Someone not being even-handed is your personal observation. Just because you observed something doesn't mean it's the fact to be standardized.
For the consumer of these products, the best part of the debate here was heralded by Marcel, who helped uncover the impact clock frequency multipliers may have on delta sigma DACs.
It’s always good to lay out a framework. As evidenced by this thread, happiness fuelled by subjectivity tends not to co-exist favourably with objectivity or intense rationalism. A clear rule would help create some order. Alternatively, there could be dedicated sections created that would allow people to openly share subjective views.
It’s always good to lay out a framework. As evidenced by this thread, happiness fuelled by subjectivity tends not to co-exist favourably with objectivity or intense rationalism. A clear rule would help create some order. Alternatively, there could be dedicated sections created that would allow people to openly share subjective views.
A great example from this very forum: 10 years ago, there were tons of subjective testing reports, chastising audio CFAs. All kind of language was used, from "muddled" to "screechy sound". The Alexander amp was in particular under fire.
Today, CFAs and "high speed" are all over and in the top of subjctive preference for many audiophiles, claiming they can hear "micro details", "resolution", etc... all attributed to the high slew rate of CFAs.
Those curious can use the search engine on this forum to find out more.
Even-handedness across a large community should not be claimed when there are no rules stipulated about the subject causing the dispute.
The best approach would be to join the audiophile forums intended for precisely this purpose; even mentioning the word "measurements" there would get one booted for good. Or open your own forum, software is free and hosting costs pretty much nothing today.
One of the problems I find irritating with some of the members here is that they want to eat the engineering cake, and have it too. That is, they are all about measurements and objective results (like the low close in phase noise performance) when challenged, but then also supporting the outlandish claims about the SQ. This would be fine if any correlation between measurements and the SQ could be established beyond reasonable doubts, unfortunately this never happens, and is rejected as required.
I am afraid engineering and science in general are not democracies. Evaluation/decision by vote is not an accepted criteria for establishing the truth.
You seem to have, not surprising, a pretty short memory. Use the search engine and you'll find quite some.
Rule based on your point of view?
Who was not being even-handed in dealing with cases of subjectivity? Lets start with this thread, can you please quote that specific post?
Forum rules are mostly based on a point of view. If the moderation team favors a certain type of post or form of accuracy why would they not want to make that preference public in order to help establish a foundation for moderation?
Please prove to me that every subjective post on this entire forum has been presented with equal opposition. Also please provide evidence that human bias does not play a part in which threads or posts a person chooses to respond to.
Statistics show that humans are more fallible than infallible. Are you truly certain that an unwritten rule can be moderated just as effectively as one that’s listed alongside the other guidelines for content?
If you think otherwise, then you are subjective even in this respect, you have subjective opinions about moderating the subjective opinions.
All humans are victims of subjective preferences.
I'm not, but until you can come up with clear examples I'd be much better not buying into conspiracy theories.
You directed the uneven-handedness comment to moderator/s, unless you believe that regular members can enforce the forum rules. So, still unable to quote one post that exemplifies your claim?
it’s better to clearly state rules so that they can act as guidance before moderation becomes necessary. That’s why there’s a list of rules in the first place. Unwritten rules are not wise for large communities. Are you able to show that all members know the unwritten rule?
I don’t have an issue following a rule that’s been clearly presented to all. The terms of service are agreed upon when we join, and amendments are allowed to be a part of that. Why is there reluctance to state a framework that the moderation team would like followed?
You are referring to discretion. Just like personal opinion, it's all over the place. When you call it not even-handed, that's equivalent to saying that ice is cold to touch. Yeah, that's just the way it is and no amount of complaining will change that. If you don't like the cold feel, don't touch the ice.
Imagine that on your resume, where your old boss adds :"C.B. acted as fairly as he could."
You say that as if it was a bad thing to shake the dust from one's shoes and move on.
Timenuts or eevblog at least do not force you to add excuses if you mention them
to professional colleges. And no, I don't like it here any more. In the last 17 years,
I've met some interesting people here; less than one per year if I count them.
And that's what kept me here. Andrea & co have advanced the art of accessible
quality oscillators. Maybe they are over the top, but so is a Bugatti Veyron.
And the group buy prices are OK, after all the oscillators are not fallen from a truck
in a dark forest like, maybe, the $30 ones mentioned by syn08. But then, THIS
mythical seller might be a complete moron who sells for 1% of the street value.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.