Article: Audiophile Style State of the Union

[PeterG]

Hi Chris,

 

I applaud this (long overdue) effort to get rid of some of the incivility on AS.  I'm also a subjectivist with little need to read the 100th iteration of the same objectivist statement.

 

But I'm a bit concerned this is the wrong solution.  Two thoughts:

 

First, too much of the internet allows people to easily filter out those with whom we disagree.  In politics, this manifests itself as too many Democrats watching only MSNBC, and too many Republicans watching only Fox.  Collectively, we lose a common set of facts and ideas.  So I hope that does not happen here.

 

Second, you seem to suggest a much more obvious solution in your post when you refer to the usual suspects causing you to steer clear of certain threads.  I have the same problem.  The real answer is to get rid of the usual suspects so that the rest of us can enjoy your (our?) awesome website in aesthetic, intellectual, collegial peace.

 

Thanks again for all your great work

[Account Closed]

2 minutes ago, PeterG said:

Hi Chris,

 

I applaud this (long overdue) effort to get rid of some of the incivility on AS.  I'm also a subjectivist with little need to read the 100th iteration of the same objectivist statement.

 

But I'm a bit concerned this is the wrong solution.  Two thoughts:

 

First, too much of the internet allows people to easily filter out those with whom we disagree.  In politics, this manifests itself as too many Democrats watching only MSNBC, and too many Republicans watching only Fox.  Collectively, we lose a common set of facts and ideas.  So I hope that does not happen here.

 

Second, you seem to suggest a much more obvious solution in your post when you refer to the usual suspects causing you to steer clear of certain threads.  I have the same problem.  The real answer is to get rid of the usual suspects so that the rest of us can enjoy your (our?) awesome website in aesthetic, intellectual, collegial peace.

 

Thanks again for all your great work

My guess is that they depart voluntarily when they realize that nobody is paying attention any more. The time to cull them out easily has long since past. It would have easier earlier on. And if you think this is bad now, (MSNBC vs Fox type behavior) just wait until this summer.

[The Computer Audiophile]

 

45 minutes ago, audiobomber said:

ASR is another example of a place "where nothing subjective is allowed".

 

Absolutely false. Read an "objective" review of a product that Amir doesn't like. It's all gussied up with subjective sauce talking about cheapness of the chassis etc... 

 

 

37 minutes ago, Allan F said:

 

To compare the relatively trivial differences of opinion regarding the contents of an online audio forum to the scourge of anti-Semitism is, IMO, insulting, insensitive, outrageous and completely inappropriate. The analogy is a most egregious example of the application of Godwin's law or its philosophical equivalent.

 

I agree 100%. When will people just stop with the nonsense. 

 

 

 

8 minutes ago, skatbelt said:

What is the equivalent of Nancy Pelosi's action in this context?

 

More serious. It's good that you do address these issues, Chris. At the same time I think it is a shame it's needed. And I am curious if it will have effect. Feels a bit contrived.

 

What about it feels contrived? Serious question. We have a problem, we've tried solutions with limited success. This is yet another solution to the issue. 

 

 

 

 

2 minutes ago, PeterG said:

Hi Chris,

 

I applaud this (long overdue) effort to get rid of some of the incivility on AS.  I'm also a subjectivist with little need to read the 100th iteration of the same objectivist statement.

 

But I'm a bit concerned this is the wrong solution.  Two thoughts:

 

First, too much of the internet allows people to easily filter out those with whom we disagree.  In politics, this manifests itself as too many Democrats watching only MSNBC, and too many Republicans watching only Fox.  Collectively, we lose a common set of facts and ideas.  So I hope that does not happen here.

 

Second, you seem to suggest a much more obvious solution in your post when you refer to the usual suspects causing you to steer clear of certain threads.  I have the same problem.  The real answer is to get rid of the usual suspects so that the rest of us can enjoy your (our?) awesome website in aesthetic, intellectual, collegial peace.

 

Thanks again for all your great work

 

 

I hear your points and take them seriously. Fortunately with spaces for all conversations here on AS people can do what they like. I can't force anyone to do what they don't want. As it was, people were leaving because threads were being ruined. Then where do we land? I think your concern is great and one I share, but there is no solution that forces people to do what they don't want to do , and that's co-mingle with others who they disagree with about an audio hobby. This is supposed to be enjoyable, not a fight about how to have fun. 

