New forum created for subjectivist members

[Gregadd]

Now you can see the problem. Imagine if you are a lawyer and your opposing counsel is also acting as judge. He constantly steps out of his role as counsel and rules in his favor.
Then he declares himself immune to the rules of evidence and beyond discipline. When you refuse to adhere to this he threatens to ban you from the courtroom.
Is that fair?

 

[Ronm1]

The whole idea of this new forum is a bit flawed, IMHO, and in part for the reasons that have been mentioned up thread. It seems a clever move but something does not quite seem right about it. I can't quite figure out why.

Isn't that the crux of the matter 'State of Mind'
The lights may go up or down or change hue in a test environment but the data itself being evaluated has not changed.

 

[amirm]

Amirs' statement , a forum for those who are afraid to be challenged , is equally inflamarory. Sorry it is not a matter of semantics. It is his clearly stated belief. He is now using his power as admin/owner/mod to implement it.

I have asked you repeatedly what you want it to say and you have not given me anything.

I created the forum because good point was made by a number of members that they want a place to share experiences without being challenged by objectivists. These are their words so that is what was on top of mind when I wrote. Another thing that was on my mind in the description was everything I wanted to say to objectivists to stay out of the forum. There was nothing for subjectivists to read into it other than "ah, we have a place where we can do what we have been asking, i.e. free of the other camp bothering us."

The other forum was created by Steve without consultation with me. He wrote the text and quickly under pressure from subjectivists, changed it from Science or whatever it was called to the incorrect title of "Measurement." I voiced my objection to it, he didn't care, so we live with it. Compare that to the protests some of you are putting forward.

 

[amirm]

As this seems to be a thread where members can express their opinions about this new forum, here is mine: The whole idea of this new forum is a bit flawed, IMHO, and in part for the reasons that have been mentioned up thread. It seems a clever move but something does not quite seem right about it. I can't quite figure out why.

I will figure it out for you:

1. You want to post about a topic and want to make sure Keith, myself, etc. don't go and ask you "did you do a blind test to know if you really heard that?" this is the forum for you.

2. If you want to post about a topic and want to make sure someone like myself doesn't come to tell you there is a research paper that says what you are saying is wrong, this is the forum for you.

3. If you want to post about a topic and want to not hear challenges from "armchair engineers" critiquing the design of the product "without hearing it first," this is the forum for you.

Probably other reasons like this I can't think of right now. Go give it a try. Create a thread and we can see how it plays out. Just like "measurement guys" did.

My job here is to police the forum strictly to make sure the above rules are followed.

And again, if you want to propose a better description for the forum, just say it.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

It's not so much what amir, Blizzard and others post as it is the sheer number of posts and relentless re-iteration of their opinions and "data" that is objectionable. An effective and reasonable discussion doesn't consist of one (or more) poster(s) posting the same thing over and over and over again in response to disagreement (even though the current U.S. political landscape might suggest otherwise.)

No, it's the content. It's the fundamental disagreement. We could agree with you over and over and over again and you'd never get tired of it. And that's not personal, it's human.

Tim

 

[Old Listener]

See: The Fine Art of Seppuku

You get better with practice.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

I was about to agree with this, opus112, but then I considered the ways in which a few of my subjective listening impressions have been challenged. To some of those, I do take exception. As my mother is fond of saying, "It's the tone that makes the music." I don't mind being challenged, but I do mind rude attacks.

And then, thinking some more about this new forum where subjectivists can enter and not be subject to challenge: what if someone says "I did not hear that the same way you did." Is that a subjectivist offering a challenge?

As this seems to be a thread where members can express their opinions about this new forum, here is mine: The whole idea of this new forum is a bit flawed, IMHO, and in part for the reasons that have been mentioned up thread. It seems a clever move but something does not quite seem right about it. I can't quite figure out why.

Maybe the measurement sub forum should be changed to "for objectivists only" and this new one "for subjectivists only." Neutral enough? What feels wrong about it? It won't work. I can absolutely promise you I won't go to the subjectivists forum and subject them (sorry) to specs and measurements, and if I accidentally go there and do that through the "new posts" button, call me out on it; I'll apologize and delete the post. Same goes for "cables," "tweaks," turntables, brand forums and, well, pretty much everything here except digital and general audio. But the record here shows that several of our subjectivist brothers can't do that. They go to the measurements forum to express their opposition, turning threads I'd like to learn from into epic arguments. But it's worth a try under those obvious labels, I suppose, if management wants to do it.

Tim

 

[Steve Williams]

Now you can see the problem. Imagine if you are a lawyer and your opposing counsel is also acting as judge. He constantly steps out of his role as counsel and rules in his favor.
Then he declares himself immune to the rules of evidence and beyond discipline. When you refuse to adhere to this he threatens to ban you from the courtroom.
Is that fair?

I have to agree with this post as this is the very premise with which I continue to have a problem. This is not a matter of subjectivists vs objectivists so please let us not lose sight of what the real issue is and why we continue to look for bandaids to repair something which cannot be repaired as long as this status quo exists. Gregg hit the nail on the head. Jack has alluded to the fact that an owner administrator should act like a host and remain neutral on topics. The fact remains that this forum has found itself in similar circumstances on several occasions since June of last year when the PeterB meltdown occurred. If one is to search the history of these troubled threads one will quickly determine that there is a common denominator (one person) that seems always to be the match that sparks the fire and it all boils down to what Gregg said. The admin team has been so overwhelmed with complaints and reported posts that frankly we were always seeming to be putting out the same fire in which Amir seems to reside. This has proved beyond difficult due to the double standard re our TOS. The mods have been told in no uncertain terms to stay out of things so we have been walking on egg shells

Frankly I see the formation of this forum as well as trying to decide on a color for it to be merely a bandaid and far from a fix. This all boils down to the direction of management so please everyone this is not a subjectivist vs objectivist thing. A you can already see even the subjectivists are opposed to the idea and no one can decide on a color. For me this is an issue of management and how all the reported posts are handled. When the majority of them have a common source upon which we cannot act, then this becomes the bone of contention.

There is a strong mandate here in a poll that members feels everyone should be subject equally to the TOS. This has nothing to do with picking things from years ago to make a point. Rather it is the feeling that there is a double standard here. IMO this new forum solves nothing but create more chaos. Further the same thread has also given strong support for an orderly split in the forum. Everyone in support of the split feel it necessary to extricate oneself from such a double standard. As I read these threads that is the message that I am getting

 

[DaveC]

Everyone seems to be saying reasonable things, but it gets lost sometimes and it's up to management to keep things on track in some cases, to avoid BS we don't need. Some things that stand out:

Tom on quality of posts, yes... there's just too much BS. We need a larger ratio of reasonable topics vs fluff. I don't really want to participate in threads like this at all and I haven't read many of the threads lately.

Spaz on posting etiquette, it's true there's too much passive-aggressive attacks, this is a problem in most forums but it's true that passive aggressive comments and attacks tend to be tolerated when they are attacks nonetheless.

Finally, I think separate subjectivist and objectivist forums are a bad idea. On the recent thread on speaker isolation in the measurement forum it was frustrating, I just had to stop posting... it was just too much. You shouldn't be allowed to be a total idiot and say whatever you want then ask people to prove it with measurements when they disagree with your ridiculous assertions. Again, up to management to set this stuff straight and it too often doesn't happen. To me this seems like what a debate would look like in the film Idiocracy. I just can't take time for this kind of BS.

 

[amirm]

Jack has alluded to the fact that an owner administrator should act like a host and remain neutral on topics.

And that is exactly what I have done by creating a safe heaven for subjectivists to discuss their topics of interest at the detriment of objectivists who like to engage them. And I am ready to police and sanction objectivists violating such rules.

I am still not hearing why subjectivists who are now given the safe heaven they asked for, are unwilling to use it. Or whatever they want to have fixed in the title and description of the forum.

 

[amirm]

Finally, I think separate subjectivist and objectivist forums are a bad idea.

The entire forum including General Audio Discussion forum is available for mixed participation. We are creating this other space in exclusionary manner because people keep saying they are suffering at the hands of the other group. So here it is.

BTW, I agree with you. We should have all figured out how to get along as we did in the prior 5 years and not need our force and power to keep people separate. But we are hear and I rather do something than just argue .

 

[Al M.]

Steve and Dave, I agree with both of your posts.

The formation of a subjectivist forum is nonsense. The deep underlying problem is Amir's unwillingness to effectively deal with, or allow to effectively deal with by the other members of the moderating team, certain posters whose constant interjections threaten to make this forum a junk site. This unwillingness is obviously recognized and opposed by Steve, Tom and Lee, and now clear to me as well.

Amir may decide to ban me for this post like he has recently banned others, it is up to Steve or the other two moderators to reinstate me if that happens.

 

[DaveC]

The entire forum including General Audio Discussion forum is available for mixed participation. We are creating this other space in exclusionary manner because people keep saying they are suffering at the hands of the other group. So here it is.

BTW, I agree with you. We should have all figured out how to get along as we did in the prior 5 years and not need our force and power to keep people separate. But we are hear and I rather do something than just argue .

