Michael Lavorgna strikes back.......

[plissken]

3 minutes ago, rando said:

Hectoring and taking turns one by one matching wits seemed to be tactics he embraced. 

 

That's fine and should be encouraged. Lavorgna has a track record of lashing out with the profane when he's getting soundly trounced in a back and forth. He's a scorched earth type person. Just look at all the people on A.S. that are banned because they were technically proficient to see through his B.S. 

[christopher3393]

8 minutes ago, rando said:

Hectoring and taking turns one by one matching wits seemed to be tactics he embraced.  Gang warfare isn't even fun for the ones stripping flesh or fracturing immobilized bone.

 

some people like watching:

 

 

 

[rando]

18 minutes ago, plissken said:

 

That's fine and should be encouraged. Lavorgna has a track record of lashing out with the profane when he's getting soundly trounced in a back and forth. He's a scorched earth type person. Just look at all the people on A.S. that are banned because they were technically proficient to see through his B.S. 

 

You understand I'm just noting a short term impression from what I saw in that thread.  It isn't always wise to judge people by a troubling circumstance that keeps repeating with no apparent improvement. 

 

Maybe not ML in his current state, but certainly others who make a living off this would be good to have around without exhibiting fearful responses to every stimulus.  I don't mean obvious technical discrepancies being levied.  I do mean handling them in a way everyone involved can learn from and part under some semblance of civil behavior becoming of adults.

[wgscott]

Lavorgna's trolling worked perfectly, plain and simple.  He wasn't here to discuss computer audio.  He was here to disrupt, pure and simple.  And he succeeded, even subsequent to the banning .

 

The revival of the WDW "civility" thread is the clearest example of his success:  https://www.computeraudiophile.com/forums/topic/13204-civility/

 

The "incivility" being objected to of course isn't someone saying GFYM, but rather, the subjectivist snowflakes lamenting the banning of their prophet.

 

 

[OldBigEars]

6 hours ago, mansr said:

What a pathetic little whiner.

 

Funny comment coming from you.  LOL

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Samuel T Cogley]

15 minutes ago, wgscott said:

Lavorgna's trolling worked perfectly, plain and simple.  He wasn't here to discuss computer audio.  He was here to disrupt, pure and simple.  And he succeeded, even subsequent to the banning .

 

The revival of the WDW "civility" thread is the clearest example of his success:  https://www.computeraudiophile.com/forums/topic/13204-civility/

 

The "incivility" being objected to of course isn't someone saying GFYM, but rather, the subjectivist snowflakes lamenting the banning of their prophet.

 

 

 

I'm not sure "prophet" is the best word.  In my experience, narcissists collect sycophants.

 

[sandyk]

12 minutes ago, wgscott said:

Lavorgna's trolling worked perfectly, plain and simple.  He wasn't here to discuss computer audio.

 

 How many members participating in this thread are here to discuss Computer Audio ?

 It appears that some come here simply to attack Audiophiles in general,

 and they contribute very little (if any) in the way of advice to further improve Computer Audio.

 No, I am not referring to mansr, Dennis, or Bill either, who often help out or advise other members with particular problems..

[firedog]

2 hours ago, LCC0256 said:

"stir up the animals"? Bannon like?  That comment coming from you and your fellow fascists wannabe's at Berkley (Who by the way  are CONSTANTLY shutting down free speech) is f@8k!n@* laughable. This is a forum for computer audiophile not political discussions. You just can't help yourself can you. 
 

Uh, he's not at Berkeley and has nothing to do with any shutting down of free speech.

But then, why would you care about facts before you spout inverctive based on nothing?

[wgscott]

Thanks, Firedog.  I have that guy on my ignore list, so I didn't see his erudite contribution.  I did go to grad school there a few hundred thousand years ago.

 

I also didn't mean to suggest anything political, but rather that the disruption tactic was similar.  If Lavorgna had come here to discuss some aspect of audio and had gotten caught up in the heat of passionate debate, it would be a lot more forgivable.  

 

I do think that tactic he used is designed to undermine free expression here in the same sort of way as the "alt-right" was far more interested in provoking a disruption in Berkeley than in initiating a dispassionate discussion.  I am not suggesting Lavorgna has any sympathy at all with the "alt-right" or holds any views in common with them.

[wdw]

You guys need to get out more often.  

