roddyama said:
at the same time, the imposition of the proposed "ethic code" deters others from asking valid questions, and amounts to censorship by intimidation as well.
The end result? Well, this is a public forum and if you don't like being challenged, either don't answer the challenge or don't post it.
Now, can I tell you what great things my neutrino shields can do to improve your sound?
Everybody who posts on the forum does so voluntarily, so nobody
has any right to demand anybody to publish schematics,
proofs or whatever. That does not mean it is inappropriate to
ask if they are willing to share a schematic with us, to add
if not a proof so at least som additional information to back up
their claims. It they do not wish to do so or cannot do so, then
fine, it is their decision. Although this is not a scientific forum,
we can consider what many people, both professionals and
amateurs, do as some kind of reasearch, although usually not
in a strict scientific sense. If they want their results/findings to
contribute to the advance of audio, then it should be in their
interest to try giving additional information and, if possible,
back up their arguments. If person A says that Black Gates
sound better than OS-CONs and person B has the opposite
view, then we really aren't much wiser. However, if we can
get these persons to give additional information about where
and in what application they were used and how the tests
were performed etc. we may, at least occasionally, be able
to draw some conlcusion from these findings and at least
find out that these findings are not necessarily contradictory
even on an objective basis. If the findings were based on
listening tests only, we still have no hard evidence, but at
least these findings may serve as a guideline for others what
to test themselves and what not to bother about.
Although a scientist by training, I try not to have a strict
scientific approach here on the forum, and I try to keep a
reasonably open mind. That doesn't mean I buy any claim
people try to "sell" me, but I am at least willing to listen
even to the seemingly very controversial standpoints. Just
because one of a few persons claim to hear something doesn't
necesarily mean that is a truly audible phenomenon, but it
could be. Just because we cannot measure or explain
a a claimed audible difference doesn't mean it cannot be real.
Theory is constantly revised and often simplified theories are
applied which may not have their prerequisistes for applicability
satisfied. Similarly, we may be measuring the wrong things in
the wrong way, our measument equipmant may not be quite
suitable for what we ought to measure.
Regarding theory, let me quote (from memory) a passage from
the Nobel dinner talk by physics price winner Anthony Leggett:
"If you want to study a phenomenon and your collegues say
it is a waste of time becasue it has already been investigated
enough, ignore them. If you think it is worth further study, then
go ahead an do it, whatever your collegues say."
Finally, as for subjective listening evaluations, let me once again
ask for something I have asked about several times before:
Please add at least some minimal information about what type
of music you used for the test, since I do think the choice of
music does make a difference for the outcome in many cases,
or at least the musical preferences of the listener may affect
their sonic preferences. Some people do so, but most don't.
An exemplary example is the TAA (?) article by Gary Galo on
changing the regulators in his CDP to Jung super-regs. Not
only does he list exactly what recordings he used, but he also
goes into detail about specific passages in the musc describing
in detail what differences he perceived.
Edit:
Hugh,
I am flattered that you seem to consider my contributions on the
same level as the other people you mention. Although I try to
contribute to the forum in my own, sometimes misunderstood
ways, and often from a slightly different point of view, I seriously
doubt my contributions deserve to be ranked on that level.
has any right to demand anybody to publish schematics,
proofs or whatever. That does not mean it is inappropriate to
ask if they are willing to share a schematic with us, to add
if not a proof so at least som additional information to back up
their claims. It they do not wish to do so or cannot do so, then
fine, it is their decision. Although this is not a scientific forum,
we can consider what many people, both professionals and
amateurs, do as some kind of reasearch, although usually not
in a strict scientific sense. If they want their results/findings to
contribute to the advance of audio, then it should be in their
interest to try giving additional information and, if possible,
back up their arguments. If person A says that Black Gates
sound better than OS-CONs and person B has the opposite
view, then we really aren't much wiser. However, if we can
get these persons to give additional information about where
and in what application they were used and how the tests
were performed etc. we may, at least occasionally, be able
to draw some conlcusion from these findings and at least
find out that these findings are not necessarily contradictory
even on an objective basis. If the findings were based on
listening tests only, we still have no hard evidence, but at
least these findings may serve as a guideline for others what
to test themselves and what not to bother about.
Although a scientist by training, I try not to have a strict
scientific approach here on the forum, and I try to keep a
reasonably open mind. That doesn't mean I buy any claim
people try to "sell" me, but I am at least willing to listen
even to the seemingly very controversial standpoints. Just
because one of a few persons claim to hear something doesn't
necesarily mean that is a truly audible phenomenon, but it
could be. Just because we cannot measure or explain
a a claimed audible difference doesn't mean it cannot be real.
Theory is constantly revised and often simplified theories are
applied which may not have their prerequisistes for applicability
satisfied. Similarly, we may be measuring the wrong things in
the wrong way, our measument equipmant may not be quite
suitable for what we ought to measure.
Regarding theory, let me quote (from memory) a passage from
the Nobel dinner talk by physics price winner Anthony Leggett:
"If you want to study a phenomenon and your collegues say
it is a waste of time becasue it has already been investigated
enough, ignore them. If you think it is worth further study, then
go ahead an do it, whatever your collegues say."
Finally, as for subjective listening evaluations, let me once again
ask for something I have asked about several times before:
Please add at least some minimal information about what type
of music you used for the test, since I do think the choice of
music does make a difference for the outcome in many cases,
or at least the musical preferences of the listener may affect
their sonic preferences. Some people do so, but most don't.
An exemplary example is the TAA (?) article by Gary Galo on
changing the regulators in his CDP to Jung super-regs. Not
only does he list exactly what recordings he used, but he also
goes into detail about specific passages in the musc describing
in detail what differences he perceived.
Edit:
Hugh,
I am flattered that you seem to consider my contributions on the
same level as the other people you mention. Although I try to
contribute to the forum in my own, sometimes misunderstood
ways, and often from a slightly different point of view, I seriously
doubt my contributions deserve to be ranked on that level.
Maybe "ethics" isn't the right word. I think plain consideration is more to the point.millwood said:
To challange an assertion or conclusion and ask for substantiation, IMO, is perfectly valid. To challange an observation or perception with the same vigor is intimidation.millwood said:
How?millwood said:Now, can I tell you what great things my neutrino shields can do to improve your sound?
Hi,
Moamps nailed the problem already but I think this is not something that started here on this forum but elsewhere a good while ago already.
I really don't see what diyAudio's ethics have to do with it but as it's not the first time this happens I can only suggest the obvious:
If your brainchild is under attack for some reason that seems pretty factual then why not provide the necessary measurements to set the attacker straight?
Other than that particular //ed 6SN7 issue it seems pretty obvious to everyone reading those threads that it has more to do with a personal fute than mere electronics.
Asking the referees to change the rules of the game in the middle of a fight looks rather desperate to me.
ROUND # 27.
Cheers,
Moamps nailed the problem already but I think this is not something that started here on this forum but elsewhere a good while ago already.
I really don't see what diyAudio's ethics have to do with it but as it's not the first time this happens I can only suggest the obvious:
If your brainchild is under attack for some reason that seems pretty factual then why not provide the necessary measurements to set the attacker straight?
Other than that particular //ed 6SN7 issue it seems pretty obvious to everyone reading those threads that it has more to do with a personal fute than mere electronics.
Asking the referees to change the rules of the game in the middle of a fight looks rather desperate to me.
ROUND # 27.
Cheers,
Konnichiwa,
Hmmm. If you re-read, I am asking for changes to be considered and then set to be voted by the community. All this is a process that is pretty lengthy, at least in my estimation. I rather doubt any proposed change of rules would take place before this particular spat is over. So, I am asking the referees to chjange the rules for the NEXT TIME, as I'm sick and tired of arguing with people who display such behaviour as I originally commented on at the beginning of the thread (namely to talk every sort of others contributions down as their ONLY contribution).
Nuber one, most of my measuremnt gear is very analogue in nature, so I cannot simply post a AP One screen. Secondly, the design discussed (and also the Phono one) where build and tested quite a few years ago and are long dismanteld/modified/passed on to friends/sold etc.... This makes it somewhat difficult to repeat measurements.
At any extent, the electrical performance of most electronic circuits can in this day and age be predicted quite accuratly by P-Spice. The schematic was from my archive and measured back then pretty closely to what was predicted, as this my usual chjeck to see if what I have build matches what I wanted to build.
Anyway, the issues raised where illustrably either the result of a deliberate misstatement of fact (in other words a lie) or due to a fundamental lack of basic electronics knowledge, I presonally do not much care which, but I do care not wasting my time disprooving ridiculous arguments (and I know other feel likewise), hence this thread. And please note that the whole argument(s) related to demonstrable electrical parameters, not to the subjective "I don't think this sounds good", which would merely leave me shrugging.
