The science of opinion ...

OK, I think I finally figured this all out. It’s from the Seinfeld episode, The Limo. Does anyone else think it was a bad idea to get Kramer involved?

Jerry flies in from Chicago and George arrives to take him home. His car has broken down on the Belt Parkway, stranding them at the airport. Jerry points out a limousine chauffeur with a sign saying "O’Brien". Jerry had seen an O’Brien in Chicago complaining to airport staff that he had to reach Madison Square Garden. Since O’Brien’s flight is overbooked and he will not be arriving in New York soon, George suggests they pose as O’Brien and his colleague and take the limo home. George assumes the identity of O’Brien, and Jerry makes up the name Dylan Murphy. The chauffeur lets them into the limo and says he has the four passes. George remembers the Knicks are playing the Bulls that night at MSG. Excited at the prospect of seeing the game live, Jerry calls Elaine on the limo’s phone and tells her to wait with Kramer for them to pick them up for the game, and to call him and George by their pseudonyms.

This is silly. From the OP’s article abstract,

“In particular, we identify two major attractors of opinion: (i) the expert effect, induced by the presence of a highly confident individual in the group, and (ii) the majority effect, caused by the presence of a critical mass of laypeople sharing similar opinions. Additional simulations reveal the existence of a tipping point at which one attractor will dominate over the other, driving collective opinion in a given direction. These findings have implications for understanding the mechanisms of public opinion formation and managing conflicting situations in which self-confident and better informed minorities challenge the views of a large uninformed majority.”

>>>>>I say it’s silly because everybody and his brother knows you cannot change an audiophile’s belief no matter how many people try to convince him. It’s call the Backfire Effect. I’m not even talking about pseudo skeptics who will never change their beliefs, no matter what, it would be too embarrassing. Think of what their friends would say. I’m talking the average audiophile, not newbies, who hold certain beliefs. And they have reasons for those beliefs. But when people try to convince him that his beliefs are wrong he holds on to those beliefs even closer. That’s the Backfire Effect. When it comes to experts audiophiles are a little bit cynical and most of them would agree an expert is someone who used to be drip under pressure. We don’t need no stinking experts! As for the so called Majority Effect that cannot work either because it’s been proven, they’re like cats, you can’t herd Audiophiles. As for the Professional Pseudo Skeptics, it’s like Charles Manson opined, you can’t kill kill.

atdavid--"If I have any goal at all, it is to help other people not fool themselves."
And you have just proven my point in my last post.
Lordy, I have been rescued from the darkness and see the light....!
Like I said, just another guy in a long line of guys who fancy themselves as audio saviors telling people they’re not really hearing what they hear.

atdavid--"If I have any goal at all, it is to help other people not fool themselves."

That’s GOLD, Jerry, GOLD! 🤗

If I have any goal at all, it is to help other people not fool themselves."

Yeah... that’s always what they say when they post this stuff all over the Internet. Good Samaritans saving people from spending their money.

But is it really the reason they do this? Some of them full time, in all audio groups. Do they have an agenda? Some type of guerrilla warfare marketing for whatever they are selling, be it acoustic panels, cheap class D amps, questionable cheap China copy cats?

Or is it simply sense of irrelevance and self-awareness steaming from inability to own and enjoy decent gear? Just ask them what their system is. This question alone will drive them crazy and over the cliffs