Article: Audiophile Style State of the Union

[kumakuma]

I have to say that I'm not a fan of this change.

 

This place is interesting because you have folks with radically different viewpoints interacting with each other.

 

Your creation of an objectivist containment zone sends the message that objectivists are second class citizens here. 

 

I also believe it will turn this place into an echo chamber for subjectivists and cause valuable contributors like Mans to move on to other more welcoming places.

 

The fact that the subjectivists are lining up to pat you on the back for making this change suggests I'm right.

 

[kumakuma]

1 minute ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Subjectivists are likely happy because not they can have fun without  snark, combativeness, imposition, confrontation, or belittling. When objectivists couldn't police themselves and stop their own rude behavior, changes were necessary. 

 

In my opinion, you are attempting to put folks into boxes and treat them all the same.

 

The fundamental issue here isn't that Alex is a subjectivist. It is that he can be rude and you've never punished him for his bad behavior. 

 

The same applies to me and others. The problem isn't that we are objectivists or subjectivists but that we can be assholes on occasion and you've allowed us to get away with it.

[kumakuma]

1 minute ago, firedog said:

People need to realize there's a difference between a thread (like the DLNA thread referenced above) where the OP asks for info/opinion and is clearly asking for all points of view, or a thread  where the OP says something like, "do you think USB cables can make a difference?", as opposed to a thread where the topic is "USB cable comparisons". In the latter, the OP clearly isn't asking to be told that there isn't a difference between cables and cables can't possibly make a difference.
 

In the first type of thread all points of view are welcome, in the second the objectivists clearly aren't welcome, especially if they want to be snarky. I don't really think this is rocket science.

 

I agree.

 

Perhaps there just needs to be a better way for those starting threads to indicate what kinds of opinions they welcome.

[kumakuma]

Just now, The Computer Audiophile said:

Don't you think it's obvious in most cases? Serious question. 

 

 

Not always, especially if the person is new or not a frequent poster. 

 

I was thinking something like a flag that the thread creator sets:

 

- All opinions welcome (default)

- Subjectivists only

- Objectivists only

 

Probably a bear to implement though...

[kumakuma]

1 minute ago, Allan F said:

 

Get real! As you very well know, there have been numerous threads where the OP has clearly indicated that naysayers are not welcome, only to find the thread hijacked by objectivists who could not control themselves in their zeal to save the OP and like minded souls from themselves.

 

If we're going to cherry pick evidence, counselor, there are also "subjectivist" threads that are amazingly free of "objectivist" intrusions. 

[kumakuma]

59 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 As I said in the article, audio is inherently a subjective pursuit.

 

Is it or is that just the approach that many, but not all, take to the hobby?

[kumakuma]

25 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

Liking something is subjective. I'm guessing people listen to music because they like it or like the way it sounds or there is some subjective reason why they pursue music and audio. If people don't think audio is an inherently subjective pursuit, there is always Hydrogen Audio where nothing subjective is allowed. 

 

How could one take the approach that audio / HiFi as a hobby is inherently objective? If you look at graphs and charts only, then yes I get it. But, if you listen to music for enjoyment that's subjective. 

 

Please don't think I'm saying anything related to how components are designed and the masterful work done by people like Mitch using DSP and measurements to improve my room. I'm not. I am saying that in the end I listen as a subjective pursuit for of entertainment. 

 

 

The act of listening itself may be subjective but I'm talking about the process of getting to this point through the selection of components to buy, things to test, etc., all of which can be approached in various different ways.

[kumakuma]

Just now, Allan F said:

Oh, would you prefer "mission" or "hobbyhorse"?

 

Give it a break, Allan!

 

You guys won. You've convinced Chris to drive out the undesirables in order to create your nice warm place where everyone is a friend, no opinions are challenged, and nothing of any lasting value to anyone is created.

 

[kumakuma]

53 minutes ago, Iving said:

 

Well - I wouldn't agree with the last bit.

 

The reality is that the folks that you all consider the most disruptive are also the ones with the most technical skills and knowledge.

 

Once Chris has driven these folks off, the technical core of this place will be gone and what will be left?

 

A bunch of guys sitting around sharing stories about which ethernet cable sounds the best.

 

In other words, a shell of what this place was and could still be.

