Why should audiophile deniers be allowed on an audiophile forum?
Why should we be subjected to audiophile deniers, on a site dedicated to audio?
It’s antithetical to the hobby and adds nothing to the pursuit. I want to quote something from another thread.
@djones51 wrote "exposing bull products like "audiophile switches, cables, fuses " and other highly questionable devices that serve no purpose"
What then, is the purpose of people with this agenda being on this site? To “expose bull products.” It’s fine for someone to post they tried a product and it didn’t work for them, but to dismiss entire product categories is not a discussion that belongs on an enthusiast forum.
Would a car enthusiast site stand for this type of post?
Try going on a Porsche forum, just for example, and posting that your Mustang is just as fast 0-60 and that others poster’s claims about their driving experience is “dubious.” See how long that will be tolerated
There are plenty of sites to poke fun at audiophile’s obsession with cables, power conditioners etc. Why does it belong here, especially when we can’t mute specific posters?
What’s next? Arguing that speakers that measure the same must sound the same and that we are all suckers for buying expensive speakers? I thought we got rid of trolling?
Isn’t it obvious with all the ASR related posts here lately we are being trolled?
A couple of months back I read a post here about someone that ordered a new cat8 cable from China. I tried it and posted back my fantastic results for others to benefit.
Personally that’s the kind of forum I’m interested in, not to come here to be challenged about what I hear and that since it can’t be measured so it must be “dubious.”
The OP was complaining about me. If the owners of Audiogon want to cancel me or toss me off that's their prerogative. It's the price I paid when I voluntarily joined this site and agreed to their terms. | ||
Me, shouting? That's rich coming from you. You're operating under the notion that you can say whatever you want but I have to watch what I say. Free speech, and the discussion of it, is a two way street. One thing I've pointed out in many threads over the years, is that all posts should remain up for all to see, warts and all. That way all can get a handle on just who they're dealing with, and if they want, to never deal with them again if they wish. Another is that those that cry and wail against censorship, are the first to have members posts removed after they've replied to their offending posts. Rank hypocrisy every single time. As for the OPs question, I've already stated how I feel. As for anyone about to be "canceled" , are you feeling guilty about something? All the best,
| ||
@djones51 , I will try to unpack this as best as I can. Let's start by saying that this place, is, for the most part, not infrastructure so what I would apply to other entities, even Facebook, would not appear here.
I am saying that we have allowed the line between "Private" entities and public utilities to blur too far. Many aspects of Facebook, especially the communications aspects, are an effective equivalent of a public utility. In the past, a telephone could not be refused by Ma Bell unless bills were not paid or the phone was used for illegal purposes. No one was threatening to burn down their offices because someone, someone did not like, was allowed to have a telephone. I would put Banks, and credit cards / payment processing into that, i.e. Paypal. There is enough concentration into few enough companies, that I think a legal requirement to serve is essential if we want to preserve the concept of free speech. Ditto would be for ISPs and access to the Internet. Today, say the wrong thing, upset the wrong 10%, 25%, etc. of the population and Credit Card companies will refuse to process your payments, etc. even though you are doing nothing illegal. ISPs may refuse you service, etc. What is the point of having a legal right to criticize the government, etc. if private companies are able to eliminate your ability to have a voice. You can't even create your own platform unless you are exceedingly wealthy because again, Credit Cards won't process your payments, ISPs won't allow you access, etc. Very very dangerous precedent. I see right to access laws as beneficial for these companies as well. One has to expect that while some of their banning is partisan politics, a lot of it is just knee jerk reactions because it is easier to ban one person, then it is to stand up to the mobs insisting that person is cancelled. If these companies are not legally able to cancel that person, except for illegal activity, then those companies don't have to worry about the outraged mobs. To wit, YOU can boycott Hobby Lobby all you want, same as I can avoid ULINE if at all possible (I really wish they had some effective competition). However, what I don't think is acceptable, is that you and an outraged mob, lobby Hobby Lobby's bank, which I consider an essential service, effectively infrastructure, such that the bank feels pressured to drop them as a client. I would likely extend that to Facebook as it has become ubiquitous, and perhaps even Youtube. You-tube does not like your politics and they demonetize your videos (but happily capitalize on the mindshare of the viewers you bring to their platform). These are private entities, BUT they rely heavily on public infrastructure to survive, including physical space, airwaves, etc. Private company, you don't want to allow XXX to use your network, that's okay, we will take usage of 1.5-1.75GHz away from you, I hope it was not important. Mr. Bank, you don't want to serve this customer? No problem. Now you must have 100% assets to match your lending because you don't get to print money from the central bank any more. Youtube, you don't want to allow certain people? No problem, your data can longer be carried on any infrastructure that makes use of public land. It is all about deciding what type of society you want to live in. | ||
au·dio·phile | \ ˈȯ-dē-ō-ˌfī(-ə)l \ Definition of audiophile
: a person who is enthusiastic about high-fidelity sound reproduction Not sure who you are complaining about. The focus (or target?) of the OP “Audiophile’s” would seem to cover a wide range of people who enjoy listening to music. Or even sound effects? There will always be spirited battles between the subjectivists and objectivists. Many “audiophiles” probably reside in both camps to one degree or another. I don’t believe I hear any difference using myriad items claimed to improve or enhance the sound of the music I listen to. I do hear differences between many pieces of equipment. What exactly IS a non audiophile anyway? Is this about audio or Constitutional law 101? | ||
@nonoise , I feel your position is clouded by a belief that because things are relatively good today, that they will always be so. I don't share that belief and history is on my side.
This post to me is ignorant of today's reality. Take for instance, and I would appreciate some leeway from mods, trans rights to participate in sport. I don't feel at all guilty saying that biological women are at a disadvantage and this should not be allowed. I also don't feel guilty saying that a biological woman's live experience is different from a trans person. However, it today's world, there is a large contingent that will want to cancel you. Just look at J.K. Rowling. Similarly, there is a large body of scientific evidence that shows that our brains continue to develop till our early 20's and that most teens with gender dysphoria naturally gravitate to their biological sex over time. Even stating that, which is pure scientific data, can get you a slap on the wrist on Twitter and don't even consider suggesting that reasonable limits for gender transition for teens is a good idea in some circles, or you will be labelled all kinds of nasty things even though your position is based on scientific facts. I could give you many examples where having reasonable views will have people attempt to cancel you. The end result is lack of communication and societal division. In Russia right now, many people are totally unaware that Russians are somewhat indiscriminately killing people in Ukraine. People in China are also unaware. You think that can't happen here? There are many examples in our world today where freedom, especially around speech, but as much communication of thought, are being reduced. To think it will not happen here and not impact your family directly is not a supportable position.
|
