Konnichiwa,
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
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
My comments here are as a member, not as a moderator nor as spokesman for the moderators.
In a real sense, forums like this are communities. Communities are composed of all sorts of people with all sorts of ideas and views, all sorts of styles, and all sorts of interests. As with all communities, the basic mores and culture are not generally enforced from above, but are a result of the interaction of the members. People don't refrain from loudly passing gas at restaurants because they're afraid a cop is going to arrest them, they refrain from it because it is something that will cause their fellows to think poorly of them and, eventually, to shun them.
Criticism is either on point or not. If it's on point and the target continues to ignore it, discount it, make fun of it, and in general not deal with it, the target will eventually be ignored at worst, and in general not be taken seriously at best. Contrariwise, if the critic's comments are repeatedly not pertinent and poorly thought through, the critic will not be taken seriously and will eventually be ignored and lose interest- or go and learn something.
There are nutcakes who continue to get up on soapboxes and denounce the Queen of England for heroin smuggling. As long as they attract a crowd and get attention (whether positive or negative), they will continue to do so. At the point where no one pays them attention, they generally climb off their little box, go home, and tend to their stamp collections.
There are people whose posts I personally find interminally dull, far too long, pompous, and ill-informed. I don't argue with them, I ignore them. You are free to do the same.
In a real sense, forums like this are communities. Communities are composed of all sorts of people with all sorts of ideas and views, all sorts of styles, and all sorts of interests. As with all communities, the basic mores and culture are not generally enforced from above, but are a result of the interaction of the members. People don't refrain from loudly passing gas at restaurants because they're afraid a cop is going to arrest them, they refrain from it because it is something that will cause their fellows to think poorly of them and, eventually, to shun them.
Criticism is either on point or not. If it's on point and the target continues to ignore it, discount it, make fun of it, and in general not deal with it, the target will eventually be ignored at worst, and in general not be taken seriously at best. Contrariwise, if the critic's comments are repeatedly not pertinent and poorly thought through, the critic will not be taken seriously and will eventually be ignored and lose interest- or go and learn something.
There are nutcakes who continue to get up on soapboxes and denounce the Queen of England for heroin smuggling. As long as they attract a crowd and get attention (whether positive or negative), they will continue to do so. At the point where no one pays them attention, they generally climb off their little box, go home, and tend to their stamp collections.
There are people whose posts I personally find interminally dull, far too long, pompous, and ill-informed. I don't argue with them, I ignore them. You are free to do the same.
Kuei Yang Wang said:
adding to the general store of knowledge also means subtracting from it mis-information. There is no assurance that anyone posted here is true, and quite frankly the signal to noise ratio isn't that great. So if all we can do is to agree to anything and everything posted here then this forum will end us as nothing but garbage dump, which I assume isn't the intended purpose of its creator(s).
so to me it would seem a reasonable conclusion that to the extend that we were to impose an "ethic code" (why would it be called "ethic code", BTW?), it would be vital that we impose the same "ethic code" on anyone and everyone posting here in affirmative fashion: demand proof / back-up for anything statements posted here so that there is no mis-information.
If you think the egyptian maple case adds to the sound of an amp, you better back it up with solid scientific proof, and subject yourself to peer reviews before posting to this forum.
That way, you eliminate the addition of mis-information to this forum, a neccessary condition if you are to eliminate the subtraction of mis-information caused by the imposing the "ethic code".
Kuei Yang Wang said:
That is also my view. As a member, I'm here to learn new ways and utilize them in my projects. I'm not looking for proofs and I don't give them out. My personal observations are "good enough" for me. I also like to share my experiences and whatever I learned so far. People are free to use that (and accept) in any way they want, no obligations here. This gives me sort of satisfaction and a feeling that I'm contributing to something bigger, something that is beyond this forum (one could called it New Age Audiophile awarness
).I find people who demand a proof and who question everything (without even trying to conduct their own experiments) as parasites and distraction to everybody who is more serious about audio (and this forum), and frequents this place not only for entertainment purposes but rather treat it as a part of everyday life.
