Acceptable Responses when Impossible Claims Are Made??

[Ralf11]

38 minutes ago, AudioDoctor said:

This is destined to go places...

 

at jet speed?

[marce]

3 hours ago, sandyk said:

 I repeat :

It's not up to you to decide whether the claims are possible or not, or for that matter ANY member of this forum.

 You have made it abundantly clear in your button clicks that you do not accept that. Just like everyone else, you are not infallible !

 BTW, it should be very obvious to most reasonable members that this is yet another in a series of threads started  by Ralf 11 , where I am the main target in this thread designed to ridicule me and other Audiiophiles of this forum.

And one wonders why, the paranoid rantings aside, your always telling us what we can and can't do, why don't you shut the F*** up for a bit. You've won anyway because most that did post something technical probably wont any more after recent threads. So you have basically got your one sided, no opposition, no facts, no science, to play in, so shut up and be happy.

[marce]

3 hours ago, sandyk said:

 I repeat :

It's not up to you to decide whether the claims are possible or not, or for that matter ANY member of this forum.

 You have made it abundantly clear in your button clicks that you do not accept that. Just like everyone else, you are not infallible !

 BTW, it should be very obvious to most reasonable members that this is yet another in a series of threads started  by Ralf 11 , where I am the main target in this thread designed to ridicule me and other Audiiophiles of this forum.

I hadn't made any claims, but by the same token its not up to you to tell us claims are real or not.

[The Computer Audiophile]

6 hours ago, marce said:

why don't you shut the F*** up for a bit.

That's not OK here. This is a warning.

[The Computer Audiophile]

22 hours ago, Blackmorec said:

keep it friendly, civil and polite and we’ll never have to worry. 

Very true.

[The Computer Audiophile]

19 hours ago, Dutch said:

Just leave out the sarcasm, ridicule and condescending tone. Try to be positive and constructive. Don’t repeat the same statements ad nauseum, don’t try to score points with your buddies and just walk away when someone disagrees or doesn’t want to engage in (potentially endless) discussion.

I love it.

[Ralf11]

14 hours ago, sandyk said:

@#$%^&*()&^%$^^&**()*&^%$^&*()_*&^%$^^&*()_*&^%$^&*(

 

 

start your OWN thread and stop making personal attacks on other people, ad nauseum 

 

you curse worse than marce but weren't called out for it

 

also, this thread had nothing to do with you until your attention-seeking behavior forced you to put yourself into it

 

leave out the sarcasm, ridicule and condescending tone. Try to be positive and constructive

 

it is not YOUR place to tell other people what THEIR place is

[plissken]

20 hours ago, gmgraves said:

We are dealing, here, with people’s senses, in this case hearing.

 

Don't we wish. Sighted bias plays a large part.

[plissken]

21 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

That's not OK here. This is a warning.

 

It's Marce, he's just using regular expression. Some here will get that.

[gmgraves]

1 hour ago, plissken said:

 

Don't we wish. Sighted bias plays a large part.

Well, of course sight has something to do with it, especially in a concert situation or watching a music video, but in the context of that post, I was only talking about hearing.

[Ralf11]

1 hour ago, plissken said:

 

Don't we wish. Sighted bias plays a large part.

 

https://seanolive.blogspot.com/2009/04/dishonesty-of-sighted-audio-product.html

[AudioDoctor]

16 hours ago, Ralf11 said:

 

at jet speed?

At ramming speed. 

[marce]

15 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

That's not OK here. This is a warning.

I try an keep a civil tongue in my replies, but in this case Chris I am fed up of my name being mentioned when I haven't even participated in the thread, so decided to emphasise the point with the use of a strategically placed invective. No doubt the post was reported by our resident "Angry letter to the editor"... Numerous threads degenerate into pointless discussion often due to Sandy jumping in on any post by myself of others that he often mentions. Discussion is often stifled because of what we can and cannot mention and so do things really move on, no.

I would say the constant use of peoples names in derogatory posts is against the spirit of the Forum.

 

[sandyk]

39 minutes ago, marce said:

I would say the constant use of peoples names in derogatory posts is against the spirit of the Forum.

 

This thread is against the spirit of the forum. It's yet another in a series of attacks against the Audiophile members of the forum by those who wish to save us from ourselves.   Furthermore, I seriously doubt that there is a " resident "Angry letter to the editor" member.

 It's more likely to be quite a few different members wishing to see this forum return to more pleasant days where there wasn't an all out war between the Subjective and Audiophile members, where opposing views weren't shouted down, and for the most part discussions were civil. These days, you won't even see the members of the Industry that used to frequently post here and we all benefitted from their participation.

 

[Blackmorec]

17 minutes ago, marce said:

I try an keep a civil tongue in my replies, but in this case Chris I am fed up of my name being mentioned when I haven't even participated in the thread, so decided to emphasise the point with the use of a strategically placed invective. No doubt the post was reported by our resident "Angry letter to the editor"... Numerous threads degenerate into pointless discussion often due to Sandy jumping in on any post by myself of others that he often mentions. Discussion is often stifled because of what we can and cannot mention and so do things really move on, no.

I would say the constant use of peoples names in derogatory posts is against the spirit of the Forum.

 

With respect Marce, that shoe fits the other foot equally well. Personally I have no desire to fight or argue with anybody, and i really appreciate solid technical input in a discussion, but the scathing and personal remarks that typically accompany some posts (always from the same individuals) are a. Unnecessary b. Impolite c. Childlike.  I say childlike not as a judgement but in recognition of the ego state that generates those replies, where the goal is to elicit an equally impolite reply which can then be roundly and sanctimoniously condemned. Pretty much what is currently happening to a certain forum member right now. 

[semente]

As long as you keep it cordial, debate leads to better understanding (even when sides are deeply entrenched in their positions).

Be gentle and polite.

[semente]

I had offered to join @manisandher and @mansr in that famous Blue Pill or Red Pill challenge but my offer was ignored.

I'm truly convinced that it would have made a positive difference to have a third party present given that both of them have such diametrically opposed views...

 

At the time I suggested that Mani point out to Mans which aspects of sound to focus, in other words to train him on how and what to listen for, and have him try to hear the difference. I'm unsure this was done.

I have no recollection of any comments by Mans regarding the performance of Mani's system regarding low-level detail retrieval either. This is important.

 

It's a shame that the subject was dropped, there was a lot to be learned from it and an opportunity for bridging across the colossal divide was lost.

[tapatrick]

On 12/12/2019 at 7:28 PM, Ralf11 said:

What responses are allowed when someone posts a claim that cannot possibly be correct?

 

 

Good question. My take is that if you have information or understanding why any claim cannot be correct then please share it. I think most people would be interested to learn otherwise why come on here. 

 

Keep it to the claim, not the character of the poster. It's pretty difficult to discern why someone posts something because we are complex creatures who cannot be fully appreciated through this medium. Who knows someone might have smoked something strong or in their system a synergy might have fallen into place and are driven to express it to fellow audiophiles. Time will tell.

 

Like all things in life there are ways to further discussion and ways to stop them dead as is the want and intention of the poster. This can't really be policed except by some basic standards set by Chris. If a discussion or discussions descend into repeated stalemate, someone is not learning something and not many find it interesting....

 

[Iving]

59 minutes ago, Blackmorec said:

Personally I have no desire to fight or argue with anybody, and i really appreciate solid technical input in a discussion, but the scathing and personal remarks that typically accompany some posts (always from the same individuals) are a. Unnecessary b. Impolite c. Childlike.  I say childlike not as a judgement but in recognition of the ego state that generates those replies, where the goal is to elicit an equally impolite reply which can then be roundly and sanctimoniously condemned.

 

The offending TA ego state is really Critical Parent which assumes a "You Should" stance. The poor reaction comes from Rebellious Child.

Gambits are delivered at the psychological level. It is what is meant - rather than what is said - that provokes.

"It's not what you say, but how you say it." (whether ulterior or not)

Usually there is a switch when the Persecutor assumes Victim and invites a Rescuer etc [cf. Karpman's "drama triangle"].

Players muck in with all they can muster. Escalation is the default strategy.

Some threads on AS are relatively free of drama.

Some are not. All of the subjective-objective debates are mostly drama / psychological warfare.

The only winning moves are relentless courtesy (if you have the maturity and the inclination) or not playing at all ...

... with the possible exception of the true sociopathic troll who really doesn't have a heart to hurt.

I saw on here TA described pejoratively as a pseudo-science. Well it sort of is although actually the Parent and Child ego states can be accounted for entirely in terms of conditioning principles [Pavlov, Skinner]. We are convinced by what we want to be convinced by after all.

btw "The Big Crazy" (TM) started a long time ago.

 

[tapatrick]

22 minutes ago, Iving said:

Better than an orchestra

love it..

Subjective/objective debates require Radical and Relentless Courtesy ! And makes much more sense to harness and direct our ability to amplify what we feel and think for creative ends otherwise its all just...

[4est]

58 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 

This thread is against the spirit of the forum. It's yet another in a series of attacks against the Audiophile members of the forum by those who wish to save us from ourselves.   Furthermore, I seriously doubt that there is a " resident "Angry letter to the editor" member.

 It's more likely to be quite a few different members wishing to see this forum return to more pleasant days where there wasn't an all out war between the Subjective and Audiophile members, where opposing views weren't shouted down, and for the most part discussions were civil. These days, you won't even see the members of the Industry that used to frequently post here and we all benefitted from their participation.

 

Easy now Alex. Although I agree with you in spirit, I am not so sure that your posting on this thread is any different than a objective bent one in a subjective thread. I implore you to quit taking the bait, and derailing things- even if you might be right. People are people and often disagree. Unless we can somehow manage to get along better, this forum will continue to degrade from the constant noise. Please do not take this as I am picking on you personally, but as my simply using this as an example.

[Summit]

Acceptable Responses when Impossible Claims Are Made should enlightening us why it is in fact impossible, objectively and with reliable references.

 

Saying things like it is against physics is very vague IMO and it’s better to try to explain which physical law and how the design is in contradiction of the law.

[Summit]

21 minutes ago, 4est said:

Easy now Alex. Although I agree with you in spirit, I am not so sure that your posting on this thread is any different than a objective bent one in a subjective thread. I implore you to quit taking the bait, and derailing things- even if you might be right. People are people and often disagree. Unless we can somehow manage to get along better, this forum will continue to degrade from the constant noise. Please do not take this as I am picking on you personally, but as my simply using this as an example.

 

Maybe because he was personally pointed out in the post he replied too 🙄.

[4est]

32 minutes ago, Summit said:

 

Maybe because he was personally pointed out in the post he replied too 🙄.

Oh, certainly. People can point all day long, but one doesn't have to take the bait.

[Summit]

3 minutes ago, 4est said:

Oh, certainly. People can point all day long, but one doesn't have to take the bait.

 

No but it is understandable.