Sayonara
fdegrove said:
Hmmm. If you re-read, I am asking for changes to be considered and then set to be voted by the community. All this is a process that is pretty lengthy, at least in my estimation. I rather doubt any proposed change of rules would take place before this particular spat is over. So, I am asking the referees to chjange the rules for the NEXT TIME, as I'm sick and tired of arguing with people who display such behaviour as I originally commented on at the beginning of the thread (namely to talk every sort of others contributions down as their ONLY contribution).
fdegrove said:
Nuber one, most of my measuremnt gear is very analogue in nature, so I cannot simply post a AP One screen. Secondly, the design discussed (and also the Phono one) where build and tested quite a few years ago and are long dismanteld/modified/passed on to friends/sold etc.... This makes it somewhat difficult to repeat measurements.
At any extent, the electrical performance of most electronic circuits can in this day and age be predicted quite accuratly by P-Spice. The schematic was from my archive and measured back then pretty closely to what was predicted, as this my usual chjeck to see if what I have build matches what I wanted to build.
Anyway, the issues raised where illustrably either the result of a deliberate misstatement of fact (in other words a lie) or due to a fundamental lack of basic electronics knowledge, I presonally do not much care which, but I do care not wasting my time disprooving ridiculous arguments (and I know other feel likewise), hence this thread. And please note that the whole argument(s) related to demonstrable electrical parameters, not to the subjective "I don't think this sounds good", which would merely leave me shrugging.
Sayonara
Konnichiwa,
You pay me by far to large a compliment when you call me altruistic. My reasons for sharing my experiences are strictly and absolutely selfish. I feel that if no-one shares no-one can learn from other peoples sucesses and failures. Now if I wish to benefit from the general wealth a given community or society contains and if I wiss to see this general wealth to grow then I need to contribute my own, however little, limted and stupid it may be. By doing so I make sure that in the end others follow suit and everyone walks away with more than they brought to the table.
Okay, so this is an old commie/Xtian view of things and I admit that I am unreformed communist (though only in that I believe in the priciple of everyone contributing according to their best ability and everyone taking what they need, with the limitation of "fair share" - not as one who supports the statemopolistic capitalist dictatorial system previously operating in Eastern Europe) and strictly consider the points YshHVH (often rendered Jesus) made about posession and community - like the feeding of the 1000's from all they had with them....
Anyway, as you can see, my motivations for attempting to enrich the communit are completely selfish and absolutely not altruistic. In fact, I do not believe in altruism, humans are ruled by greed and channeld the right way greed is good.
Sayonara
AKSA said:
You pay me by far to large a compliment when you call me altruistic. My reasons for sharing my experiences are strictly and absolutely selfish. I feel that if no-one shares no-one can learn from other peoples sucesses and failures. Now if I wish to benefit from the general wealth a given community or society contains and if I wiss to see this general wealth to grow then I need to contribute my own, however little, limted and stupid it may be. By doing so I make sure that in the end others follow suit and everyone walks away with more than they brought to the table.
Okay, so this is an old commie/Xtian view of things and I admit that I am unreformed communist (though only in that I believe in the priciple of everyone contributing according to their best ability and everyone taking what they need, with the limitation of "fair share" - not as one who supports the statemopolistic capitalist dictatorial system previously operating in Eastern Europe) and strictly consider the points YshHVH (often rendered Jesus) made about posession and community - like the feeding of the 1000's from all they had with them....
Anyway, as you can see, my motivations for attempting to enrich the communit are completely selfish and absolutely not altruistic. In fact, I do not believe in altruism, humans are ruled by greed and channeld the right way greed is good.
Sayonara
Konnichiwa,
Looking around the boards I see the same problems appearing I originally wrote this post about.
To be clear, I was complaining about time and resource wasting ****ing contest, stirred up deliberatly by people with varying agendas, but usually a commercial one on the back somewhere.
I would again porpose the consideration of a simple code of ethics and it's application, plus the power for the moderators to censure individuals behaving unethical.
Maybe, as I am not currently embroiled in any significant controversy we can this time have a topical discussion of the subject. I suggest reviewing my original post as starting point for a re-start of the discussion:
"I would suggest a new topic for general discussion.
This group of Boards exists to share ideas, experiences and the like, thus adding to the general store of knowledge and helping the DIY Community.
From this it would seem a reasonable conclusion that desired postings are of a type that actually add something, or ask for clarifications.
It would seem to me that posts by people who NEVER share anything and instead only criticise other peoples posts and do so often using specious arguments violate the (as of yet unstated) ethical code for this groups of boards.
