being a member of diyaudio since 2004, it occurred to me that we have among us a lot of audio "celebrities" and/or users with commercial affiliations.
what about making a list of these users? I've seen it done on other forums.
I'm not trying to promote the argument of authority neither suggest that all things coming from said users should be taken with a grain of salt. personally I find that the involvement of certain people in a discussion correlates (to a point) to its quality level but it's not a rule.
what are your thoughts about this? is there any reason we shouldn't do this publicly? would it break forum rules? other thoughts?
what about making a list of these users? I've seen it done on other forums.
I'm not trying to promote the argument of authority neither suggest that all things coming from said users should be taken with a grain of salt. personally I find that the involvement of certain people in a discussion correlates (to a point) to its quality level but it's not a rule.
what are your thoughts about this? is there any reason we shouldn't do this publicly? would it break forum rules? other thoughts?
It would reduce the risk of marketing under the guise of discussion.
Sadly, it might also expose how many people making their living from audio don't actually understand what they are doing. I don't mean esoteric stuff which people argue over; I mean basic physics and maths and circuit theory.
Sadly, it might also expose how many people making their living from audio don't actually understand what they are doing. I don't mean esoteric stuff which people argue over; I mean basic physics and maths and circuit theory.
I think that some probably prefer to remain anonymous so that they can engage in "normal" conversations. Some people get all funny when a high profile person is present.
The results could be either stifliing of the conversation due to people being too afraid to post alternate view for fear of being shot down (not necessarily by the celebrity but by their fans), or quite the opposite where things get ugly because people want to try and find some fault with the celebrity.
There are of course many high profile people here who do not hide who it is they are. It's everyone's individual choice as to whether or not they reveal their identity.
Tony.
The results could be either stifliing of the conversation due to people being too afraid to post alternate view for fear of being shot down (not necessarily by the celebrity but by their fans), or quite the opposite where things get ugly because people want to try and find some fault with the celebrity.
There are of course many high profile people here who do not hide who it is they are. It's everyone's individual choice as to whether or not they reveal their identity.
Tony.
Haha, audio VIPs sounds funny. IMO the term is wrongly applied here because VIPs enjoy certain kind of privileges and I just don't see...I mean....you just write stuff here. That doesn't make you a special person, does it? Haha.
Hmm... the only thing I can see is that some members know more than others and that gives you extra freedom. Freedom to avoid foolish conversations, for example. That is a privilege.
Hmm... the only thing I can see is that some members know more than others and that gives you extra freedom. Freedom to avoid foolish conversations, for example. That is a privilege.
hence the quotation marks: Quotation mark - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
semantics aside, you get my point.
say, Charles Hansen of Ayre is a "special person" in the context of audio because, unlike me for instance, he sells audio equipment and customers seem to be happy.
Last edited:
here I disagree.
over time I noticed that most of the discussions certain people get involved in are different. not necessarily for the better, not always. [later edit] and that's because no argument is exhaustive[/later edit].
there's a good reason I haven't posted the list without asking first and that's because I anticipated disagreement. I'll happily obey the majority.
Last edited:
sounds like a black and white thing, doesn't it?
I used to take for granted some very vocal and confident members here. one day I realized they're (partially or completely) full of it. thing is that the persons that made me realize it and provided the explanation were, coincidentally or not, rather prominent audio designers.
example.
say that one day I write
"CFB amps are better but I'm in a hurry and I can't explain why".
say Scott Wurcer writes the above. who would you believe?
likely neither because you likely happen to know that there's no such thing as CFB is better than VFB. but that's because, well, you happen to know it. others don't.
also, the saying goes "I'm only responsible for what I say, not for what you understand". each reader would have the liberty to use such list the way they prefer.
So, say I sell speaker cables and then I state in a post: Cables xyz suck.
Several options:
1) you believe me on the face of it because I sell cables, if you were very simple minded and gullible
2) you realise I sell cables and so you ask: ohh yeah? why? And that would be a sensible question
3) You disregard whatever I sell and ALWAYS ask: Ohh yeah? Why? which I think is the most sensible way to react.
So, in the end, it doesn't make a hoot of difference what you do - ALWAYS ask for facts, figures and arguments to backup such a sweeping statement.
So your list would be of academic but not of any practical interest.
jan
Several options:
1) you believe me on the face of it because I sell cables, if you were very simple minded and gullible
2) you realise I sell cables and so you ask: ohh yeah? why? And that would be a sensible question
3) You disregard whatever I sell and ALWAYS ask: Ohh yeah? Why? which I think is the most sensible way to react.
So, in the end, it doesn't make a hoot of difference what you do - ALWAYS ask for facts, figures and arguments to backup such a sweeping statement.
So your list would be of academic but not of any practical interest.
jan
Life is not that simple. Wise people sometimes talk nonsense. Fools sometimes (accidentally?) talk sense.Cassiel said:
The way to tell whether someone is wise or a fool is to correct them when they talk nonsense. The wise man will thank you. The fool will insult you. (King Solomon said something vaguely similar to this, a long long time ago.)
On balance I think a list of 'VIP's would be unhelpful. We already get too much fanboy behaviour on here as it is, although less than some other sites. However, integrity requires that someone commenting on something which relates to their income should declare it - although not necessarily all the time if a regular contributor.
What I see in many forums is the requirement that anyone with industry affiliations clearly identify themselves with a suffix to their IDs or with a disclosing signature. Not only does that avoid the need to create/consult a list but readers can make of it what they wish.
yes. but when you realize that user X has commercial affiliation Y it starts to make sense why his answers don't make sense and/or why he avoids them
that would be acceptable
and yes, like I said, readers are free to/will make of it what they wish.
yes. but when you realize that user X has commercial affiliation Y it starts to make sense why his answers don't make sense and/or why he avoids them
But you could be wrong, of course. It's not fair to think he says something because he is in for the money. He may be, or he may be genuinely convinced of what he says, and in either case he can still be wrong!
In other words, it doesn't really help! The only thing that helps if the guy/gal shores up with facts and arguments you can check.
jan
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.