Michael Lavorgna strikes back.......

[beetlemania]

8 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

In other words, not ML's fault?  Just like Flip Wilson's Geraldine, apparently the devil made him do it.

Is my post really that hard to understand? Why do you twist and modify the meaning?

[opus101]

Just now, Samuel T Cogley said:

Wow.  So the alleged discomfort he felt justified his response?

 

I have really no idea what reasoning process could lead to such a conclusion. ML is responsible for the existence of his own 'buttons', his reaction (a word which better describes his behaviour than 'response') when they're pressed isn't in any sense a 'justifiable' one.

[Samuel T Cogley]

2 minutes ago, beetlemania said:

Is my post really that hard to understand? Why do you twist and modify the meaning?

 

That's how I read your post.  If I'm wrong, please elaborate.

[Samuel T Cogley]

1 minute ago, opus101 said:

 

I have really no idea what reasoning process could lead to such a conclusion. ML is responsible for the existence of his own 'buttons', his reaction (a word which better describes his behaviour than 'response') when they're pressed isn't in any sense a 'justifiable' one.

 

That's how I perceived the distinction between "fault" and "responsibility".

[opus101]

1 minute ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

 If I'm wrong, please elaborate.

 

You appear to be wrong in suggesting that @beetlemania is denying ML's responsibility for his reaction(s).

[Samuel T Cogley]

Just now, opus101 said:

 

You appear to be wrong in suggesting that @beetlemania is denying ML's responsibility for his reaction(s).

 

What about the distinction between "fault" and "responsibility"?

[rando]

Even in the realm of childish behavior pulling someone's hair because they were already upset and just needed a push towards having a meltdown isn't good behavior.  It reflects even worse when you have a group of people portraying this and then beating their chests in a show of cocky bravado as soon as it comes into question.  

[opus101]

Just now, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

What about the distinction between "fault" and "responsibility"?

 

Its rather a complex one to go into in detail. The TL;DR is - I take 'fault' as meaning that ML is blameworthy for his reactions. 'Responsibility' though doesn't attribute blame.

[Samuel T Cogley]

Just now, opus101 said:

 

Its rather a complex one to go into in detail. The TL;DR is - I take 'fault' as meaning that ML is blameworthy for his reactions. 'Responsibility' though doesn't attribute blame.

 

Ok, so having to endure the hardship of interacting with the "unhappy" people absolves ML of "blame"?

[opus101]

If you'd set out what you understand to mean by this word 'blame' I might have a stab at answering... Alternatively if you argue the word is my own introduction (which I accept) then what you meant by 'fault'.

[beetlemania]

6 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

That's how I read your post.  If I'm wrong, please elaborate.

Of course ML is "at fault" for his inappropriate fym PM. Did you miss where I wrote "ban worthy"?

 

But here's the thing: his PM was a disproportionate *reaction* to at least one impolite post. Again, this didn't happen in a vacuum.

[Samuel T Cogley]

Just now, opus101 said:

If you'd set out what you understand to mean by this word 'blame' I might have a stab at answering... Alternatively if you argue the word is my own introduction (which I accept) then what you meant by 'fault'.

 

With due respect, you linked the words "fault" and "blameworthy".  Just trying to understand the mindset that is sympathetic to ML because of the alleged hardship he had to endure.

[opus101]

Just now, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

With due respect, you linked the words "fault" and "blameworthy".  Just trying to understand the mindset that is sympathetic to ML because of the alleged hardship he had to endure.

 

Yes I have already accepted your first sentence. The 'mindset sympathetic to ML' is not my mindset - are you suggesting that it is? I am suggesting no 'hardship' that ML 'had to endure' - he was here by choice and could've left at any time.

[Bill Brown]

ML is of course responsible for what he writes and must suffer whatever consequences are deemed appropriate by the owner of the site.

I do think, though, that there is a misunderstanding (likely insurmountable, based on the personalities of his antagonists) of why he would become angry enough to message what he did (not what I would have chosen, btw- if someone insulted me that way I would be more likely to chuckle than react with righteous indignation or feel offended).

In the last few days I have read:

• Comparisons of audiophiles to flat earthers, antivaxxers, adherents to homeopathy, memory water advocates, etc.

• “I am not concerned about hurting their feelings”

• “There’s a benefit to being on the right side of the debate.  You have a higher ground that you get to speak from.”

• People labeled delusional- “If you are ML and you are delusional about Ethernet..”

• “One consequence of saying stupid shit is often, quite likely, ridicule.”

