The term “placebo” is often used by those who actually know the difference between two or more substances, of which one causes a “non-effect” and another that causes an “effect.”
It seems to me that one cannot have a placebo unless one acknowledges something actually does bring about an “effect.” So one must first acknowledge the existence of a cable, for example, as having a bona fide change in SQ, before a placebo can even exist.
So it’s more than arrogance. It’s stupidity to suggest another’s experience is false or that another is being deceived when the poster typically has no experience with the product(s) in question, let alone the context in which the product(s) resides.
And there are are others who base their arguments on test results that they would likely admit their don’t fully comprehend to even critically adjudge the test construct’s legitimacy. Even more amazing are those who believe not hearing such differences when listening for them on an iPhone proves their point as being universally applicable to all audio systems...well, don’t get me started.