MQA is Vaporware

[Samuel T Cogley]

1 minute ago, christopher3393 said:

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" 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.

 

Keeping track of name calling?  I'd love to see that list.  I think the worst thing I've ever called Lee is a shill.  And I firmly stand by that word.

 

 

[Rt66indierock]

33 minutes ago, Paul R said:

 

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. 

 

 

 

I don't have a commercial interest. Liquidating MQA Ltd is something they seem to be on path to because they don't have a revenue stream according to their financial statements published so far. And I have a lot of faith  in Bob Stuart's ability to lose money as he did at Meridian.

[christopher3393]

8 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

Keeping track of name calling?  I'd love to see that list.  I think the worst thing I've ever called Lee is a shill.  And I firmly stand by that word.

 

 

Sorry to disappoint, Sam. But I have no list. I could make one if you'd like. Wouldn't be hard, there are so many examples. It's fine with me if you stand behind any or all of your name calling. I may agree or disagree with you, but I don't think there are any rules against name calling. That was my point.

[Tintinabulum]

59 minutes ago, Jud said:

Waiting for suggested solutions. Got any?

Well, if wasn't obvious.... stop the free publicity?

[The Computer Audiophile]

25 minutes ago, christopher3393 said:

 

 

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.

It’s all contained in 2. Restrictions on the Use of the Site. 

 

Like all rules, policies, etc... they have to be somewhat vague. I can’t think of all the names one could call another in order to have a complete policy. Plus, the more specific the policy the easier it is to abuse by perpetual line steppers. They look for cracks to exploit. 

 

I’m always interested in feedback that could improve upon our current policies. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

6 minutes ago, christopher3393 said:

Sorry to disappoint, Sam. But I have no list. I could make one if you'd like. Wouldn't be hard, there are so many examples. It's fine with me if you stand behind any or all of your name calling. I may agree or disagree with you, but I don't think there are any rules against name calling. That was my point.

Depends on the name. The C word is vile to some and a term of endearment to others. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

5 minutes ago, Tintinabulum said:

Well, if wasn't obvious.... stop the free publicity?

Based on what I’ve been told, back when I was on the MQA Ltd Christmas card list, the company would prefer this thread go away. 

[Tintinabulum]

1 hour ago, Rt66indierock said:

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. 

It's not a "nice try" or an 'argument", it's an observation. If a number of people point that out, I guess you could call them a group (but why). Can't see the connection to the audio press?

 

Not sure where you're trying to go here...

 

 

[FredericV]

7 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

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.

 

I was also tired of LeeS and the repeated MQA marketing speak. The same could be said of PV.

They never learn and keep posting the same BS. They all deny being paid by MQA, but follow the money: why would anyone keep wasting their time here repeating the same old BS, if they were not being paid? If they are not paid, what do they gain? It just does not compute. It's more plausible they are getting paid or they get some other reward for pushing MQA.

 

[christopher3393]

4 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

It’s all contained in 2. Restrictions on the Use of the Site. 

 

Like all rules, policies, etc... they have to be somewhat vague. I can’t think of all the names one could call another in order to have a complete policy. Plus, the more specific the policy the easier it is to abuse by perpetual line steppers. They look for cracks to exploit. 

 

I’m always interested in feedback that could improve upon our current policies. 

 

Thanks. Which restriction does the offending post violate? I would guess it would be under f) or g), but not sure what wording really fits the post.

 

(f)

Use the site to threaten, defame, abuse, assault, stalk, harass or otherwise violate the rights of any other person or entity, including without limitation rights of privacy or publicity;

(g)

Publish, post, display, offer, or disseminate any profane, obscene, indecent, unlawful, terroristic, violent, or hateful User Content;

[Tintinabulum]

Just now, The Computer Audiophile said:

Based on what I’ve been told, back when I was on the MQA Ltd Christmas card list, the company would prefer this thread go away.

Well, things have changed, I wouldn't assume that still holds true. I don't see any damage being caused by this campaign and similar efforts on other fora. It could even embolden them, they may believe themselves more than otherwise. Thinks- If these experts are worried, maybe we will take over the world! 

 

I don't see the threat but you guys do.

[Tintinabulum]

5 minutes ago, FredericV said:

It just does not compute.

That's because people aren't computers?

 

[Rt66indierock]

5 minutes ago, Tintinabulum said:

It's not a "nice try" or an 'argument", it's an observation. If a number of people point that out, I guess you could call them a group (but why). Can't see the connection to the audio press?

 

Not sure where you're trying to go here...

