Audiophile Neuroscience Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 1 minute ago, The Computer Audiophile said: You sure? :~) hell yeah that's why I added the "edit" ? ... Sound Minds Mind Sound Link to comment
phototristan Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 23 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said: Hi Joel - John Darko and I had a disagreement about his RSS feeds being published here. He suggested a phone call to which I agreed. We resolved the situation and remain friends. Pay to play, so to speak? Link to comment
Popular Post The Computer Audiophile Posted July 17, 2018 Author Popular Post Share Posted July 17, 2018 1 minute ago, phototristan said: Pay to play, so to speak? For sure. Multiple millions of dollars changed hands. This is the lucrative world of online HiFi publishing you know. Summit, AudioDoctor, Fluffytime and 3 others 4 1 1 Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
crenca Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 "Then the Law is an Ass ! Does it also permit dissemination of Mobile Phone Texts ???" How very odd. Where does this expectation of privacy - let alone that the law would be such - come from? If you say something, to anyone, about anything, why would you think that person would keep it to themselves? If you say "I like the color blue" or "your an m#^&#$f#@!#%" or "I am going to call my lawyer - war is on" who in their right mind keeps any of this to themselves? You are a social being. Humans can not survive in isolation, and in all things (i.e. love, life, business, internet) we are social animals. Even in space where we legally require a certain amount of discretion (not correctly termed "privacy") such as my business (medicine), someone knows and much is communicated because it has to be. What good is communication if it is not communicated? Hey MQA, if it is not all $voodoo$, show us the math! Link to comment
sandyk Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 8 minutes ago, Jud said: Entirely aside from the present situation, Alex - Do you think as a matter of policy people who have been threatened, with regard to their businesses or persons, ought to have to worry that they will be subject to legal action if they reveal that to someone else? Jud There is a big difference between revealing the information to someone else for advice , e.g. a legal representative, and posting it in a forum for perhaps many thousands to see and make judgement, and perhaps result in a financial loss to one of those involved, perhaps via sales revenue. If the dispute is serious enough, that's what the Court system is for. You only need to look at the replies in this thread to see the many varied opinions. If it's O.K. to post the content of emails, where there is no specific statement requiring the recipient to keep the contents private, then is it O.K. to also publish the contents of mail without the permission of the sender ? I am not just talking about the USA either. As far as I am concerned there are moral issues here as well. Alex How a Digital Audio file sounds, or a Digital Video file looks, is governed to a large extent by the Power Supply area. All that Identical Checksums gives is the possibility of REGENERATING the file to close to that of the original file. PROFILE UPDATED 13-11-2020 Link to comment
Popular Post serendipitydawg Posted July 17, 2018 Popular Post Share Posted July 17, 2018 I have to say that this is one of the most entertaining threads ever to appear on CA. All my favourite characters (plissken, wgscott, jud, shadders & mansr to mention a few) and nary a mention of some outlandish and implausible modification. I have read the entire thread thus far and agree that the only thing to do with bullies is to stand up to them. Mr Dorgay clearly has an inflated idea of his importance. Making ignorant threats invoking the word "war" can't be seen as anything but bullying. On another thread, someone joked about the Audiophile Liberation Front. Maybe it's time has come?? AudioDoctor and Fluffytime 2 " The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance--it is the illusion of knowledge." Daniel.J.Boorstin Link to comment
phototristan Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 12 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said: For sure. Multiple millions of dollars changed hands. This is the lucrative world of online HiFi publishing you know. Details, please. Apparently Darko didn't want his content on your site either. He contacted you and you took it down. Was that really that difficult? Was the difference just that Darko begged you and said "pretty please"? Link to comment
crenca Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 3 minutes ago, serendipitydawg said: On another thread, someone joked about the Audiophile Liberation Front. Maybe it's time has come?? It's long past time for the consumer to have access to information about Audio that is not filtered through these eccentric characters who run these trade publications. Hey MQA, if it is not all $voodoo$, show us the math! Link to comment
Audiophile Neuroscience Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 8 minutes ago, crenca said: If you say something, to anyone, about anything, why would you think that person would keep it to themselves? I gather you're not good at keeping secrets. Besides I believe you answered your own question. It is a matter of discretion. Sound Minds Mind Sound Link to comment
crenca Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 4 minutes ago, phototristan said: Details, please. Apparently Darko didn't want his content on your site either. He contacted you and you took it down. Was that really that difficult? Was the difference just that Darko begged you and said "pretty please"? Are you an conscious or unconscious liar? Hey MQA, if it is not all $voodoo$, show us the math! Link to comment
phototristan Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 1 minute ago, crenca said: Are you an conscious or unconscious liar? That was prior to Darko contacting CA. See anything form Darko on CA more recently? Didn't think so. Link to comment