No big fan of ML but plissken you and your continual animus is destroying this site for conversation.  

Why not go somewhere else...pull the wings off of something somewhere else?

 

[wgscott]

24 minutes ago, wdw said:

You guys need to get out more often.  

No big fan of ML but plissken, you and your continual animus, is destroying this site for considered and gentle conversation.  

Why not go somewhere else...pull the wings off of something somewhere else?

 

 

This is exactly the problem.  "Civility" is just an Audiophile Taliban code-word for their intolerance of any dissent.  More subjectivist dishonesty?   

 

  ;-)  <--- note the Winkie of Absolution, before you start calling for Jihad 

[lucretius]

17 minutes ago, wgscott said:

  ;-)  <--- note the Winkie of Absolution, before you start calling for Jihad 

 

Lavorgna should have used this after his GFYM message. 

[vmartell22]

8 hours ago, Lighthouse said:

 

I mean, Michael is not free from blame, but some of us here in forum did not really help the situation.

 

But yeah... at least he is not as damaging as Bannon from forcefully positive perspective. 

 

 

Well - he did lose his temper. I was surprised to see him here. I don't expect, for example to see Michael Fremer here. The thing is, in my belief, he should have not done the fym thing. Period. Not sure what is his relation to Sterophile - there seems to be some between Audiostream and Stereophile - but I see him and believe that he should see himself as a journalist. And as such, you should always see yourself as representing an institution, be it Stereophile  or Audiostream, even if he owns it controls it, etc. 

 

That is the baseline. So if you represent an institution, such reactions (gfym) are avoided. Note, I did not say should be or even must be. Categorically, it is not done.  A serious journalistic institution, whatever the subject, will at the very least reprimand him or more.

 

But, if he seems himself as an evangelist, then well...  you begin to understand, but of course, it does not mean is appropriate. 

 

I had a post exchange with him -  I immediately noticed the stand-offish posture. I tried to apologize and deflect, even when he was sarcastic - while never retracting my positions. It seemed like the right way to have an exchange with him. And indeed,  that exchange never got to the gfym level.

 

But I have to the conclusion that, whether he knows it or not, whether he believes it or not, that he is definitely not a journalist. And I don't mean training. There is a basic distance from the subject that it is not in him or his  approach to the subject/industry etc. He probably will not agree and may even take offence but, Michael (and I know he will lurk and read) I am trying to say this out of dispassionate analysis and with as much respect as I can frame it.

 

He is more like a commentator and/or analyst  and above all, an evangelist. Now, they are allowed to have a point of view.

 

But again, if affiliated to an institution, gfym is still unacceptable.

 

v

 

 

 

 

 

[firedog]

59 minutes ago, vmartell22 said:

 

 

Well - he did lose his temper. I was surprised to see him here. I don't expect, for example to see Michael Fremer here. The thing is, in my belief, he should have not done the fym thing. Period. Not sure what is his relation to Sterophile - there seems to be some between Audiostream and Stereophile - but I see him and believe that he should see himself as a journalist. And as such, you should always see yourself as representing an institution, be it Stereophile  or Audiostream, even if he owns it controls it, etc. 

 

That is the baseline. So if you represent an institution, such reactions (gfym) are avoided. Note, I did not say should be or even must be. Categorically, it is not done.  A serious journalistic institution, whatever the subject, will at the very least reprimand him or more.

 

But, if he seems himself as an evangelist, then well...  you begin to understand, but of course, it does not mean is appropriate. 

 

I had a post exchange with him -  I immediately noticed the stand-offish posture. I tried to apologize and deflect, even when he was sarcastic - while never retracting my positions. It seemed like the right way to have an exchange with him. And indeed,  that exchange never got to the gfym level.

 

But I have to the conclusion that, whether he knows it or not, whether he believes it or not, that he is definitely not a journalist. And I don't mean training. There is a basic distance from the subject that it is not in him or his  approach to the subject/industry etc. He probably will not agree and may even take offence but, Michael (and I know he will lurk and read) I am trying to say this out of dispassionate analysis and with as much respect as I can frame it.

 

He is more like a commentator and/or analyst  and above all, an evangelist. Now, they are allowed to have a point of view.

 

But again, if affiliated to an institution, gfym is still unacceptable.

 

v

 

 

 

 

 

Professionals often don't participate at forums or give up after trying  b/c they are hounded by a small number of impolite and ignorant posters who often disparage their motives. Why waste your valuable time at a forum when that is the response?

That said MLs attitude didn't help and his PMs were totally out of line - not just for a professional, but for any reasonable adult. 

 

I don't know the technicalities, but his blog etc is part of the Stereophile family, my understanding is he is an employee of some type. 

 

I'm not sure he sees his  role first as a traditional journalist. I think he sees it more as something akin to a movie or art critic - whose role is to inform us about the field and give us his/her personal insights. He does seem to have some good listening skills. We can then take his written insights for whatever we think they are worth. 

 

It's clear his POV is that the technical stuff is secondary and the point for him is what brings more listening enjoyment. He doesn't seem to think the  the how, why, or "science" behind it  are very important, just the end result. So he has no issue with saying ethernet cables make an SQ difference. If that's what he heard, placebo effect or not, that's what he cares about. 

Since he often states that POV pretty clearly. at least over at his site I don't think there is any point in challenging that. At a forum like this one he is a legitimate target (as a critic, not as a person).

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

 

31 minutes ago, firedog said:

Professionals often don't participate at forums or give up after trying  b/c they are hounded by a small number of impolite and ignorant posters who often disparage their motives. Why waste your valuable time at a forum when that is the response?

 

They display extreme intolerance to dissenting viewpoints and if not frankly uncivil behaviour, skirting the edges with sarcastic remarks meant to offend. IMO it is cyber bullying and is almost cult like in its goal to ridicule audiophiles. Ironically they bleat if their unsolicited impoliteness is returned or not "tolerated".

 

Part of the credo is to bastardize the term audiophile to mean delusional individuals that warrant ridicule and they are incessant and zealous in this prime "objective". "Objectivist" may therefore be a fitting title in the context of their prime objective. In reality the term objective has also been bastardized to mean their subjective interpretation of data IMO.

 

Mind you, this website is an *audiophile* website. So it is a little strange that they participate here unless for the prime objective.

 

I am not defending the ML now infamous comment, but it is no surprise that he was set upon. Other professionals have experienced the same fate and left. BD comes to mind. Yeh, I get ML was unliked and that he was considered a trouble making troll by some, which I find a bit rich of the accusers to be honest. His "sin" was to offend the delicate sensibilities of the cult by having the audacity to hear differences in ethernet cables. Perhaps there was more to it. He dared to assert his authority on a matter that the cult has supreme ownership of the truth.

 

Oh . <----- I declare immunity

[esldude]

15 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

 

They display extreme intolerance to dissenting viewpoints and if not frankly uncivil behaviour, skirting the edges with sarcastic remarks meant to offend. IMO it is cyber bullying and is almost cult like in its goal to ridicule audiophiles. Ironically they bleat if their unsolicited impoliteness is returned or not "tolerated".

 

Part of the credo is to bastardize the term audiophile to mean delusional individuals that warrant ridicule and they are incessant and zealous in this prime "objective". "Objectivist" may therefore be a fitting title in the context of their prime objective. In reality the term objective has also been bastardized to mean their subjective interpretation of data IMO.

 

Mind you, this website is an *audiophile* website. So it is a little strange that they participate here unless for the prime objective.

 

I am not defending the ML now infamous comment, but it is no surprise that he was set upon. Other professionals have experienced the same fate and left. BD comes to mind. Yeh, I get ML was unliked and that he was considered a trouble making troll by some, which I find a bit rich of the accusers to be honest. His "sin" was to offend the delicate sensibilities of the cult by having the audacity to hear differences in ethernet cables. Perhaps there was more to it. He dared to assert his authority on a matter that the cult has supreme ownership of the truth.

 

Oh . <----- I declare immunity

 

 

 

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

2 minutes ago, esldude said:

 

 

Well, if viewing it from the POV of the cult, not from an audiophile on an audiophile website,, just sayin   <-----Dennis you forgot yours!

[sandyk]

8 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

Mind you, this website is an *audiophile* website. So it is a little strange that they participate here unless for the prime objective.

 

Because very few other Audio forums will permit this kind of behaviour.

They have no interest in anything Audiophile, so it would appear that they have come here purely to be disruptive and get their "jollies."

I wonder if Admin permits this, because it is likely to increase traffic statistics ?

