Arguing for the sake of argiung is a term I've heard before.
But to have a debate or argument you need two specific but differing points that are based on personal experience,or well established fact(insert science).
My point is that it is only argument for arguments sake, when one party cannot back himself up with either personal experience(with a tweak, ie)or can't provide scientific proof either in favour of or not in favour of the item being debated. Prove to me scientifically that an upscale fuse, i.e., has no effect. Don't always expect me to provide proof that it does.Fair enough?
I've done my job, I've tried it and stated my experience, although I have no scientific prof to back it up.I am at least half way there.
The other fellow hasn't done anything but express an opinion,and an opinion that is not based on personal experience or backed up by scientific fact.He may make references to scientific experiments or quote the results of double blind listening tests,but they are seldom specific to what is being debated, and again he has not participated in those tests, so again,still handicapped.
I demagnetize my cd's and lp's and have demonstrated the before and after effects, and everyone who has experienced it at my home has been in agreement that the sound was improved.No one asked for me to prove it to them scientifically.They heard the same things I heard.
I once posted this ,in the hope that others might try it and enjoy improved listening.
Sceptics who were not present to those demos came out of the wood work and gave a multitude of reasons why demagging can't work.
I can speak from experience that it was a power play.
Riddicule and sophmoric humour were last resorts as they usually are when one side starts to get the upper hand.
The topic doesn't matter anymore, it's all about who wins.
Who gets to be proclaimed the Wise One and who is made out to be the Dummy.Only a Dummy would believe that you can demagnetize a vinyl LP.
Instead of leaving it alone, or at least trying it for themselves, those folks decided that it was a subject that needed to be scrutinized and sanitized.
We don't need no more snake oil claims.
You'd of thought I suggested standing in a pool of water while playing with the power cords was the tweak, or some other type of mayhem.
This is when there's nothing to be learned, there's no sharing of knowledge and the thread is no use to anyone except the two protagonists and those folks in the crowd watching the fight taking one side or the other.
I have nothing against two or more folks freely expressing their opinions, but before you start to argue, please experience it for yourself and then post your take on it.
If your experience is different from mine I won't be able to argue with that.
So it's not really a two sided argument if one side is handicapped from the beginning.