Is It Time For Moderators?

[The Computer Audiophile]

Hi Guys - As the title says, is it time for moderators in the forum?

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 minute ago, crenca said:

I voted no, due to the context.  If you have a plan then what is it and does it make sense?  Lasker98 and such "usual suspects" don't like being asked the hard questions (such as "what is the basis for the "sound" of digital cables) and like a child, reacts emotionally.  If moderation is a proxy for "thou shalt not challenge my beliefs" then it will be a very bad thing...

I clicked the thanks button on your post because I value all input. However, I disagree with your views. 

 

This site isn't JAMA or a scientific testing ground. It's a place for everyone to come and increase their enjoyment of this wonderful hobby. For most people it isn't enjoyable to be challenged when they are just having fun. We don't need more challenges in their lives, especially from a place in which we come to have fun.

 

If people don't want to engage you in your style of conversation, you need to accept that. Just the same as when people don't want to engage in your idea of a good audio conversation. They need to accept that. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 minute ago, davide256 said:

What you would view as the function of a moderator? What is being delegated?

 

A lot of threads would be more constructive if a moderator could block "holy war" users from further comment on a thread where their comment

agenda was obvious ridicule and obstruction.

 

For the most part I view moderation as keeping topics on topic. This means, if the OP wants a purely objective topic, a moderator would remove the purely subjective comments per the OP's wishes. 

 

We will never moderate opinions if left in the right place and without a personal attack. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

10 minutes ago, esldude said:

Before voting what will be the guidelines these moderators will follow?

 

I realize the pitfalls of slavishly following written guidelines, but with multiple mods you'll need something.

It will be moderating how the site has always been moderated but with more people doing it the rules should be applied more evenly and frequently. For example, if I don't see something I can't moderate it. this usually ends up with me being late to the party and moderating based on what I believe is happening when the reality may be far different.

[The Computer Audiophile]

2 minutes ago, Music Enthusiast said:

If all you want in your thread is listening impressions, call it the Mola Mola Tambaqui listening impressions thread. A general title will attract general posting. And I think people like to have the option to have general discussions about the DAC and the pros/cons of the design. 

You seem to have trouble accepting rules laid out by an OP. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

43 minutes ago, crenca said:

 

 

But (but but) you ARE on a civility crusade!  Your particular viewpoint around "social media ethics" was put forward, I don't know, 2 years ago now.  The forum went round about it, on several threads (usually these were OT discussions), in both a positive and negative way.  Your viewpoint was in the main rejected. I and many others don't agree with you.  You continue to put forth your viewpoint, as is your right.  Rather than trying to persuade however, you claim "personal" attack.  You have little tolerance for others view on this, and claim "personal attack" and victimhood relentlessly.  Folks have said I am on an "anti-MQA crusade" and I don't complain - I even admit the truth in it!  

 

You being on a civility crusade, refuse to own up to it.  In THE VERY NEXT PARAGRAPH following your claim of victimhood you try to convince that a change is needed, something called "informed moderation" (by which you really mean those who agree with you on civility), and how this would be "good" for the forum.  I believe this would be bad for the forum.  You believe in the righteousness of your cause, of your particular cities standards.  I don't - I come from a different city.  You claim victimhood, I deny it - or whatever the truth in it get over it, its audio.  You have demanded change and your ethical standards.  I call this a crusade, and it is.  

 

Up is down, left is right...

Dude, do you care about audio? You only seem to talk about how we talk to each other. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

2 minutes ago, crenca said:

 

Was my response off topic (the need for moderation) in general or the specific Christopher3393 accusation against me (yet again) and of the need for moderation?  

 

Is this thread about audio?

 

You got me confused on this one...this is your moderation/talk-to-each other thread!

I'm just tired of reading about your take on what you call a civility crusade. Plus, your comment was directed right at christopher, not directed at the discussion of moderation or for anyone else to read (except that you'd never send that in a PM to him because you want everyone to read your post).

[The Computer Audiophile]

22 minutes ago, audiobomber said:

Considering that our only moderator is participating, I assume he does not see a need to moderate. Censoring this mild thread would be heavy-handed IMO. 

