Popular Post SoundAndMotion Posted December 18, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted December 18, 2019 6 hours ago, austinpop said: I know too many thoughtful and contributing ex-members who have left AS due to the negativity. I agree with the bold, but don't agree with the italicized. I find this is true for all audio forums I read (used to be 7, now 6). Although for many that left, the negativity was part (perhaps all), for others it was just not worth the effort, or they preferred spending their time in other ways. At first I wanted to analogize: if you don't like getting hit, don't choose boxing. But the point of boxing is to hit. Better examples would be basketball, soccer or hockey. Hitting is not explicitly part of the game, but it happens and if you don't like it, choose another sport. I don't think "negativity" (and other bad things) are explicitly or necessarily part of audio forums, but it's part of every one I've seen. I admire Chris' moderation, not because I agree with his decisions, but because of the results (over the long term). If it has become an unpleasant burden for him, I'll trust his decisions and won't offer advice. I know if I had an audio forum, I'd kill it with bad decisions. 3 hours ago, Ralf11 said: However, anyone who has taken 2 years of physics (physics majors, and chemistry and biology majors) is well versed in the fundamentals of classical physics, and therefore easily able to "comment authoritatively" on violations of fundamental laws of classical physics, i.e. cable threads. Engineers take (or used to take) a different physics than physics majors, but any EE or EE will also be able to "comment authoritatively" on such matters. Well you didn't go to my university, where Bio and Chem majors took 1 year - a special version with some, but not too much, calculus. Physics and Engineering majors took the first 4 quarters (a year and third) together in the calculus-intensive courses. As someone who took 4 years of calculus-intensive physics, I can tell you how important simplifying assumptions are to introduce topics (frictionless surfaces, infinite planes, pure vacuums), but how limiting it is to stick with them. This does not mean cables have magical properties, but it does speak against the arrogance of "I had some courses, so I know everything about that". Even when I think someone is right, I find that unwarranted overconfidence to be a problem. "Commenting authoritatively", aka an appeal to self-authority, is not a convincing tactic for me. 3 hours ago, Ralf11 said: Analogies to evolutionary biology or climate science, in large part, are inapposite. As someone who has worked for decades in those two areas, I am able to "comment authoritatively" that the analogy does not hold. Please explain. Appeals to self-authority because one had some "related" courses would seem a problem in all types of technical/scientific forums. I'd be happy if you'd tell me why I'm wrong, but just not "because I say so". sandyk, Iving, The Computer Audiophile and 2 others 1 1 3 Link to comment
Recommended Posts