This is my personal view, and as a moderator I have to find a middle way, where my actions seem fair to everybody. There were few cases when interesting discussion was interrupted by doubters and proof seekers. My usual intervention in those cases is to immediatly create a new threrad, where doubters can pursue their quest for obtaining proof, yet leave the original thread untouched by their demands and free for discussion of the original subject.
I think it interesting that people would call those with different point of views "unethical", which I remember the churches did a lot many many years ago. and I thought we had long passed that.
what I would consider unethical is a) selling personal experience as nothing but personal experience; and b) selling knowing false statements.
If I tried to tell you that my neutrino shields made a RadioShack boombox sound like a Parasound amp, that would be unethical. and if you challenged and disagreed with me on that, it would NOT be unethical.
The point? we have diverse experience and reasonable people can differ. We would just have to agree to disagree and move on.
what I would consider unethical is a) selling personal experience as nothing but personal experience; and b) selling knowing false statements.
If I tried to tell you that my neutrino shields made a RadioShack boombox sound like a Parasound amp, that would be unethical. and if you challenged and disagreed with me on that, it would NOT be unethical.
The point? we have diverse experience and reasonable people can differ. We would just have to agree to disagree and move on.
The main purpose of such a forum is information exchance. Freindly of topic digressions ocurr and are distracting at worst but not really harmful.
On the other hand when disagreements become personal and insults and invesctive replace reasonable differences of opinion the value and purpose of the site is harmed. These instances have been rare but it appears to me that in the case of of few negative instances the motive is to engender attention from the rest of us. To counter this I try simply not to respond to the offending posts since ignoring the offender ios usually the most painful of all possible rebukes.
On the other hand when disagreements become personal and insults and invesctive replace reasonable differences of opinion the value and purpose of the site is harmed. These instances have been rare but it appears to me that in the case of of few negative instances the motive is to engender attention from the rest of us. To counter this I try simply not to respond to the offending posts since ignoring the offender ios usually the most painful of all possible rebukes.
Peter Daniel said:
Exactly.
And I think the signal to noise ratio is extremely high for an open internet forum on hard matter like designs. It simply blows the doors off of any other forums of any other of my hobbies.
On soft matter like theory, the SNR can get pretty low. I admit I have completely lost the patience to follow the long threads debating theory. But I don't think it can be fixed by a soft-censorship, which is what a detailed code of ethics would amount to IMO.
Hooray for DIYAUDIO
SY and Peter ro right on
There are bunch of issues in audio field that have no clear technical proof as well as are the different methods in the way measurement should as they relate to signal or a sounds. . That is just one of the reasons, besides the music, that audio is so fascinating. However, we do have the proof that there are many way to accomplish high quality sound, as there are points of views, can only one be correct.
The facts are we only can hypotheses the reason why a tube amp sound different than transistors, one cable sound better than another and so on so forth. It would be sad if DIYAUDIO became some kind of dictatorial forum, for the group that fells they are the ileitis. I just cannot even imagine Nelson having to prove ever thing he says, come on, what fun that would be. The fact is there are many people that are not that Technical that come to this virtual meeting place, where the best of audio can be discussed, no matter where they are, whom they are and what they have to offer. I think we are just darn lucky to have suck a place.
Hooray for DIYAUDIO
SY and Peter ro right on
There are bunch of issues in audio field that have no clear technical proof as well as are the different methods in the way measurement should as they relate to signal or a sounds. . That is just one of the reasons, besides the music, that audio is so fascinating. However, we do have the proof that there are many way to accomplish high quality sound, as there are points of views, can only one be correct.
The facts are we only can hypotheses the reason why a tube amp sound different than transistors, one cable sound better than another and so on so forth. It would be sad if DIYAUDIO became some kind of dictatorial forum, for the group that fells they are the ileitis. I just cannot even imagine Nelson having to prove ever thing he says, come on, what fun that would be. The fact is there are many people that are not that Technical that come to this virtual meeting place, where the best of audio can be discussed, no matter where they are, whom they are and what they have to offer. I think we are just darn lucky to have suck a place.