Trying to spend time with my 6 year old daughter rather than babysitting adults. I’ll get to this thread in a bit. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

7 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

It appears some frequent posters are here on a mission. To clean up the industry - that they believe needs cleaning up; to challenge what others can hear - that they believe cannot be heard; to save people from themselves - that they believe need to be saved; and the list goes on. Some of course just like making sarcastic and belittling remarks and personal attacks.

This is one of my biggest frustrations. Adults who can’t let other adults be adults. Some treat adults like children by attempting to save them from something with which they disagree. 

 

If people don’t like subjective threads about cables, tweaks, etc... then leave the threads alone. If people have something to offer, then by all means offer it up. But, don’t enter the thread and give adults the same arguments they’ve been hearing for decades. It gets old. 

 

I think many people who try to save others from themselves are also playing dumb. They know what’s going to happen, but frequently pretend to offer “help” for some kid who may see the thread and “not know how things work” etc...

 

i also don’t understand why people like to participate in topics where those who are enjoying themselves in the topic clearly don’t want their participation. 

 

Don’t get me wrong. There’s a huge difference between being a jerk and adding value to a topic. Disagreements often add value and are encouraged. 

 

I think it all comes down to respecting other human beings and one’s self. If people don’t want you in their thread, have some respect and stay out. Open your own thread. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

10 hours ago, wgscott said:

 

With all due respect, I think this might be a bit of a caricature.  

 

Instead, let's take a not too infrequent thread topic as a counter-example.  The OP states that he or she is interested in starting up a computer-based audio system, and would like to know (for example) if a Mac Mini is a reasonable starting point.

 

The first responder comes along and categorically states that the sound quality will be vastly inferior to a commercial streaming system, or if one insists upon using a Mac Mini, it is absolutely essential to replace the SMPS with a custom linear power supply, to strip out a bunch of processes from the operating system, etc., in order to get decent sound quality.

 

At no time does this first responder qualify any of this as subjective personal opinion, but simply states that it is the accepted, received, collective wisdom of the community.

 

Is that a fair introduction to Computer Audio?

 

If I then come along and state that there is nothing inherently inferior regarding SMPS in a mac mini, or using an unmodified OS, etc., and that I know of no measurements or tests that substantiate the claim that expensive power supplies or time-consuming and dubious OS modifications will do any good at all, am I the one who is being unreasonable?

 

Many here, including those who would like to see my comments heavily moderated, or perhaps even banished, clearly think so.  Do you agree with them?  (I've always assumed you don't, but if I am wrong, I will apologize and go away.)

Your response to the example post is wonderful. If offers another side to the discussion. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

32 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

 

Yesterday's NY Times had an interesting front page article on Facebook and the challenges they face with moderation. I'd hate to see CA go down the same path.

Don’t worry about that. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 hour ago, pkane2001 said:

 

Depends on where you look. CA is a bit tilted towards the subjective (IMO), so objective measurements are rarely published here. There are exceptions, of course @mitchco, @mansr, @miska, and some others come to mind, but you can find plenty of analog output measurements published on other sites, many with some very high-caliber equipment by folks who really understand how to measure audio.

I love reading both sides. We are working on publishing more measurements. The testing gear and protocol are being assembled. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 hour ago, Ralf11 said:

The strength of CA is that a number of electronics engineers, manf. consultants, etc., scientists, recording engineers, and industry professionals (real professionals, not PR people) post here.

 

I see much of the problem here as symptomatic of a larger problem in society.  And that is the tendency of liberal arts majors ot not understand science at all.  They were taught to think that way by liberal arts faculty (and by abdication of non-majors teaching by science faculty; together with teaching science as a body of knowledge, not as a methodology used to understand reality, that is objective reality).

 

"Viewpoint diversity" is wonderful for addressing policy issue and political questions, but when you are trying to understand an electronic or acoustic device, NOT all viewpoints are of equal value.

 

Yet, some here fly into a rage when asked how they determined what their declarative sentences are based on.

