Ethernet Cables, do they make a difference?

If "advocates" of blind testing were serious, they would submit the protocol for advance review here, and the test would be performed in public, which would allow witnesses and an opportunity for others to participate. This could be done at an audio store or audiophile club. But the "advocates" haven’t shown any interest in that; their call for scientific testing is just a red herring.

It's been offered to be done at a show. I've posted a video of the setup in action and it lists all the components and demonstrates the LACP dynamic LAG.

It's also been offered to train someone (random pick) to do the cable swap. 

jinjuku

Upfront payment wasn’t demanded. It was also loser pays expenses. This would all be handled after the evaluation.

Perhaps that was your offer. The proposal to which I refer required a $25,000 advance payment and agreement crafted by an attorney for the supposed "protection" of the listener.

By the way, there is no "loser" in a listening test. A listening test doesn’t really test the listener at all - that’s a misnomer. Rather, it’s an evaluation by the listener of the equipment that is under test. To suggest otherwise shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of a scientific listening test.

My offer, as it was for William, was to do this in the listeners setup. No money involved. 

Seems way more than fair to the claimant. 

jinjuku says:

Upfront payment wasn’t demanded. It was also loser pays expenses.

Then jinjuku says:

My offer, as it was for William, was to do this in the listeners setup. No money involved. Seems way more than fair to the claimant.

It looks like you've made all kinds of "offers." In any event, a scientific listening test doesn't include a "claimant" - you're compromising the validity of the test itself with that kind of notion. Remember, a listening test doesn't test the listener - it tests the equipment that is the subject of the test. Regardless of the result, it can only be strictly applied to that equipment, under those circumstances, and with that listener. That's why, if you want a scientifically valid test, you'll want a large number of samples, and that usually means a large number of listeners.

If the testing isn't scientific, it's of no value at all.

No, it tests the claim. 

And sighted evaluation, and anecdotal accounts are 100% rigorous. Gotcha.  

Guess what happens when you at 1+1 and do it 48 more times over the course of time? You increase the sample size.