I would suggest to the moderators to formulate an extended ethical code and suggest this for vote by the Board Users, for adoption as general "code of behaviour" for the Moderators to utilise.
This would then give a handle to combat unethical behaviour that currently is tolerated as it does not violate the written code of conduct, but which is clearly against the spirit of sharing and community embodied in this group of boards.
Comments please."
Sayonara
Looking around the boards I see the same problems appearing I originally wrote this post about.
To be clear, I was complaining about time and resource wasting ****ing contest, stirred up deliberatly by people with varying agendas, but usually a commercial one on the back somewhere.
I would again porpose the consideration of a simple code of ethics and it's application, plus the power for the moderators to censure individuals behaving unethical.
Maybe, as I am not currently embroiled in any significant controversy we can this time have a topical discussion of the subject. I suggest reviewing my original post as starting point for a re-start of the discussion:
"I would suggest a new topic for general discussion.
This group of Boards exists to share ideas, experiences and the like, thus adding to the general store of knowledge and helping the DIY Community.
From this it would seem a reasonable conclusion that desired postings are of a type that actually add something, or ask for clarifications.
It would seem to me that posts by people who NEVER share anything and instead only criticise other peoples posts and do so often using specious arguments violate the (as of yet unstated) ethical code for this groups of boards.
I would suggest to the moderators to formulate an extended ethical code and suggest this for vote by the Board Users, for adoption as general "code of behaviour" for the Moderators to utilise.
This would then give a handle to combat unethical behaviour that currently is tolerated as it does not violate the written code of conduct, but which is clearly against the spirit of sharing and community embodied in this group of boards.
Comments please."
Sayonara
Kuei Yang Wang said:
That is probably main reason for this board existance and it's a noble cause in itself.
Up to a certain time in a past things were simple, as most topics discussed here were new and the spirit of sharing could grow. People had enthusiasm and new projects were springing everywhere, like mushrooms after a rain.
Recently though, a period of stagnation can be observed, and some members are very jumpy about a slightest sign of competition or simply: "my toy is better than yours" attitude. It goes as far as creating permanent animosities between certain members, and this is clear at every exchange when members collide in a same thread.
The commercial ventures seem to be kept in a poor esteem, as unethical and infringing with forum rules, but honestly, it seems like those actually bring the most interest in current forum discussions and create most value for eager to try forum members.
After all, every effort is focused much better, if a vision of reward is at sight.
I also agree that in a an environment, where one's every idea or opinion is critisized right from a start, by people who really don't bring anything useful to the forum is not the best and is simply a resisting force in a place that was created "to share ideas, experiences and the like".
I also ask moderators to create a better set of rules to deal with such issuses, as I find myself in a position, where I have to think twice whether I want to share my next project. By not doing it, it's simply much more convenient not having to deal with !#$%&^s queastioning one's every post (even in private mails), and arguing about matters that shouldn't be a subject of discussion at all.
I also believe that every commercial project, that publishes schematics, parts choices and PCB layouts, shouldn't be regarded as commercial at all. It is an effort to enrich diy community, and the commercial aspect is only of value to those who don't have enough time or courage to go building it themselves.
Some Want It Both Waysbut Can They Live With It
One of the biggest problems here is some people want it both ways. The don't want to listen they just want to criticize and if they don’t agree then they want to battle you into submission by ridiculing your intelligence. However, the funniest thing here some of these people only can dish it out they can’t handle it. So then they want to change the rules to suite them, I find this so hypocritical. I won’t name names.
One of the biggest problems here is some people want it both ways. The don't want to listen they just want to criticize and if they don’t agree then they want to battle you into submission by ridiculing your intelligence. However, the funniest thing here some of these people only can dish it out they can’t handle it. So then they want to change the rules to suite them, I find this so hypocritical. I won’t name names.
Creating permanent animosities
"Recently though, a period of stagnation can be observed, and some members are very jumpy about a slightest sign of competition or simply: "my toy is better than yours" attitude. It goes as far as creating permanent animosities between certain members, and this is clear at every exchange when members collide in a same thread."
It seems to me that this started at about the same time that people tried to use the forum to promote commercial products and organize group buys. I think the exchange of useful circuit ideas is becoming scarce because often they conflict with present and potential product offerings on the board. Who wants to discuss something that will bring a long argument because it might shine the light on a flaw or poor engineering choice that might threaten the sales of a commercial product promoted on the forum. When the person asking the questions has a fit because the answers he receives are not what he wants to hear and attacks the advice, eventually he stops getting advice. Unfortunately 2 or 3 people with agendas asking questions can result in dozens of members of the forum claming up, many stating the reasons for doing so.
" I also ask moderators to create a better set of rules to deal with such issues, as I find myself in a position, where I have to think twice if I want to share my next project."
We have rules....... what we lack is enforcement of the rules, and even worse, the strong appearance of rules applying for one member, and not another, over the same actions. We also have posters who have stretched the rules well past the breaking point. Perhaps a lack favoritism and being open to the same criticisms from other members, that one has had the privilege to direct at these other members, is a rude awakening. Attempts to bully, argue, and question the motives of people with suggestions, based on sound engineering and personal experience, do nothing to promote one's viewpoint. Inspiring confidence in the veracity of ones claims and convincing members that one does not have a strong ulterior motive is not going to happen after a few of these incidents. To ask the moderators to dig you out of a hole that your so called adversaries have told you to stop digging yourself into (on many occasions) will probably evoke little or no sympathy at this point.
"Recently though, a period of stagnation can be observed, and some members are very jumpy about a slightest sign of competition or simply: "my toy is better than yours" attitude. It goes as far as creating permanent animosities between certain members, and this is clear at every exchange when members collide in a same thread."
It seems to me that this started at about the same time that people tried to use the forum to promote commercial products and organize group buys. I think the exchange of useful circuit ideas is becoming scarce because often they conflict with present and potential product offerings on the board. Who wants to discuss something that will bring a long argument because it might shine the light on a flaw or poor engineering choice that might threaten the sales of a commercial product promoted on the forum. When the person asking the questions has a fit because the answers he receives are not what he wants to hear and attacks the advice, eventually he stops getting advice. Unfortunately 2 or 3 people with agendas asking questions can result in dozens of members of the forum claming up, many stating the reasons for doing so.
" I also ask moderators to create a better set of rules to deal with such issues, as I find myself in a position, where I have to think twice if I want to share my next project."
We have rules....... what we lack is enforcement of the rules, and even worse, the strong appearance of rules applying for one member, and not another, over the same actions. We also have posters who have stretched the rules well past the breaking point. Perhaps a lack favoritism and being open to the same criticisms from other members, that one has had the privilege to direct at these other members, is a rude awakening. Attempts to bully, argue, and question the motives of people with suggestions, based on sound engineering and personal experience, do nothing to promote one's viewpoint. Inspiring confidence in the veracity of ones claims and convincing members that one does not have a strong ulterior motive is not going to happen after a few of these incidents. To ask the moderators to dig you out of a hole that your so called adversaries have told you to stop digging yourself into (on many occasions) will probably evoke little or no sympathy at this point.
Re: Re: MODERATORS ATTN. (and others) -- Posters Ethics and Moderation
Konnichiwa,
I feel that those who have commercial ventures but still discuss their work freely without overtly promoting their buisness are a most welcome addition. Also, businesses that do support DIY'ers should be allowed to comment on availability low key, or perhaps be given a complete "Kit's, PCB's & Parts" section for discussion, as it all contributes.
I think what I feel detracts most is the "sour grapes" attitude certain members display to anything others do. As far as I'm concerned I learn here and am usually willing to help others who wish to learn. If someone benefits from my comments they are welcome, if they end up incorporating ideas and suggestions into commercial gear, more power to them.
Now if someone rubbishes anything that is not theirs and at the same time refuses to illustrate better approaches or to allow the same type of scrutiny of their designs, I'd call that unethical.
A moderate amount of questioning a given idea is not per se a bad thing and a good discussion can develop. However, it seems that many of those who rubbish anytrhing they don't like, fail to comprehend or simply cannot morally afford aim first and foremost to simply put a stop to any discussion. Again, such attempts to simply stop a discussion are in my view unethical.
I feel the same. Plus certain people cannot discuss a topic without fundamentally questing the personal integrity of those who happen to hold opinions or happen to have had experiences that differ from theirs.
So, it brings me back to the topic of ethics. One set of rules that simply require people to behave in certain ways (no name calling, personal insults etc.) have most to do with the outer forms of behaviour. One may engage in severely unethical behaviour while not violating any of the written rules applicable to this group of boards.