 

Second, I hear you here as well. However, I like reading posts from people who often cause me headaches. If they'd only post in the right location and not derail other threads I'd love it. I hate to throw the baby out with the bathwater. This is my way of saying, hey stick around but please do so in the appropriate place. 

 

[Barton]

Limiting individual posts to three a day could help. Those three post would have to be good ones, so quality of content might improve. Repetitiveness would lessen because posting for sport would stop. Both are pretty rampant on the site. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

I often wish people would stop to look around a bit and realize there are people without a place to sleep for the night and without food. Yet, we're here arguing about where the appropriate place to post is on a site dedicated to first world problems. 

 

Take a step back people. We'll get through it. Nobody is being censored except Prof. Scott's sophomoric comments. 

[Ralf11]

1 hour ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Stop with the made up fake news that anything is being censored. 

 

of course you have censored things

 

what is wrong with you?

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 minute ago, Ralf11 said:

 

of course you have censored things

 

what is wrong with you?

 

Because your thread designed to cause problems was removed, you're upset. I get it. I don't call that censorship. You yelled fire in a crowded theater. 

[Ralf11]

if you didn't understand the post you could have asked questions

 

if you dislike PART of the Op in that thread you could have asked me to modify it

 

you did neither

 

but that isn't the point...

 

you are censoring technical discussion with your new Stylist rules

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

3 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

if you didn't understand the post you could have asked questions

 

if you dislike PART of the Op in that thread you could have asked me to modify it

 

you did neither

 

but that isn't the point...

 

you are censoring technical discussion with your new Stylist rules

 

Do we really need to get into the discussion about what is or isn't censorship? I split topics so people can enjoy themselves and you're claiming censorship. 

 

Real censorship is you guys continuing to drive people away until there's nobody left. Nobody talking about HiFi because of your crusade. 

[Iving]

6 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Real censorship is you guys continuing to drive people away until there's nobody left. Nobody talking about HiFi because of your crusade. 

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^+++++++++++++++++++++++++++10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

[Ralf11]

Splitting posts made on a thread so that they no longer exist on that thread is clearly censorship

 

I hope you realize that

[Shimei]

18 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

You yelled fire in a crowded theater. ....

Do we really need to get into the discussion about what is or isn't censorship? I split topics so people can enjoy themselves and you're claiming censorship. 

 

I love this example in response to those that cry censorship. It is okay to yell fire in a theater but it's not okay to lie about it. If no real fire exists arguing about this or that might sometimes be mistaken as the metaphorical fire itself. 

 

 

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 hour ago, Ralf11 said:

Splitting posts made on a thread so that they no longer exist on that thread is clearly censorship

 

I hope you realize that

No. 
 

If people are enjoying themselves you don’t need to barge in and tell them they are delusional. If this happens, I move the post so you can explain why and we don’t have a fight. 

[mansr]

1 minute ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

No. 
 

If people are enjoying themselves you don’t need to barge in and tell them they are delusional. If this happens, I move the post so you can explain why and we don’t have a fight. 

And when the reverse happens? Oh, don't bother answering. I know you'll continue to let that slide like you always have.

[The Computer Audiophile]

2 minutes ago, mansr said:

And when the reverse happens? Oh, don't bother answering. I know you'll continue to let that slide like you always have.

Don’t pretend to know what goes on behind the scenes. 

[mansr]

2 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Don’t pretend to know what goes on behind the scenes. 

Did you misdirect that reply? I was not the one alleging that people are conspiring via PMs on another forum.

[skatbelt]

1 hour ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

What about it feels contrived? Serious question. We have a problem, we've tried solutions with limited success. This is yet another solution to the issue. 

 

 

Until now forum topics were clearly divided into logical and functional categories, but - if I understand correctly - from now on they are also used to address interaction issues between different types of people? Besides it not being intuitive for newcomers, I think people generally don't like to be put in boxes. If I speak for myself, probably with age and experience, I slowly moved towards a more subjective and less pronounced way of judging things. I guess I am somewhere in the middle by now.