• “And you are 100% correct that their (sic) should be consequences for a professional audio reviewer that just blatantly lies”

• “You, too, would be frustrated if fake nostrums were shilled in your (more important) field”

• “welcome to generation wuss”

• “snowflakes roasting on an open fire”

• “I called him a hack and a coward a while ago but only because I truly believe those things and I can back it up.  Now I have additional proof of his cowardice.”

• “narcissists collect psychophants”

Certainly, many of these statements came after his message, but the attitudes behind them permeated all prior interactions with him.

There are both personal and professional issues, involved.  The latter is incompletely understood, I feel.  It is consistently seen, for example, when JA feels compelled to repeatedly respond to accusations of shilling, pay for play, pandering to advertisers, etc. (typically on AA).  People seem very willing to (anonymously, of course) impugn someone’s professional integrity without the expectation of consequences.

If someone came to my place of business and called me a liar, shill, delusional, a hack (I guess in my case a “quack”), and a coward they had better be prepared to deal with the consequences, especially the last, as they would soon realize that it wasn’t the case (and they wouldn’t be able to rely on anonymity).

There was a time when we were men (sorry Teresa).  And I agree with the “wuss generation” designation, though I think it was misapplied in this case, and prefer Eastwood’s name in print of “pussy generation” (sorry again, Teresa).

In older (perhaps more noble days), the above would have been dual-worthy.  These days we (that frequent these sites, anyway) are perhaps more enlightened and don’t shoot at each other, but the underlying instincts haven’t fully left us.

I should note that I agree with much of what “Neuroscience” has been writing, especially my complete lack of desire to go to medical fora and ridicule those who disagree with me (what’s the point?!).

I considered not frequenting CA anymore (not because of ML's situation), or perhaps just following the more practical threads, but admit it is hard to look away from a car accident.  I will have to figure out how to be more disciplined in this regard.

I will go back to my typical lurking.

Bill

[beetlemania]

5 minutes ago, Bill Brown said:

Certainly, many of these statements came after his message, but the attitudes behind them permeated all prior interactions with him.

 

Indeed. I went back thru' the build-up to the fym PM and found many examples of people needling and outright insulting ML. Once again, my opinion is that he was rightly banned (and he should probably refrain from all of the forums, given his short fuse). But more than one CA member went out of their way to heckle ML presumably, in part, because of his status as an "authority". Chris was active on that thread at the time and, curiously, failed to ask for civil discourse in the manner he did earlier today on this thread.

 

 

[Samuel T Cogley]

Wow, tiny font.  Copy and paste from a word processor?

 

12 minutes ago, Bill Brown said:

• “narcissists collect sycophants”

 

Fixed, and I completely stand by this. 

 

It had to have taken quite a bit of time and effort to assemble that list.

 

It's clear that some attribute some kind of nobility to ML (assuming you're not a sock puppet).  I have seen no evidence of that nobility, but will gladly repent if some evidence exists.

 

[Indydan]

20 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Hi Guys - Michael and I have exchanged emails this afternoon. I don't believe I'll be receiving a holiday card from him this year. 

 

So Chris, you now have a little feud going with Michael Lavorgna who runs Audiostream, and Michael Fremer who runs Analog planet. Both of those sites are owned by the Ten Network and affiliated with Stereophile.

 

My question is, when will you get into a fight with Tyll Hertsens of Innerfidelity?!  

[The Computer Audiophile]

2 minutes ago, beetlemania said:

Chris was active on that thread at the time and, curiously, failed to ask for civil discourse in the manner he did earlier today on this thread.

With all due respect, not a single person, including Michael, reported posts that heckled him. That in and of itself doesn't make it right, but I also can't monitor every comment and keep it in context. So, just because I participated in a thread, doesn't mean I condone all the comments in that thread. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

3 minutes ago, Indydan said:

 

So Chris, you now have a little feud going with Michael Lavorgna who runs Audiostream, and Michael Fremer who runs Analog planet. Both of those sites are owned by the Ten Network and affiliated with Stereophile.

 

My question is, when will you get into a fight with Tyll Hertsens of Innerfidelity?!  

Too funny. Michael Fremer and I are back on good terms. We patched it up at RMAF in 2016. 

[Indydan]

Just now, The Computer Audiophile said:

Too funny. Michael Fremer and I are back on good terms. We patched it up at RMAF in 2016. 

Well that is good to hear! I think Michael is impulsive and passionate, which sometimes leads to him reacting a little strongly. Most of the time, he seems like a very nice person. 

[crenca]

Hey, I just found this thread!  I was going to goad Audiophile Neuromancer with a popcorn reference, but Chris's speech had me thinking perhaps I am a better person that that...

 

NAH!  Hey Neuro, where are you?

