On ''what there is''


The question looks ''philosophical'' in the sense of ''what exist?''. In the old terminology ''ontology question''.
The modern formulation (by Quine) is: ''what are the values of your variables''? In our hobby ''what are
the new available components''?  Can one person know what are available components? Obviously not
but we have ''collective knowledge''. Each contribution is welcome. Like in science. But like in science there
are individuals with special contributions. Raul with his MM contributions and his ''successor'' chakster
with his contributions about ''both kinds'': MC's and MM's. Despite his ''modest means''. I think we should
be thankful to have such individuals.
128x128nandric
This thread is a perfect example of a moderator who feels intimidated by jabberwocky. 
So, the penchant of providing "philosophy" to audiophillia, finally points to the disease.
streadmerdude, Are you forced by someone to react to this
thread? You can simply pass over. There are more threads.
Nothing to your liking? BTW you can complain by the moderator.
An novice with 51 posts so not well informed. 
Nandric,
I have to assume that your posts on this thread are a practice in personal vanity, since you must know that you are flying high above the heads of most readers including myself regarding the writers and philosophers that you are referencing. (excluding mahgister)
I think that it's far more effective to distill a point clearly in layman's terms than to use arcane references and even equations. ( ''for all x Fx& Gx'')
I understand, you're smarter and more well read than me, but stop grandstanding and say something.
By the way, in English it's did, not deed. Gee, I knew something you didn't know after all...