So either the rules should include specific clarifications on unethical behaviour or a simple inclusive code of ethics should be stated which then clearly defines ethical behaviour (and very clearly) implies that ANY behaviour not consistent with the code of ethics is UNETHICAL and leave the poster open to cencure on grounds of UNETHICAL behaviour. Moreover, a public warning from the "Cop's" -- hold it buddy - your behaviour is unethical -- will be in most cases sufficient, especially if there is a strong code of ethics that contrasts with the behaviour given a ticking off.
It will remain the moderators perogative to impose any sanctions, but it will provide I feel a more usuable platform for moderation. With the current posting rules only one more rule would be required, namely "do not post in a way that shows unethical behaviour". It then removes the argument of "Where does it say in writing that I cannot do that!?".
Anyway, these are my own thoughts. The only other option would be to follow the same process that was applied to the AA and led (partially) to the establishment of the groups of Boards here, namely for those who wish to share to go elsewhere and to establish another "corner". I would find this undesirable.
I would think it preferable to keep the current envoironment and continuity by ensuring it is policable and policed. Of course, we can always "go west"....
Sayonara
Konnichiwa,
Peter Daniel said:
I feel that those who have commercial ventures but still discuss their work freely without overtly promoting their buisness are a most welcome addition. Also, businesses that do support DIY'ers should be allowed to comment on availability low key, or perhaps be given a complete "Kit's, PCB's & Parts" section for discussion, as it all contributes.
I think what I feel detracts most is the "sour grapes" attitude certain members display to anything others do. As far as I'm concerned I learn here and am usually willing to help others who wish to learn. If someone benefits from my comments they are welcome, if they end up incorporating ideas and suggestions into commercial gear, more power to them.
Now if someone rubbishes anything that is not theirs and at the same time refuses to illustrate better approaches or to allow the same type of scrutiny of their designs, I'd call that unethical.
Peter Daniel said:
A moderate amount of questioning a given idea is not per se a bad thing and a good discussion can develop. However, it seems that many of those who rubbish anytrhing they don't like, fail to comprehend or simply cannot morally afford aim first and foremost to simply put a stop to any discussion. Again, such attempts to simply stop a discussion are in my view unethical.
Peter Daniel said:
I feel the same. Plus certain people cannot discuss a topic without fundamentally questing the personal integrity of those who happen to hold opinions or happen to have had experiences that differ from theirs.
So, it brings me back to the topic of ethics. One set of rules that simply require people to behave in certain ways (no name calling, personal insults etc.) have most to do with the outer forms of behaviour. One may engage in severely unethical behaviour while not violating any of the written rules applicable to this group of boards.
So either the rules should include specific clarifications on unethical behaviour or a simple inclusive code of ethics should be stated which then clearly defines ethical behaviour (and very clearly) implies that ANY behaviour not consistent with the code of ethics is UNETHICAL and leave the poster open to cencure on grounds of UNETHICAL behaviour. Moreover, a public warning from the "Cop's" -- hold it buddy - your behaviour is unethical -- will be in most cases sufficient, especially if there is a strong code of ethics that contrasts with the behaviour given a ticking off.
It will remain the moderators perogative to impose any sanctions, but it will provide I feel a more usuable platform for moderation. With the current posting rules only one more rule would be required, namely "do not post in a way that shows unethical behaviour". It then removes the argument of "Where does it say in writing that I cannot do that!?".
Anyway, these are my own thoughts. The only other option would be to follow the same process that was applied to the AA and led (partially) to the establishment of the groups of Boards here, namely for those who wish to share to go elsewhere and to establish another "corner". I would find this undesirable.
I would think it preferable to keep the current envoironment and continuity by ensuring it is policable and policed. Of course, we can always "go west"....
Sayonara
Handbags at dawn!
I just stumbled upon this thread....
I am a relative newbie and must say that all the squabling and arguing is really detracting from a great source of info and help for us lesser mortals.
You must remember that there is no point scientifically proving everything as we just observe it from our relative postion. Your ears are different to mine. Your tastes are different to mine. If there was a black and white to everything we should all just top ourselves now. Dont forget that black and white dont even exist!
Criticism should only be given with the spirit of furthering the line of thought or the porduct/project. Negative comments are as corrosive as oxygen and this forum is rusting.
Personal opinions are fine. Just remember that they are personal and therefor sometimes best kept that way.
So please stop murmering and whining. Remember the kicks you got the first time a project worked even if it sounded crap. Those with greater knoledge should pass it on and try not to discourage newer or less technically gifted members with thoughtless thoughts.
Its ALL subjective.
I just stumbled upon this thread....
I am a relative newbie and must say that all the squabling and arguing is really detracting from a great source of info and help for us lesser mortals.
