MQA is Vaporware

[Ralf11]

2 hours ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

So you disagree?  Noise floor isn't a factor here?

 

I vote for a new thread on car audio.  I do disagree overall, but agree that while noise floor is a factor, it does not overcome the synesthesia of driving while hearing some great music.

 

on another tangent here, I enjoy seeing more yiddish on this site as I now live in an ethnic deficit area of the US, not to mention Slapowitz's wit..

[Tintinabulum]

18 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

This thread is a reaction to the marketing plan of MQA Ltd.

And all it's doing is giving MQA free publicity, own goal...

[Paul R]

7 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

My grandmother used to say, "you'll catch more flies with honey than vinegar".  But Grandma never saw how insidious both the technology and the marketing of MQA are.  And those who suggest that Grandma's method should be used with MQA never, ever acknowledge the hostility (in the form of disingenuous and misleading claims) of MQA.

 

The hostility expressed as passive-aggressive behavior? That's exactly what I am grousing about.

 

I really despise passive-aggressive attacks, probably because I am just not built to deal well with them. I learned how of course, but I don't like it and probably never will accept it as a reasonable form of controlling a conversation, topic, marketing, etc. 

 

 

-Paul 

 

[Paul R]

3 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

 

And I'm sure Lee is telling his industry buddies that his support of MQA is why he was banned from this site.

 

Absolutely - and without a doubt that is a great loss for CA and a definite win for the pro-MQA side. It makes us all look unreasonable, childish, and foolish. 

Exactly the opposite of what was, I am sure, intended. 

 

-Paul 

 

[Rt66indierock]

Just now, Tintinabulum said:

And all it's doing is giving MQA free publicity, own goal...

 

Nice try but this is an old argument. There seems to one group of audiophiles saying all you are doing is giving them free publicity. Those that are upset that the audio press is criticized.  

[Samuel T Cogley]

1 minute ago, Paul R said:

 

Absolutely - and without a doubt that is a great loss for CA and a definite win for the pro-MQA side. It makes us all look unreasonable, childish, and foolish. 

Exactly the opposite of what was, I am sure, intended. 

 

I disagree.  Scoggins no longer shills (whatever his motivation) here for MQA.  That's a win.

[Paul R]

34 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

The aim is the liquidation of MQA Ltd.

 

Then you should go promote that aim on your own system somewhere, and not involve this system. Who knows what you open up any innocent participant here to with such a goal? 

 

And it might break the CA rules by bringing commercial interest into the system, and or unwittingly  enlisting people to aid in a commercial goal when the topic is not clearly identified as commercial. 

 

 

[Jud]

44 minutes ago, Tintinabulum said:

And out of curiosity, what is the aim of this counterargument? To convince others? The hostile attitude won't do that. To change the business model of MQA?

 

I agree about a hostile attitude. But to give @Samuel T Cogley his props, disingenuousness bothers me equally as much.

 

My aim is to discuss MQA in a fashion that is as technically accurate and as clear as possible; and thereby do what I can to avoid a future in which the already tiny slice of the market occupied by hi res and Redbook is dominated by a technically inferior, proprietary product.

[Paul R]

1 minute ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

I disagree.  Scoggins no longer shills (whatever his motivation) here for MQA.  That's a win.

I see your point, but with respect, disagree. 

 

Also, better the enemy you know than the one who remains unseen.

 

[kumakuma]

14 minutes ago, Tintinabulum said:

And all it's doing is giving MQA free publicity, own goal...

 

You appear to believe in the old adage that "any publicity is good publicity".

 

Unfortunately this adage isn't true.

 

If it were, Boeing's stock price would be though the roof.

[Jud]

11 minutes ago, Paul R said:

 

Well, I will certainly agree with that statement. I do think there is some level of design behind those actions, the same as there was from MQA at Chris RMAF session. Stuff like this can happen once, maybe even twice as a coincidence, but four or five times?  With absolutely predictable reactions?  

 

I don't go for conspiracy theories, but clearly, the actions of getting X number of people banned are not coincidental, and that implies at least some sort of planning. 

 

-Paul 

 

 

My friend, without any hostility at all, I have to say I flatly disagree, to the point that I think the idea is outlandish.

[Paul R]

Just now, Jud said:

 

My friend, without any hostility at all, I have to say I flatly disagree, to the point that I think the idea is outlandish.

 

(grin) Well, I don't mind honest disagreement at all. Perhaps I will reconsider and change my mind after I think on it a bit.

 

But as of now, I seriously find it incredulous to believe there is not some coordinated/planned/designed purpose behind the flurry of such activity.

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

14 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

 

And I'm sure Lee is telling his industry buddies that his support of MQA is why he was banned from this site.

 

This is what usually happens. I don't have any verifiable information that this is indeed the case for Lee. 

 

 

 

3 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

 

You appear to believe in the old adage that "any publicity is good publicity".

 

Unfortunately this adage isn't true.

 

If it were, Boeing stock price would be though the roof.

 

Absolutely. I remember when Gloria Alred said Michael Richards use racial slurs at his standup gig in order to get publicity. He went from top of the world to ... is he even alive anymore?

[Rt66indierock]

3 minutes ago, Paul R said:

 

Then you should go promote that aim on your own system somewhere, and not involve this system. Who knows what you open up any innocent participant here to with such a goal? 

 

And it might break the CA rules by bringing commercial interest into the system, and or unwittingly  enlisting people to aid in a commercial goal when the topic is not clearly identified as commercial. 

 

 

 

I disagree and if I was breaking the rules here wouldn't Chris have mentioned it last year at RMAF when we were sitting next to each other? Or the year before at RMAF?

[Jud]

13 minutes ago, Tintinabulum said:

And all it's doing is giving MQA free publicity, own goal...

 

Waiting for suggested solutions. Got any?

[Samuel T Cogley]

Just now, Paul R said:

 

(grin) Well, I don't mind honest disagreement at all. Perhaps I will reconsider and change my mind after I think on it a bit.

 

But as of now, I seriously find it incredulous to believe there is not some coordinated/planned/designed purpose behind the flurry of such activity.

 

I submit that what you're characterizing as a concerted effort is more like strong disdain for Scoggins' shenanigans.  And that disdain is felt by several forum members here, including myself.

[Paul R]

1 minute ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

I disagree and if I was breaking the rules here wouldn't Chris have mentioned it last year at RMAF when we were sitting next to each other? Or the year before at RMAF?

 

I don't know, but this a whole different thing than sitting in a session together at RMAF.

 

If you want to equate this topic  to a free "pub" atmosphere, then driving a commercial interest in it is simply wrong. If you are paying for the privilege of driving a commercial interest, then you should make that crystal clear so that people know you may use information or commentary provided in your commercial interest. 

 

 

[Paul R]

9 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

I submit that what you're characterizing as a concerted effort is more like strong disdain for Scoggins' shenanigans.  And that disdain is felt by several forum members here, including myself.

 

If it was just Scoggins, I would agree with you. But a whole list of people have been treated this way, and *that* just screams out there is some kind of - something. I don't know what wording to use other than "planned effort."  Even if, I will grant you, that "planning" may have been informal. (Informal would equal gang thinking to me.) 

 

 

[kumakuma]

19 minutes ago, Paul R said:

 

If it was just Scoggins, I would agree with you. But it a whole list of people that have been treated this way, and *that* just screams out some kind of - something. I don't know what wording to use other than "planned effort."  Even if, I will grant you, that "planning" may have been informal. (Informal would equal gang thinking to me.) 

 

 

 

I suggest that you go back and look at why each of the folks on that list was banned.

 

You will find that the circumstances behind each were different. Some of the banned parties were pro MQA and others were anti MQA. Most of the bannings had nothing to do with MQA. The only commonality is that the banned individuals acted like assholes.

 

Maybe there's a group of folks behind the scenes trying to get assholes banned from this site but, if this were true, they aren't doing a good job because folks like myself continue to post here.

[Samuel T Cogley]

4 minutes ago, Paul R said:

 

If it was just Scoggins, I would agree with you. But a whole list of people have been treated this way, and *that* just screams out there is some kind of - something. I don't know what wording to use other than "planned effort."  Even if, I will grant you, that "planning" may have been informal. (Informal would equal gang thinking to me.)

 

There have also been several threads exploring civility and the alleged lack of it here in the forum.  I'm of the opinion that disingenuousness is just as rude as "go f your mother".

[The Computer Audiophile]

@Paul R If you walk into New England bar and say the Patriots are the worst team in the history of the NFL, you're likely to get considerable blowback by people who have facts to prove you wrong. If you're there toward the end of a game you're likely to get pushed around. 

 

None of this would be planned by any of the bar patrons. They all have a certain amount of knowledge from being big Patriots fans.

 

Put this into the MQA context. Most people in this thread have read all the information about MQA and are tired of putting up with misinformation and lies. It doesn't take any planning to counter lies with facts. it's even easier when the facts are several pages back in this very thread.

[Jud]

4 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

I submit that what you're characterizing as a concerted effort is more like strong disdain for Scoggins' shenanigans.  And that disdain is felt by several forum members here, including myself.

 

It takes a hell of a lot for me to put someone on my ignore list. Dishonesty in interaction - mischaracterizing what others say, refusal to honestly deal with technical information, or excessive and unremitting hostility to others are the main reasons.  Of the thousands of people I've interacted with on this site, Lee was one of just a half dozen on my list.

 

Others obviously had a different reaction than ignoring him.

 

This is not to excuse the personal attacks, but to say that dealing with him could be quite frustrating.

[Hugo9000]

What is it called when a member posts incessantly in a thread, accusing everyone that disagrees with him of being part of a "gang" "group effort" "middle-school mentality" "schoolyard bullies" ad nauseum?  I suppose this is one way to achieve 12k posts on a forum.  I'll pass, thanks.

 

[Samuel T Cogley]

4 minutes ago, Hugo9000 said:

What is it called when a member posts incessantly in a thread, accusing everyone that disagrees with him of being part of a "gang" "group effort" "middle-school mentality" "schoolyard bullies" ad nauseum?  I suppose this is one way to achieve 12k posts on a forum.  I'll pass, thanks.

 

Now this is a great example.  Some might think this is rude, I think it's pithy. 

[christopher3393]

18 hours ago, Lee Scoggins said:

 

Steve, it's clear you are an idiot and an asshole.  Welcome to my ignore list.

 

18 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

Bye Lee. I have to ban you after this behavior. The same rules apply to you as they do Lavorgna, Brian Lucey, and all the others who talk to people this way. 

 

 

Hi Chris. Can you show me these rules? The TOS looks like a legal statement that covers behavior that can break laws. Is a law being violated? I doubt it. So what is this rule violation? You have also referred to this elsewhere as "our policy", and the main focus has appeared to be a "policy" against "personal attacks" with little or no expansion/description other than your own ad hoc statements in posts in various threads. The word "policy" in our context usually refers to written statements.

 

I'm not defending Lee Scoggins behavior and think he could have been banned a while ago for posting behavior that is mentioned by others (follow the "dissembling" and "disingenuous" comments"). But when it comes to name calling, I could give you a rather long list of names Lee has been called, including a few that may very well be more offensive. So I'm having trouble seeing consistency and clarity on the rules.

 

At this point, I don't think there are actually rules or policy at AS except in the legal sense, or in some implicit way that is left solely to the moderator to discern and support at his discretion.