 

So I question if it will be a solution. And to be honest, I doubt if it really is an objectivist vs. subjectivist problem. I think it is more related to everyday manners and how they seem to fade if there is no face-to-face communication. A generic and long existing phenomena. Mostly only a minority is guilty of this. The problem is that this minority grows in absolute numbers with the growth of a community.

[Jim Sylva]

2 hours ago, Ralf11 said:

Splitting posts made on a thread so that they no longer exist on that thread is clearly censorship

 

I hope you realize that

I disagree. Moving a post to what is deemed to be a more appropriate category is an organizational act, not suppression (censorship).

[wgscott]

9 minutes ago, Jim Sylva said:

I disagree. Moving a post to what is deemed to be a more appropriate category is an organizational act, not suppression (censorship).

 

Exactly.  And if you suggest otherwise, your post will be deleted.

[Jim Sylva]

54 minutes ago, wgscott said:

 

Exactly.  And if you suggest otherwise, your post will be deleted.

😀

[Jud]

7 hours ago, mansr said:

The creators of Jewish ghettos might have said the same thing.

 

Yes, this is plainly on the same level as that. 🙄

[Sal1950]

7 hours ago, mansr said:

The implication here is that only the awful, terrible "objectivists" ever misbehave. The nice, friendly subjectivists are only trying to help when they are repeatedly rude, belittling, and condescending, even after being told to go away.

Yep, the meanest, nastiest posts I ever read here were put up by a subjectivist having his feet held to the fire when asked to produce proof that what he believes he heard is real by supplying verifiable evidence such as DBT's or measurements. They just can't stand having their religion questioned and get reduced to name calling, snarky remarks and such.

 

7 hours ago, Allan F said:

 

Why is it so difficult for you to understand the fundamental difference between threads that seek information and/or different points of view and which encourage the participation of all interested parties, and those that are intended to share experiences without the unwanted intervention of people telling them that their experiences are imaginary and/or contrary to the laws of physics?

 

7 hours ago, rickca said:

I'm one of the guys who was very close to abandoning AS.  I don't mind people who think I'm delusional and like to poke fun at me in a good natured way.  It's the mean spirited endless confrontational posts that derail threads that I find objectionable.  So to me, it isn't really a subjective vs objective thing.  It's about the vibe.

 

 

5 hours 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.

 

Of course engineering is involved. People are taking this way over the top and thinking I am anti-engineering for some reason. I'm anti-fighting when this is supposed to be fun. Providing a space for both parties to discuss topics is idea. That is, if both parties really want to discuss what they say they want to discuss. 

 

Life is gray. We will find out where to place specific threads in due time. nobody is going to get banned for good faith attempts at anything. 

 

Because HiFi is short for High Fidelity. The persuit of HiFi has since the very beginning been accomplished via the use of measurements and the advancement of the engineering community learning to apply scientific principles towards an ever improving SOTA.  The human weaknesses toward sighted, known DUT, expectation bias used as a tool has been discounted for every scientific path from chemistry to medicine.  If your only interest in this "hobby" is to assemble a system that produces a pleasing sound for you, that's fine. But if your interest is to follow a path that will bring you closer to the artist/producer/engineers intent, you need to take a verifiable path that insures your hearing resembles that which is your desire,  High Fidelity.

If someone comes here after going to a Copperfield magic show and insist he made a 747 disappear off the runway with his "magic",  would you take that as gospel because he seen it with his own 2 eyes, or ask him to please look behind the curtain with a camera to prove the airplane was actually gone?

 

5 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Stop with the made up fake news that anything is being censored. 

Not faked in any way Chris, that's exactly what your doing. If one of us posts a reasonable objective question to a thread that you or the OP doesn't approve of, you cast it off to Siberia.

 

4 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

That place is very far from an objective pursuit of HiFi. But, I encourage people to have fun there if it's more their style. 

 

4 hours ago, audiobomber said:

ASR is another example of a place "where nothing subjective is allowed".

Not true at all.  Amir lets people post most anything they like, but they will probably be asked, mostly by members, to supply verifiable confirmation. That IMO is only fair. You can't just make up fake news there and expect to get away with it.

