject. At least that is what I tried.

 

All we know right now - and it seems that we are stuck with that - is that someone with a nice post count spreads wise words. Well, if THAT is it ... NOT helpful.

(mayhem, I didn't mean your post although it is about it)

 

And so this very thread is turning into a same one, but this time not about DBT. Waiting to be locked ?

Now guess what encourages it.

 

Regards,

Peter

[mav52]

 

And so this very thread is turning into a same one, but this time not about DBT. Waiting to be locked ?

Now guess what encourages it.

 

Regards,

Peter

 

Maybe some people just don't know when to leave it alone and move on to new thread. .

[PeterSt]

I heartily agree with that. But how can I myself with such an outcome ? quite difficult.

Meanwhile I feel it as completely wasted that again me myself has put effort in a DBT thread, which happily vanished, might come back and out of all over the same subject. Ok, dictionary tells me direct object or accusative. The latter seems nice.

But no word about it all. Just done.

[christopher3393]

Respectfully Chris, i get your reservation and the instances are NOT literal, frequent or AVOIDABLE. Not being clever but sometimes to make an omelet, you gotta break a few eggs. lol. It all depends on how passionate the member might be. I don't think the post i type condoned such instances, but we're all big boys here and can wipe our own noses. Locking down threads and banning members isn't the solution either. Agreed?

 

Thanks, that is a very helpful clarification for me.