 I wonder how many of them are also members of Hydrogen Audio ?

Longer term members may recall that Hydrogen Audio had members join Audiophile forums for this specific purpose some ago,  but they got found out. 

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

3 minutes ago, sandyk said:

Because very few other Audio forums will permit this kind of behaviour.

They have no interest in anything Audiophile, so it would appear that they have come here purely to be disruptive and get their "jollies."

 

yes agreed. I also note Dennis changed that troll image to remove context.

[esldude]

5 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

yes agreed. I also note Dennis changed that troll image to remove context.

Wasn't changed to remove context.  Just decided a change was better.  Didn't know you would respond almost immediately.  Your reply wasn't here when I changed it so it must have occurred while you were replying.  Sorry, no intent to trick anyone that way.  

[esldude]

8 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 

Because very few other Audio forums will permit this kind of behaviour.

They have no interest in anything Audiophile, so it would appear that they have come here purely to be disruptive and get their "jollies."

I wonder if Admin permits this, because it is likely to increase traffic statistics ?

 I wonder how many of them are also members of Hydrogen Audio ?

Longer term members may recall that Hydrogen Audio had members join Audiophile forums for this specific purpose some ago,  but they got found out. 

Heard that tale before Alex.  That dog didn't hunt then and it doesn't hunt now.  

[sandyk]

36 minutes ago, esldude said:

Heard that tale before Alex.  That dog didn't hunt then and it doesn't hunt now.  

 It's not a tale

. It actually happened. I can't presently recall the name of the senior Hydrogen Audio member that organised it.

Perhaps Bill or some other longer term member may remember his name ?

Perhaps you have Alzheimers setting in Dennis ?

You were around at the time too, IIRC.

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

45 minutes ago, esldude said:

Wasn't changed to remove context.  Just decided a change was better.  Didn't know you would respond almost immediately.  Your reply wasn't here when I changed it so it must have occurred while you were replying.  Sorry, no intent to trick anyone that way.  

 

Hmmnnn ... a convienent  excuse...ve audiophiles hav vays to extrct ze truz

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

Michael Lavorgna  said:

My Uber driver Noreddine on people complaining about the snow:

"Some people are unhappy but the ground is always happy."

To my way of thinking, audiophiles should be like the ground. Always happy. But some aren't. If you want to see these unhappy people, just visit any hi-fi forum, like Chris Connaker's Computer Audiophile, and you'll see unhappy people on parade.

You may be wondering why and/or how people who are interested in a hobby, whose purpose is enjoyment, can be unhappy.

My answer: I don't know.

Read more at https://www.audiostream.com/content/rmaf-2017-lifes-ball#xmSVdDbzuHSww2t5.99

 

 

[firedog]

2 hours ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

 

They display extreme intolerance to dissenting viewpoints and if not frankly uncivil behaviour, skirting the edges with sarcastic remarks meant to offend. IMO it is cyber bullying and is almost cult like in its goal to ridicule audiophiles. Ironically they bleat if their unsolicited impoliteness is returned or not "tolerated".

 

Part of the credo is to bastardize the term audiophile to mean delusional individuals that warrant ridicule and they are incessant and zealous in this prime "objective". "Objectivist" may therefore be a fitting title in the context of their prime objective. In reality the term objective has also been bastardized to mean their subjective interpretation of data IMO.

 

Mind you, this website is an *audiophile* website. So it is a little strange that they participate here unless for the prime objective.

 

I am not defending the ML now infamous comment, but it is no surprise that he was set upon. Other professionals have experienced the same fate and left. BD comes to mind. Yeh, I get ML was unliked and that he was considered a trouble making troll by some, which I find a bit rich of the accusers to be honest. His "sin" was to offend the delicate sensibilities of the cult by having the audacity to hear differences in ethernet cables. Perhaps there was more to it. He dared to assert his authority on a matter that the cult has supreme ownership of the truth.

 

Oh . <----- I declare immunity

Who are "they"? My paragraph you quoted wasn't referring specifically to ML, but to professionals in the field in general. There have been a few here who stopped participating - not because they were arrogant (in fact the opposite was true), but because members here were.

If I was a successful professional in a field and stated my point of view in a reasonable manner, I probably wouldn't want to return to a forum where my motives are doubted and certain members with much less knowledge than mine insist on arguing points they know a limited amount about.