 

4 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I often wish people would stop to look around a bit and realize there are people without a place to sleep for the night and without food. Yet, we're here arguing about where the appropriate place to post is on a site dedicated to first world problems. 

 

Take a step back people. We'll get through it. Nobody is being censored except Prof. Scott's sophomoric comments. 

Oh brother, that's a straw man if I ever heard one.  "there are starving people the world over, what different does it make if people tell fairy-tales about creating audios SOTA?"  BOOO

 

Chris, I find it truly sad what your doing to CA/AS.  I came here originally thinking this was a site dedicated to Computer Audio, a place where the technology of computers used for audio storage, etc; held sway.  It has slowly swung towards just another WBF "I heard it, so it is so"  site where any claim, no matter how foolish is taken seriously.

Now it seems the final nail will be to turn this site into the subjectivist version of Hydrogenaudio, were little to any objective challenges will be allowed.

Yes Sir,  that is censorship in its worst form, to ban the process of critical thinking.

[JDoyle]

12 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Hi JD, the same way it always has. Perhaps I don't follow your question?

Hi Chris, I will send you a PM in the near future about what I meant on this. You have your hands full now.

Meanwhile, keep up the good work on a great forum 
 

Thanks,

 

JD

[The Computer Audiophile]

8 minutes ago, Sal1950 said:

Yep, the meanest, nastiest posts I ever read here were put up by a subjectivist having his feet held to the fire when asked to produce proof that what he believes he heard is real by supplying verifiable evidence such as DBT's or measurements. They just can't stand having their religion questioned and get reduced to name calling, snarky remarks and such.

 

 

 

 

Because HiFi is short for High Fidelity. The persuit of HiFi has since the very beginning been accomplished via the use of measurements and the advancement of the engineering community learning to apply scientific principles towards an ever improving SOTA.  The human weaknesses toward sighted, known DUT, expectation bias used as a tool has been discounted for every scientific path from chemistry to medicine.  If your only interest in this "hobby" is to assemble a system that produces a pleasing sound for you, that's fine. But if your interest is to follow a path that will bring you closer to the artist/producer/engineers intent, you need to take a verifiable path that insures your hearing resembles that which is your desire,  High Fidelity.

If someone comes here after going to a Copperfield magic show and insist he made a 747 disappear off the runway with his "magic",  would you take that as gospel because he seen it with his own 2 eyes, or ask him to please look behind the curtain with a camera to prove the airplane was actually gone?

 

Not faked in any way Chris, that's exactly what your doing. If one of us posts a reasonable objective question to a thread that you or the OP doesn't approve of, you cast it off to Siberia.

 

 

Not true at all.  Amir lets people post most anything they like, but they will probably be asked, mostly by members, to supply verifiable confirmation. That IMO is only fair. You can't just make up fake news there and expect to get away with it.

 

Oh brother, that's a straw man if I ever heard one.  "there are starving people the world over, what different does it make if people tell fairy-tales about creating audios SOTA?"  BOOO

 

Chris, I find it truly sad what your doing to CA/AS.  I came here originally thinking this was a site dedicated to Computer Audio, a place where the technology of computers used for audio storage, etc; held sway.  It has slowly swung towards just another WBF "I heard it, so it is so"  site where any claim, no matter how foolish is taken seriously.

Now it seems the final nail will be to turn this site into the subjectivist version of Hydrogenaudio, were little to any objective challenges will be allowed.

Yes Sir,  that is censorship in its worst form, to ban the process of critical thinking.

Sal, I like the cut of your jib, but you're truly dreaming up something that isn't happening and playing the victim. 

 

If you can't handle the fact that I'll no longer allow you to confront people about their experiences, then sayonara. You are free to post contrary information in a thread of your own choosing in the Objective-Fi sub-forum. If you're really seeking the truth, you've now got a space for only your truth. No subjective nonsense allowed. On the other hand, if you're only in this for confrontation and saving adults from themselves, then there's no place for you here. 

[pkane2001]

12 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

You are free to post contrary information in a thread of your own choosing in the Objective-Fi sub-forum

 

Still trying to understand. So no contrary objective information is allowed in the rest of the forum? Or is it?