 

It appears that the high water mark of this place will be the MQA vaporware thread. 

 

I ask others to reflect on what happened in that thread.

 

Was the real value that that thread provided created through making this is a "fun place" or by breaking a few (dozen) eggs and pissing more than a few people off?

[kumakuma]

3 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

But also surprising if you take objectivists at their word of wanting to better the audio world and leave lasting information for newbies. I guess without the satisfaction of pissing in someone’s punch bowl, the altruism is gone. 

 

Is this stereotyping and labeling of others truly necessary?

[kumakuma]

4 minutes ago, AudioDoctor said:

The example above of how this site took on MQA and how that won't happen anymore is complete baloney. There is still a place for that here, the problem is the people who it is for don't want to use it. The real question you need to ask is why do they not want to use it?

 

Mans has already left and I expect most of the other folks with technical chops to either leave soon or scale back their participation in this site.

 

Will you be stepping in to fill their shoes?

[kumakuma]

1 minute ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

If you think there are only a handful of people on Earth capable of debunking MQA and offering technical information, you're incorrect.

 

True but they will driving traffic to other sites in the future.

[kumakuma]

16 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I don't think the MQA discussion will fly at ASR. There is a monetary motive to push MQA over there. 

 

MQA is done. I was thinking of the future.

[kumakuma]

1 minute ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

With other topics it isn't much different over there. If there's a financial interest, it won't be measured and compared to the least expensive options and talked about the same way as products from manufacturers that aren't liked. It's really all about using the term science as a mask, cherry picking the clap traps, and protecting one's own business. Fine with me, but I'm not willingly blind to it.

 

You seem to assume that the refugees are going to Amir's place. 

[kumakuma]

Just now, daverich4 said:

Any chance that’s a typo and you meant to say...

A Mansr gotta do what a Mansr gotta do?

 

Mans is his name.

[kumakuma]

4 minutes ago, daverich4 said:

Jeez, seriously? That wasn’t a little bit funny?

 

 

Sorry, I appear to have subconsciously adopted the humorless stance of the subjectivists who have taken control of this site. 

[kumakuma]

30 minutes ago, Bill Brown said:

I understand why some think that the new objective forum is them being "pushed away."  I have come to believe, as Chris has said, that this doesn't have to be the case.  I also like that he has said that non-repetitive, non-belittling, non name-calling objective, educational content is welcome in other areas of the forum.

 

I think those who decided to leave felt unappreciated.

 

I can't help but think that a simple message from Chris along the lines of the following would have prevented much of this unpleasantness and the exodus of good people:

 

"Sorry to hear you've decided to leave. I wish you'd reconsider this decision as you're a valued member of this forum."

 

 

 

 

[kumakuma]

26 minutes ago, audiobomber said:

No, I did not appreciate Ralf11's constant trolling and inane jokes.

 

I wasn't thinking of Ralf11 when I wrote my post as he was banned by Chris.

[kumakuma]

6 minutes ago, Blake said:

 

Wait, let's be clear:  He was banned for a reason.  The other day you mentioned that instead of Chris creating the new subforum and rules, that he should have simply addressed problems individually and ban the member if needed.  If you followed Ralf's history here and in particular you followed the thread where Ralf was taunting Chris (which resulted in the ban), well then, what should Chris have done?

 

I am not in disagreement with you. Please read my last two posts again.

[kumakuma]

17 hours ago, thyname said:

You are totally missing the point with this move Chris @The Computer Audiophile. The “objectivists” post in all audio forums with a purpose: to save the poor souls from the evil of snake oil and high end audio charlatans and scammers. They already have their own site somewhere else (we know where). But they cannot save anyone there, as they are all saints. So they need to go to other places to do the saving. Like good missionaries. If they all talk between themselves, it’s very boring, and serves no purpose.

 

Bottom line: this ain’t gone work. Look up the meaning of “missionary” in dictionary. They need to go places

 

Not all evidence-based audiophiles are "missionaries". 

[kumakuma]

37 minutes ago, Jud said:

Anyone else think all the rich chocolatey goodness has long since been drained from this discussion (unless someone comes up with a brilliant alternative)?

 

I disagree.

 

We need a good Airing Of The Grievances from time to time: