New Objective-Fi Sub-forum

[The Computer Audiophile]

Welcome to the new space solely for objective audio discussions. Subjective impression threads, anecdotal or experience only based comments are not allowed here. Have some wonderful news to share about a USB cable? Great, do it in another sub-forum here on Audiophile Style. 

 

Other than the logical uses of this sub-forum, it will also be used to house objective-based comments that seek to refute someone's personal experience  posted elsewhere. For example, if someone says that two bit identical files sound different, the new Objective-Fi sub-forum is the place to begin / continue the discussion unabated and away from appeals to authority or unprovable psychoacoustic comments. 

 

As always, feedback and questions are encouraged. I'm sure we have some kinks to work out, but we'll get there. This is audio, not brain surgery. Nobody is saving babies or killing puppies. 

 

Thanks for all the support of the AS community!

[Account Closed]

I hope this works but I have my doubts. My personal opinion is that much of what you are trying to get people to post here is deliberately posted in the threads with the express intention of creating ill will and controversy. If it is posted here and can be ignored then it will not have the desired effect. One way to really damp this stuff down would be to eliminate anonymity. Make everyone post everywhere under their real name instead of hiding behind masks. I have always used my real name and if I say something here I take responsibility for it.

 

Good Luck,

 

Bob Flood 

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 minute ago, bobflood said:

I hope this works but I have my doubts. My personal opinion is that much of what you are trying to get people to post here is deliberately posted in the threads with the express intention of creating ill will and controversy. If it is posted here and can be ignored then it will not have the desired effect. One way to really damp this stuff down would be to eliminate anonymity. Make everyone post everywhere under their real name instead of hiding behind masks. I have always used my real name and if I say something here I take responsibility for it.

 

Good Luck,

 

Bob Flood 

 

When people post in the wrong spot, their comments can easily be moved to this sub-forum.

 

If people stop posting those comments because they'd rather cause ill will and controversy, then it's a win-win for all. 

 

Real identities are impossible to enforce and often have bad unintended consequences. People's employers have been contacted because of posts here on AS. 

[lucretius]

14 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

When people post in the wrong spot, their comments can easily be moved to this sub-forum.

 

This sounds like a penalty box. You must be a hockey fan?  ☺️

[The Computer Audiophile]

52 minutes ago, lucretius said:

 

This sounds like a penalty box. You must be a hockey fan?  ☺️

Hockey fan yes! Penalty box no. 

 

Protected space from the crazy audiophiles among us is far from a penalty box. 

[pkane2001]

9 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Protected space from the crazy audiophiles among us is far from a penalty box. 

 

Generally, the crazies are the ones moved into a containment area where they can be isolated and monitored, not the sane population

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

8 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

 

Generally, the crazies are the ones moved into a containment area where they can be isolated and monitored, not the sane population

 

There are 80% of the people in the middle and "crazies" at the poles. It goes both ways :~)

 

I'm not calling objectivists crazies. I do think it's a little crazy that people are up in arms with a separate space to discuss matters that most people in the original spaces didn't want to read anyway. In a USB listening thread, almost nobody wants to read anything from objectivists. Yet, when I provide a space for objectivists to refute anything said in the USB cable threads, the objectivists get mad. Makes no sense to me. 

[mansr]

22 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I'm not calling objectivists crazies

You keep saying that, yet your actions speak strongly to the contrary.

[pkane2001]

42 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I do think it's a little crazy that people are up in arms with a separate space to discuss matters that most people in the original spaces didn't want to read anyway.

 

I really don't see a tiny sub-forum on AS becoming the place for purely objective discussions any time soon. To do that, you'll need to do much more for such folks to want to stay. Being pushed out to a reservation isn't helping that. The split seems to be a recognition that the larger audience of this site isn't interested in science, facts, or proper engineering discussions. Too bad.

[fas42]

1 hour ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

I'm not calling objectivists crazies. I do think it's a little crazy that people are up in arms with a separate space to discuss matters that most people in the original spaces didn't want to read anyway. In a USB listening thread, almost nobody wants to read anything from objectivists. Yet, when I provide a space for objectivists to refute anything said in the USB cable threads, the objectivists get mad. Makes no sense to me. 

 

No, it's just that they like behaving in a crazy way ... at times. A lot of it is really directed at "their gang"; the drinking buddies who are having a great time slagging off at the other lot, down at the local.

[The Computer Audiophile]

18 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

 

I really don't see a tiny sub-forum on AS becoming the place for purely objective discussions any time soon. To do that, you'll need to do much more for such folks to want to stay. Being pushed out to a reservation isn't helping that. The split seems to be a recognition that the larger audience of this site isn't interested in science, facts, or proper engineering discussions. Too bad.

 

Now you're really stretching. 

 

If objectivists are truly interested in discussing objective audio pursuits rather than anything else, then I see no reason why there's an issue with a special forum just for them. What's wrong with that?

 

On the other hand, if objectivists are solely interested in having a subjective audience for their words, then it ain't gonna work. that audience doesn't want to hear from them. 