[beetlemania]

9 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

With all due respect, not a single person, including Michael, reported posts that heckled him. That in and of itself doesn't make it right, but I also can't monitor every comment and keep it in context. So, just because I participated in a thread, doesn't mean I condone all the comments in that thread. 

That's fair. I do not expect you to have the time or interest in moderating every post on your site, nor do I assume you condone every post in threads you participate in. I just found it curious that you were quite active in that thread while much of the uncivil banter was happening. I suppose my curiosity is founded on the hindsight of having seen this episode unfold.

 

I'll (try to) step aside from this thread now. I mostly come to this and other forums to learn new tricks for improving my server and it's software as well as learning about better sounding components and new music. The examples highlighted by Bill Brown are an unfortunate side effect of the these boards.

[YashN]

7 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Too funny. Michael Fremer and I are back on good terms. We patched it up at RMAF in 2016. 

 

Yep, and that was cool to see and it's a good thing.

 

I have missed part of that ML controversy here it seems, but he's one of the good guys in my book. Hopefully you guys get to see you're more alike with Computer Audiophile pursuits one day.

 

Hard not to agree with his post though:

 

- The problem he mentions is rampant in any HiFi forum

 

- If people have worked on improving their setup and getting big benefits from it, then why are some people on these forums (not just there, but they're here as well), always angry and unhappy?

 

A problem arises when these people interject in good conversations and thread and ruin them, without bringing any new additional information or without sharing anything valuable.

 

Then, what's your option as someone who wants to continue to enjoy great sound and share with other like-minded people your findings, your setup, your new music find?

 

If you're on the forum, you can use the Ignore function, or you can ignore manually, but the problem doesn't really go away.

 

Or you can just 'be like the ground' and go listen to your setup and have a fantastic time at that while doing other productive things.

 

And that's basically the fundamental problem of many of these sites where the trolls can become or have become rampant. I thought firedog described a mechanism by which people can go away from forums quite well. Moderation is one part of the solution, but I've seen forums push away knowledgeable people but giving a voice to the abrasive ones instead - so you'd need knowledgeable mods as well for it to be effective.

 

With that, I'm going to fire up the SET Tube Amp!

[rando]

37 minutes ago, beetlemania said:

Indeed. I went back thru' the build-up to the fym PM and found many examples of people needling and outright insulting ML...

 

But more than one CA member went out of their way to heckle ML presumably, in part, because of his status as an "authority".

 

I will admit wondering if I set the stage for what came about has everything to do with attempting to defuse attempts to beat an indisputably departed horse.  Two minutes before posting the quoted message below I had no idea who the guy was.  Things took a turn for the worse shortly after.  

 

 

On 10/1/2017 at 4:02 PM, rando said:

Well, that settled what type of mindset we have on display in today's 'Debate with industry personnel' highlight thread.  A reviewer (which isn't the same as a critic) and a self promoting artist you say? 

 

/audible sigh     

 

 

[plissken]

1 hour ago, Bill Brown said:

 

• Comparisons of audiophiles to flat earthers, antivaxxers, adherents to homeopathy, memory water advocates, etc.

• “I am not concerned about hurting their feelings”

• “There’s a benefit to being on the right side of the debate.  You have a higher ground that you get to speak from.”

• People labeled delusional- “If you are ML and you are delusional about Ethernet..”

• “I called him a hack and a coward a while ago but only because I truly believe those things and I can back it up.  Now I have additional proof of his cowardice.”

•  

I'll respond to the items I posted:

 

1. I didn't compare audiophiles at flat earthers. I've responded to people that have no idea about how data transmission works when they are presented with hard examples but yet persist in their delusion and it's detrimental to others as they tend to give out advice based on that delusion. 

 

2. No I'm not concerned about their feelings. Their feelings don't change how async data transfers work in highly buffered, high bandwidth systems

 

3. It's indeed easier to have a debate and being correct. Doesn't matter if it's like Ethernet cables or files with the same MD5 hash. 

 

4. ML is delusional about Ethernet. I can prove it with a listening session where he doesn't know a $350 cable from a $15 cable. 

 

5. I did call him a hack. A hack because he professes his hearing but won't substantiate it. Trust but Verify. He's a coward because he routinely bans people from AS that simply put forward a countering viewpoint. John Sully was an engineer at SGI and knows extensively about how CPU cache works. When Sully was pointing out the Swenson and another poster had no idea what they were talking about he was banned. Same for Archimago. 

 

   

Quote

If someone came to my place of business and called me a liar, shill, delusional, a hack (I guess in my case a “quack”), and a coward they had better be prepared to deal with the consequences, especially the last, as they would soon realize that it wasn’t the case (and they wouldn’t be able to rely on anonymity).

 

We aren't at your place of business.