You must remember that there is no point scientifically proving everything as we just observe it from our relative postion. Your ears are different to mine. Your tastes are different to mine. If there was a black and white to everything we should all just top ourselves now. Dont forget that black and white dont even exist!
Criticism should only be given with the spirit of furthering the line of thought or the porduct/project. Negative comments are as corrosive as oxygen and this forum is rusting.
Personal opinions are fine. Just remember that they are personal and therefor sometimes best kept that way.
So please stop murmering and whining. Remember the kicks you got the first time a project worked even if it sounded crap. Those with greater knoledge should pass it on and try not to discourage newer or less technically gifted members with thoughtless thoughts.
Its ALL subjective.
mmmm
some find this funny.....
some call it a 'discussion'
statements regarding who or what is right/better require an ultimate source of reference. Otherwise it is pure conjecture (best guess, speculation, assumption personal opinion or supposition)
As the highest 'ranked' member is a moderator or webmaster and not God I would sugest that 'I'm right' or 'if he thinks this ...then he is a ....' type comments should be left at home..which is where some seem to have left their grey matter
some find this funny.....
some call it a 'discussion'
statements regarding who or what is right/better require an ultimate source of reference. Otherwise it is pure conjecture (best guess, speculation, assumption personal opinion or supposition)
As the highest 'ranked' member is a moderator or webmaster and not God I would sugest that 'I'm right' or 'if he thinks this ...then he is a ....' type comments should be left at home..which is where some seem to have left their grey matter
JRKO said:
I find it funny....I doubt any of the combattants are losing sleep at night
This whole forum is based on opinions...almost every amp, speaker, DAC, etc. is a one-of-a-kind sitting in a different city, state, province, country, continent, in at least a minor regard, and most in a major regard. So what else do we have to talk about?
Konnichiwa,
The point here is not so much the fact that opinions are such and are presented as such, but the form some use to disagree with them and anything they seem to dislike in general.
I notice two main reasons:
1) Commercial - be it fear of lost business or whatever - some fellers simply cannot accept experinces that suggest their commercial products may leave something to be desired.
2) Moral Affrodability - be it fear of the collaps of a carefully build worldview or the fear of admitting that getting really excepional good sound requies exceptional measures (and often expenditure) - they insist that the muddy bog called "average" is the standard and nothing should be allowed to differ from in in a sense of being superior.
It seems that the proponents of either position fight with a tenacity that would shame a british bulldog fighting a german shepherd and a memeory of imagined slights and insults that would shame an Elephant.
The result is that often the sensible discussion of certain topics is impossible. Anyway, my views strictly and the main reason I suggested the "ethics" issue. Either behaviour strikes me as a "sour grapes" behaviour well past that of the famous fox. It is one thing to claim the grapes are sour, a very different one however to **** in the wine and say "you didn't ant it anyway, it's sour" as justification for it.
Surely it should be possible to simply say "I tasted the wine, I think it's awfully sour, undrinkabe to me." instead? That, assuming the wine was tasted would surely be a very ethical way to disagree. nd should one happen to be commercially selling a different wine, perhaps that fact shuld be added too, to give perspective (one's own wine is invariably the sweetest).
I'll leave it at this anyway.
Sayonara
JRKO said:
The point here is not so much the fact that opinions are such and are presented as such, but the form some use to disagree with them and anything they seem to dislike in general.
I notice two main reasons:
1) Commercial - be it fear of lost business or whatever - some fellers simply cannot accept experinces that suggest their commercial products may leave something to be desired.
2) Moral Affrodability - be it fear of the collaps of a carefully build worldview or the fear of admitting that getting really excepional good sound requies exceptional measures (and often expenditure) - they insist that the muddy bog called "average" is the standard and nothing should be allowed to differ from in in a sense of being superior.
It seems that the proponents of either position fight with a tenacity that would shame a british bulldog fighting a german shepherd and a memeory of imagined slights and insults that would shame an Elephant.
The result is that often the sensible discussion of certain topics is impossible. Anyway, my views strictly and the main reason I suggested the "ethics" issue. Either behaviour strikes me as a "sour grapes" behaviour well past that of the famous fox. It is one thing to claim the grapes are sour, a very different one however to **** in the wine and say "you didn't ant it anyway, it's sour" as justification for it.