 

I can only do so much and can't please everyone. If objectivists go to other sites that are more welcoming, I'm willing to bet they'll run into the same issues. If there are subjective conversations on those sites, they will raise hell and turn the site into 4chan. 

 

It's like people are threatening to leave and create what they created here somewhere else. It isn't a sustainable model. They will burn out every site that has obj and sub because they can't police themselves. So, I offer a space for strictly obj conversation and people get mad. I do't get it. 

 

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

47 minutes ago, mansr said:

You keep saying that, yet your actions speak strongly to the contrary.

I call the 10 percent of people on each pole crazies. The 80 percent in the middle aren't crazies. Nothing wrong with crazies, but they don't make for a good community when one combines the complete 100% in one basket.

[Account Closed]

Sometimes the ferocity of the attacks that I have seen on some threads and in particular against certain manufacturers and products has made me wonder if they were sponsored rather than being totally organic.

[fas42]

27 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

 

The split seems to be a recognition that the larger audience of this site isn't interested in science, facts, or proper engineering discussions. Too bad.

 

Unfortunately, this fails to recognise that many who stir the most are really in the scientism camp, as compared to the field of science.

[mansr]

29 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Now you're really stretching. 

It is our subjective experience that we are being rounded up and placed in special fenced-off pen. You can't argue against that.

 

If you honestly didn't intend to make us feel ostracised, you have two choices:

• Undo the changes.
• Create a similar restricted zone for the crazies (your term) from the other side.

As it stands, the message I'm getting is that some of us are considered second-rate people.

 

Why don't you save us all some grief and terminate our accounts right now. We all know that's where this is headed.

[The Computer Audiophile]

2 minutes ago, mansr said:

Why don't you save us all some grief and terminate our accounts right now. We all know that's where this is headed.

You're free to walk at any time, free to see through your self fulfilling prophecy, or free to be part of the solution. 

[Dutch]

Perhaps I’ve missed it; how do off topic “objectivist” posts get moved to this subforum? Do users have to report these posts?

[mansr]

1 minute ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

You're free to walk at any time, free to see through your self fulfilling prophecy, or free to be part of the solution. 

You'd love that, wouldn't you?

[jabbr]

Hmmm @The Computer Audiophile ... I am sure you've carefully considered this. Are you changing your target audience for the site? I was originally drawn here because of the focus on "Computer Audiophile" which isn't as effectively covered in, say DIYAudio which is also far more technical. I have enjoyed the interplay between "objectivists" and :"subjectivists" though really those labels are themselves pretty funny. 

 

I mean, where are we supposed to discuss "Networks" ... is the current subforum intended only for subjective network sound? In the past, it was the OP which set the rules of the individual thread. What is wrong with that rule?

[fas42]

6 minutes ago, jabbr said:

 

I mean, where are we supposed to discuss "Networks" ... is the current subforum intended only for subjective network sound? In the past, it was the OP which set the rules of the individual thread. What is wrong with that rule?

 

Actually, that makes sense to me - but have it that the the OP be able to set a clearly marked switch, per thread, which says that overly 'objectivist' posts are not acceptable. Not part of the post, but a setting per thread - no emotion is then attached to stating the intent. And allow that setting to be altered, by Chris and the OP, at any time.

 

What happens to disruptive posts posted is something else, to be decided.

[Account Closed]

9 minutes ago, mansr said:

You'd love that, wouldn't you?

@mansr, I for one don't want to see you go. You have a great deal of knowledge to impart to others here. I have personally learned much from some of your posts. What I would like to see change is your attitude to others here who don't have the depth of knowledge that you have. When you stick to the facts you are at your best. Often, however, you come across as arrogant and demeaning and sometimes as just mean. Please consider that many people do not enjoy being talked down to and made fun of.

[kumakuma]

2 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

Actually, that makes sense to me - but have it that the the OP be able to set a clearly marked switch, per thread, which says that overly 'objectivist' posts are not acceptable. Not part of the post, but a setting per thread - no emotion is then attached to stating the intent. And allow that setting to be altered, by Chris and the OP, at any time.

 

 

I agree and made a similar suggestion a number of hours ago. 

 

@The Computer Audiophile 

[sandyk]

11 minutes ago, mansr said:

You'd love that, wouldn't you?

 Mansr

 Even I would hate to see you leave, You are highly capable in many technical areas, and have much worthwhile to contribute when you decide to. All that we need here is less trying to save people from themselves , and the acceptance that some threads are best left alone when it is clear that views to the contrary , such as some of those from Sal are not wanted.

 

Alex

[AudioDoctor]

IMO, the only thing everyone has to do, is let others enjoy their hobby as they see fit...

 

No one needs to be saved from themselves here. All we're doing is listening to music, not saving the world from a deadly plague with only one right answer and one try at it.

[sandyk]

17 minutes ago, jabbr said:

In the past, it was the OP which set the rules of the individual thread. What is wrong with that rule?

 

 There is nothing wrong with that rule.

 The problem is that a few members refuse to abide by it.