Audiophile Neuroscience Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 3 minutes ago, phototristan said: Details, please. Apparently Darko didn't want his content on your site either. He contacted you and you took it down. Was that really that difficult? Was the difference just that Darko begged you and said "pretty please"? I also brought this point up, not about asking nicely, but why Darko asked in the first place. I mean was it a request about a one-off inadvertent error or a request never to subscribe to his feeds. Sound Minds Mind Sound Link to comment
crenca Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 3 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said: I gather you're not good at keeping secrets. Besides I believe you answered your own question. It is a matter of discretion. Even though I have you on ignore for some reason this post came through. It reminded me why I put you there in the first place - the secret is out ? Hey MQA, if it is not all $voodoo$, show us the math! Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted July 17, 2018 Author Share Posted July 17, 2018 7 minutes ago, phototristan said: Details, please. Apparently Darko didn't want his content on your site either. He contacted you and you took it down. Was that really that difficult? Was the difference just that Darko begged you and said "pretty please"? He never threatened war or lawsuits and is always a nice guy. You certainly think there’s going to be a gatcha moment here don’t you. Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
Ralf11 Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 16 minutes ago, crenca said: ... Where does this expectation of privacy - let alone that the law would be such - come from? ... US Const. Amendments 1, 4, 5, 9 common law is much older - at least 5 torts have or imply it some French code law may be germane; and then there are Justinian & Hammuradic codes... very old Link to comment
phototristan Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 2 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said: He never threatened war or lawsuits and is always a nice guy. So you've proven that if one kisses your ass, you'd take it down from CA, I see. Double standard, much? Link to comment
Popular Post The Computer Audiophile Posted July 17, 2018 Author Popular Post Share Posted July 17, 2018 Just now, phototristan said: So you've proven that if one kisses your ass, you'd take it down from CA, I see. Double standard, much? You nailed it. Ask John how much ass kidding he did. Tremendous amount. Get real. You’re proving a point but not the one you think you’re proving. AudioDoctor, Jud and Fluffytime 2 1 Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
crenca Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 2 minutes ago, Ralf11 said: US Const. Amendments 1, 4, 5, 9 common law is much older - at least 5 torts have or imply it some French code law may be germane; and then there are Justinian & Hammuradic codes... very old Well, perhaps the 9th as "not enumerated" means what people want it to mean. This (legal) philosophy is really quite new... Hey MQA, if it is not all $voodoo$, show us the math! Link to comment
Ralf11 Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 it is centuries or millennia old - not saying it cover this issue Link to comment
Audiophile Neuroscience Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 3 minutes ago, crenca said: Even though I have you on ignore for some reason this post came through. 19 minutes ago, crenca said: What good is communication if it is not communicated? Hmmm, interesting dichotomy 3 minutes ago, crenca said: It reminded me why I put you there in the first place - the secret is out ? I consider it a badge of honour ? Sound Minds Mind Sound Link to comment
crenca Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 3 minutes ago, Ralf11 said: it is centuries or millennia old - not saying it cover this issue Ok...I was referring to the issue here - a strange expectation of "privacy" around communication between persons - not the rights of persons vis-a-vis the state, not that these rights are described by the modern concept of "privacy". Hey MQA, if it is not all $voodoo$, show us the math! Link to comment
Audiophile Neuroscience Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 6 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said: You nailed it. Ask John how much ass kidding he did. Tremendous amount. Chris, why would Darko want his RSS not displayed on CA. Is it the same reasoning as JD? It's not how politely they asked, but why they asked, is my question. Sound Minds Mind Sound Link to comment
Ralf11 Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 6 minutes ago, crenca said: Ok...I was referring to the issue here - a strange expectation of "privacy" around communication between persons - not the rights of persons vis-a-vis the state, not that these rights are described by the modern concept of "privacy". the torts concern person to person interactions still not relevant here tho Link to comment
Popular Post kumakuma Posted July 17, 2018 Popular Post Share Posted July 17, 2018 16 minutes ago, phototristan said: So you've proven that if one kisses your ass, you'd take it down from CA, I see. Double standard, much? The fact that Chris hasn't banned you long ago tells me everything I need to know about HIS character and how HE runs this site. A lesser man would have banned your trolling, ignorant ass hours ago. phosphorein, crenca, jtwrace and 7 others 6 2 2 Sometimes it's like someone took a knife, baby Edgy and dull and cut a six inch valley Through the middle of my skull Link to comment
phototristan Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 6 minutes ago, kumakuma said: The fact that Chris hasn't banned you long ago tells me everything I need to know about HIS character and how HE runs this site. A lesser man would have banned your trolling, ignorant ass hours ago. Whaaaa. What whiner. Sounds like something you should go crying to your mommy about. Link to comment
Recommended Posts