Surely it should be possible to simply say "I tasted the wine, I think it's awfully sour, undrinkabe to me." instead? That, assuming the wine was tasted would surely be a very ethical way to disagree. nd should one happen to be commercially selling a different wine, perhaps that fact shuld be added too, to give perspective (one's own wine is invariably the sweetest).
I'll leave it at this anyway.
Sayonara
true
this entire forum is based on opinion.
however some seem to have a slightly elevated opinion of themsleves and thus their opinions.
No opinion is right or best. Another word for opinion is belief.
We may feel that someones beliefs are wrong but you cant prove them wrong as they are a personal opinion based on past experiance, current understanding and the knowledge base they use for reference.
opinions are needed but so is the attitude that someone else may be right (in as far as that is possible).
Otherwise you could just go to the last response in thread and copy the final design/idea and we would all have the ultimate home stereo/theater.
Everyone (including those who have been design whatever for years) can learn something new from someone else.
Its just accepting that fact that some cant swallow.
this entire forum is based on opinion.
however some seem to have a slightly elevated opinion of themsleves and thus their opinions.
No opinion is right or best. Another word for opinion is belief.
We may feel that someones beliefs are wrong but you cant prove them wrong as they are a personal opinion based on past experiance, current understanding and the knowledge base they use for reference.
opinions are needed but so is the attitude that someone else may be right (in as far as that is possible).
Otherwise you could just go to the last response in thread and copy the final design/idea and we would all have the ultimate home stereo/theater.
Everyone (including those who have been design whatever for years) can learn something new from someone else.
Its just accepting that fact that some cant swallow.
Gentleman - ORDER PLEASE....
Konnichiwa,
Carlosfm, MalichiConstant, Peter Daniel (before you ask, alphabetical order) - ORDER. The rest - stop cheering.
No matter what provocations, real or imagined and whatever, this thread is NOT about any personal griviances. It is NOT about any individuals EITHER. If you want to argue, please do NOT hi-jack "my" thread for it. My whole point was to suggest such arguing to be counterproductive and should be forstalled.
I will appeal one last time for contributions on the actual topic, namely a basic statement of Ethics for these boards and I would one last time call for topical comments, otherwise we maight as well close the thread and get on with whatever happens to be the current scheduled programming, though I'm likely to tune out....
Sayonara
Konnichiwa,
Carlosfm, MalichiConstant, Peter Daniel (before you ask, alphabetical order) - ORDER. The rest - stop cheering.
No matter what provocations, real or imagined and whatever, this thread is NOT about any personal griviances. It is NOT about any individuals EITHER. If you want to argue, please do NOT hi-jack "my" thread for it. My whole point was to suggest such arguing to be counterproductive and should be forstalled.
I will appeal one last time for contributions on the actual topic, namely a basic statement of Ethics for these boards and I would one last time call for topical comments, otherwise we maight as well close the thread and get on with whatever happens to be the current scheduled programming, though I'm likely to tune out....
Sayonara
Yes...People do forget...
Hi,
Now that would be nice, wouldn't it?
Hold on....Wasn't this how it was before someone decided it was time to reap the benefits of that wealth of information others once so gracefully provided?
I think it's perfectly possible if we'd stick to the present rules of conduct for a start instead of looking for the umpteenth way to stretch them....
Cheers,
Hi,
Now that would be nice, wouldn't it?
Hold on....Wasn't this how it was before someone decided it was time to reap the benefits of that wealth of information others once so gracefully provided?
I think it's perfectly possible if we'd stick to the present rules of conduct for a start instead of looking for the umpteenth way to stretch them....
Cheers,
"Wouldn't it be nice to discuss audio without sneer remarks here and there, without competition who has the biggest d**k, without critisizing but helping, with enthusiasm and open mind, eager to learn and share?"
heh, avoid linux... i posted mainly to vent about the failure of an amp i built and the thread got about 700 views and 30 replies in 1 day. whenever things go wrong in linux, my posts get about 7 views per day and maybe 3 replies per week...
i'm happy here.
heh, avoid linux... i posted mainly to vent about the failure of an amp i built and the thread got about 700 views and 30 replies in 1 day. whenever things go wrong in linux, my posts get about 7 views per day and maybe 3 replies per week...
i'm happy here.
I am issuing a roddy (can't find the posting of the definition) for carlosfm & Peter Daniel. This means that neither can post in the thread in question for 48 hours so they can cool off. In this case instead of just a single thread, it applies to any thread where they have been having their ****ing contest -- actually make that any thread. Failure to abide by this will net the person posting a trip to the SinBin for a week.
dave/planet10
dave/planet10
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.