 

 

I think you confuse the end goals of those liberal arts majors with your own. Those liberal arts majors often don’t care about the science and are just on a fun journey finding out what happens in their audio system when they make a change. If they hear a change, that’s what matters to them. 

 

You and and many others seek empirical evidence for sonic changes etc... 

 

Nothing wrong with either approach. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

7 minutes ago, mansr said:

Worse, they assume that nobody else understands science either.

Some do this and it’s a bit annoying in this hobby. When it comes to politics it can be deadly. Fortunately this is a harmless hobby. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

@sandyk Your comments in this thread have likely caused more harm than good. Please look over all your comments and consider which one actually added value to this site.

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 minute ago, sandyk said:

 

No, we need more active participants.

Presently, Computer Audiophile gives the appearance of a forum in severe decline, with mainly only a small core group of posters from both sides,  in all but Rajiv's huge thread. That may also be an indication of what the bulk of the members feel the need for.

I don't think that we can just blame the time of year either, or the continuing war between both Objective and Subjective sides.

 The fact that there have only been 99 votes in almost 4 days in such an important topic should be of concern in a forum with such a large readership.

 Let's hope that the advertisers who support Chris's site don't ask themselves whether their advertising $$$ could be better spent elsewhere.

 

I don't know how else to say it, but you're so wrong. I suggest sticking to topics in which you have some expertise or factual data. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

Just now, sandyk said:

 

 I asked you earlier if you had any stats for recent days to peruse but didn't receive a reply

 

I have no words.

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 minute ago, Jud said:

 

"Tell me all about your private business or I'll assume it's in the dumper"?

Post it online as well. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

The mentions of limiting posts are really interesting, but also so “different” from the normal way of doing things. 

 

What are others’ thoughts on a daily post limit?

[The Computer Audiophile]

I think a comment limit per topic per day may be an easier way to at least attempt this. 

 

If people only had X number of comments they could leave in this thread and the same for all other threads, it wouldn’t be too crazy. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

The vast majority don’t care about this type of stuff. They come here to have fun, escape their regular busy life, or just want to read about audio. They don’t want to invest time in governance or housekeeping issues. 

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

52 minutes ago, esldude said:

So any change in moderation on the horizon?

 

I’d prefer not to change how the site is moderated because I use a philosophy in which I believe. Let adults be adults and they’ll be adults. For the most part this works and I’m not sure the end result would be more favorable if this changed. 

 

Part of participating in the community is accepting responsibility for one’s actions including of course their words but also reporting posts that are out of line. In a way the community controls its own destiny. 

 

Some people complain to me and threaten to leave the site if more moderation action isn’t taken. However, these people almost never use the report post feature to let me know what they believe is against the rules.

 

When posts are reported, things can turn out much better for the most part. When this site started I read every post, but still moderated the same way. It would be great if, me standing down encouraged the community to stand up (with respect to reporting posts and trying to trying to  keep things more friendly or at least respectful ). But, I realize this is a fun hobby for everyone and they don’t want to think about this kind of stuff. 

 

I’ll likely enable a feature soon that makes it easier for me to delegate moderating capability to the OPs. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

6 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

Careful, your paranoia is showing.

 

On the contrary, I think your outbursts are sad.

 

what is this, quit at twenty paces? I stick to what I have said, I will leave if enhanced moderation is not forthcoming simply because such outbursts and similar assaults disrupt threads.

Stop the nonsense. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 hour ago, Thomas savage said:

It’s not a job I enjoy so no and tbh I would not recommend it to anyone.  Anyway someone on this thread mentioned you needed to have a high IQ for moderation so I’m out the running on that account. 

I love this post. If everyone in this hobby had a bit more self deprecating humor, it'd be so much more enjoyable. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

5 minutes ago, jabbr said:

 

Yes! Another way to look at it it s than it stimulates debate... @The Computer Audiophile We need a “disagree” vote so that we don’t feel the need to otherwise respond 

Now that’s something I really like. 

 

Perhaps if people had the "opportunity" to respectfully disagree via button, they'd use it rather than be disrespectful via words.