Hooray for DIYAUDIO
In my book FACTS require proof. Opinions can't be proved because they are just that, opinions.
If someone states something as a fact then they should expect that someone may challenge them to prove what they say. On the other hand if someone gives an opinion you are free to accept it as fact if you want to, but don't be supprised if your own opinion doesn't agree with that one some time in the future.
Later BZ
If someone states something as a fact then they should expect that someone may challenge them to prove what they say. On the other hand if someone gives an opinion you are free to accept it as fact if you want to, but don't be supprised if your own opinion doesn't agree with that one some time in the future.
Later BZ
Steve Eddy said:
It all depends what is your understanding of a term "proof". I'm not that particular about semantics. I mentioned before that I don't need proofs and I don't provide them. Most of the things discussed here cannot be proven, they can be only observed and if perceived, personally accepted. By observing other people posts and statements, one creates a sort of pattern and if enough "proven" (with personal opinion) info was observed, all individual's subsequent statements can be accepted without the need for proving them. This a sort of simplification, but it works for me in most cases.
Also, it works the other way. After "proving" to myself that certain member's observations were not consistant with my personal observations and experiences, I will never accept them without checking them out first and getting my own personal "proof".
As you see, I do it only for my personal use, to the extent that is comfortable for me. Anybody else, who requires proof, without carrying his own efforts for getting such proofs, is either lazy, doesn't care for the truth, doesn't know what others talk about, is living in denial, doesn't have enough experience or is simply lost.
HDTVman said:
So to make things easier for everybody, why don't we agree that every post presented on this forum is an expression of personal opinions, unless noted otherwise. Maybe it would be wise enough to make it one of the forum rules and all useless talk would be put to rest from now on?
Because I don't see how you can differenciate a fact from an opinion in a personal post?
Like audio, responses are subjective.
Not sure what is going on here. However, unless things are out of hand (and the moderators need to step in), I think it's up to individual members to ignore posters one considers "unproductive". Not easy to do, but what else can you do..."builds character..."
JF
Not sure what is going on here. However, unless things are out of hand (and the moderators need to step in), I think it's up to individual members to ignore posters one considers "unproductive". Not easy to do, but what else can you do..."builds character..."
JF
Esthetics, Opinions, and even Fact and Engineering all have there gray areas. For example, maybe Peter reference system is better than mine for evaluation of OSCON caps with music. So, I have access to an HP circuit analyzer. Can the analyzer prove that the cap turn into an inductor a 10Mhz, sure it can will it tell me which one sounds best, more than likely not. So opinions do count.
Peter Daniel said:
Suppose someone were to say that it's okay to run your op amps on +/-24 Volts DC. Saying something like that is a disservice to the community because it's misinformation. It's important to correct sources of misinformation because someone may actually try this and destroy their parts. Clearing up purely factual matters such as this makes the site more useful to users.
andy_c said:
While you are right about that, I don't think it's the main issue behind fact/opinion fractions. People who get into that are mostly after subjective experience issues, dealing with the sound of parts, wire directionality, chassis materials and so on. While those who critisize such matters are usually taking advantage of semantics and claim that those are stating of facts, which in reality, those can only be regarded as personal opinions.
Why has this discussion gone off topic?
Konnichiwa,
Non of my argument had anything to do with objectivsm vs. subjectivism and all that baggae. So why is it being dragged into this direction?
I merely suggest that certain types of behaviour, while not directly in contravention of the RULES are in contravention to the spirit of these borads and thus unethical. And I suggest that the moderators are to be given guidelines to act upon such behaviour, if displayed consistently and repeatedly.
So, ANY comments on that line?
Sayonara
Konnichiwa,
Non of my argument had anything to do with objectivsm vs. subjectivism and all that baggae. So why is it being dragged into this direction?
I merely suggest that certain types of behaviour, while not directly in contravention of the RULES are in contravention to the spirit of these borads and thus unethical. And I suggest that the moderators are to be given guidelines to act upon such behaviour, if displayed consistently and repeatedly.
So, ANY comments on that line?
Sayonara
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.