 

 

 

Because when I attend audio shows and talk to people they tell me you're too critical of the audio press. The press aren't too happy about it either and many industry people don't want the status quo upset.

 

As I tell people  you should have seen how critical I was of the mainstream press over Duke Lacrosse case when I figured out it was a fraud. I've been pretty easy on the audio press.

[Rt66indierock]

21 minutes ago, Tintinabulum said:

Well, if wasn't obvious.... stop the free publicity?

 

In any case you are too late. Once Steven Stone and Andrew Quint asked for me to give MQA a year and others made the same request it wasn't going to happen. 

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

22 minutes ago, christopher3393 said:

 

Thanks. Which restriction does the offending post violate? I would guess it would be under f) or g), but not sure what wording really fits the post.

 

(f)

Use the site to threaten, defame, abuse, assault, stalk, harass or otherwise violate the rights of any other person or entity, including without limitation rights of privacy or publicity;

(g)

Publish, post, display, offer, or disseminate any profane, obscene, indecent, unlawful, terroristic, violent, or hateful User Content;

Honesty, why do you care? Seems to me you are being a yente. 😓. In case you don't know, that means busy body.

[Jud]

27 minutes ago, FredericV said:

 

They all deny being paid by MQA, but follow the money: why would anyone keep wasting their time here repeating the same old BS, if they were not being paid? If they are not paid, what do they gain? It just does not compute. It's more plausible they are getting paid or they get some other reward for pushing MQA.

 

This is really the flip side of what @Paul R was saying - people must have some external motivation to do what they do.

 

I think you both underestimate the ability of people to argue strenuously and at great length on their very own, without any external motivation at all.

[Jud]

38 minutes ago, Tintinabulum said:

Well, if wasn't obvious.... stop the free publicity?

 

So simply stop what we are doing and replace it with nothing?  No positive action toward our intended goal at all?  Or if there should be some positive action, what would that look like?

[Sonicularity]

1 hour ago, Paul R said:

 

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.

 

 

-Paul 

 

 

 

I would consider the use of the term "middle school clan" as a passive-aggressive derogatory jab at some of the members participating in this forum.

[Hugo9000]

I don't see the difficulty in refraining from calling people "assholes" or "douchebags" or telling them to "GFYM" or similar.  If someone lacks the self-control to be able to ignore something that riles him up on an internet forum, and can't be held to account for taking the time to type a vulgar message and choosing to hit "Submit Reply," then I pity that person's real-life acquaintances who have to deal with in-person utterances or other behavior from someone so lacking in self-control.  I myself might have difficulty dealing every day with people who consider The Beatles to be the be-all and end-all (for example), so I simply stay off the SH Forum haha!  If this thread is so full of brilliant/determined manipulators forcing people to react rudely so they get banned (lol) then I suggest those susceptible to such dreadful manipulation/provocation stay away from the thread or the forum.  Perhaps these individuals should take an anger management course as well, if they lack impulse control.

 

From my point of view, the banning policy seems pretty clear and consistent.  I am admittedly a member of the civility police and have reported a few posts that I thought were offensive (none were directed at me, so it wasn't a matter of being personally "insulted").  We may be adults here, who can withstand being called names, but it makes a forum tedious having to wade through that, and where does it lead when unchecked?  Everyone I can think of among the small number that have been banned since I began reading this forum has received warnings prior to the actual banning.  Not that warnings are (or should be) required, my point is simply that I haven't seen anyone get banned out of the blue.

[FredericV]

20 minutes ago, Jud said:

I think you both underestimate the ability of people to argue strenuously and at great length on their very own, without any external motivation at all.

I can agree that people can get lost in forum discussions.

[christopher3393]

28 minutes ago, Ishmael Slapowitz said:

Honesty, why do you care? Seems to me you are being a yente. 😓. In case you don't know, that means busy body.

 

Ha. It's like a miasma telling me to stop sniffing around.  🙄 

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

1 minute ago, christopher3393 said:

 

Ha. It's like a miasma telling me to stop sniffing around.  🙄 

Oy Vey!😎

[Samuel T Cogley]

1 hour ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Depends on the name. The C word is vile to some and a term of endearment to others. 

 

Especially with the younger folks in Australia.  They can't say two sentences without saying it three times.

[Tintinabulum]

29 minutes ago, Jud said:

Or if there should be some positive action, what would that look like?

I'm not running your campaign for you, I made an observation. I realise that's dangerous...

[Jud]

Just now, Tintinabulum said:

I'm not running your campaign for you, I made an observation. I realise that's dangerous...

 

Yep, figured as much.