But it's just creating more arguments. What we need might be more consistent moderation when people can't get along.

 

[amirm]

Steve and Dave, I agree with both of your posts.

The formation of a subjectivist forum is nonsense. The deep underlying problem is Amir's unwillingness to effectively deal with, or allow to effectively deal with by the other members of the moderating team, certain posters whose constant interjections threaten to make this forum a junk site, an unwillingness obviously recognized and opposed by Steve, Tom and Lee.

Amir may decide to ban me for this post like he has recently banned others, it is up to Steve or the other two moderators to reinstate me if that happens.

What are you saying Al? I consider you a virtual friend. Where did this talk come from?

Explain please what makes me following the request made to have a forum where the other camp is not challenging the subjectivists camp is nonsense. If it is nonsense then I will have my answer to them when they advocate such.

 

[Al M.]

What are you saying Al? I consider you a virtual friend. Where did this talk come from?

Explain please what makes me following the request made to have a forum where the other camp is not challenging the subjectivists camp is nonsense. If it is nonsense then I will have my answer to them when they advocate such.

Amir, I have very strongly defended you before on another occasion when you pointed out that many posters complained in PMs about you and your objectivist stance, and I stand by my strong defense. I also took far less offense at the tone of some posts of yours related to that stance than others did.

Yet your position on dealing with other members seems problematic and I have had enough of it. I will send you a PM.

 

[spazmatron]

I have to agree with this post as this is the very premise with which I continue to have a problem. This is not a matter of subjectivists vs objectivists so please let us not lose sight of what the real issue is and why we continue to look for bandaids to repair something which cannot be repaired as long as this status quo exists. Gregg hit the nail on the head. Jack has alluded to the fact that an owner administrator should act like a host and remain neutral on topics. The fact remains that this forum has found itself in similar circumstances on several occasions since June of last year when the PeterB meltdown occurred. If one is to search the history of these troubled threads one will quickly determine that there is a common denominator (one person) that seems always to be the match that sparks the fire and it all boils down to what Gregg said. The admin team has been so overwhelmed with complaints and reported posts that frankly we were always seeming to be putting out the same fire in which Amir seems to reside. This has proved beyond difficult due to the double standard re our TOS. The mods have been told in no uncertain terms to stay out of things so we have been walking on egg shells

Frankly I see the formation of this forum as well as trying to decide on a color for it to be merely a bandaid and far from a fix. This all boils down to the direction of management so please everyone this is not a subjectivist vs objectivist thing. A you can already see even the subjectivists are opposed to the idea and no one can decide on a color. For me this is an issue of management and how all the reported posts are handled. When the majority of them have a common source upon which we cannot act, then this becomes the bone of contention.

There is a strong mandate here in a poll that members feels everyone should be subject equally to the TOS. This has nothing to do with picking things from years ago to make a point. Rather it is the feeling that there is a double standard here. IMO this new forum solves nothing but create more chaos. Further the same thread has also given strong support for an orderly split in the forum. Everyone in support of the split feel it necessary to extricate oneself from such a double standard. As I read these threads that is the message that I am getting

we need you to sort this out steve, you have made a great site here. the creation of the subjective area is a joke, its naive in the extreme to think that guys who may not like amir(not me) will happily go off to a little area made for them by him!! its nuts! its a bit of a worry that to some this seems like a good idea.

i dont have a problem with the objectives, a few are a bit dogmatic but most of them i really like and enjoy their input. its obvious a few of them think we are mental but that's ok with me, they might be right. who cares?

your right, the whole objectivist vs subjectivist is a smoke screen. Tom outlined a great vision for the direction of this place, i cant see any of you (managment) disagreeing with the broad strokes of his stated direction.

i want to be questioned, i dont mind guys like keith taking the mick, its light hearted.. it can be funny even if its at my expense. its the nasty, personal stuff that is not right. nothing wrong with posting data but shutting guys down is wrong. the distinctions are clear, are they not?

you right that if amir weighs in on a thread as he is the forum co founder it carries more weight and if you're on the wrong end of his post then that's kind of hard for the average member, i am sure he realises this. the same goes for Tom and Lee, even if they dont post in green they carry a extra weight and have to conduct themselves accordingly. imo Lee is exemplary in this regard. that said amir is also right when he says all you guys need to be out here posting and leading by example building relations. the membership/forum needs all of you active driving this place in a coherent direction, its important! what ever needs to happen behind the scenes to make this a reality, needs to happen sooner rather than later.

please steve, no more segregation.. it wont work, it never does.

 

[spazmatron]

And that is exactly what I have done by creating a safe heaven for subjectivists to discuss their topics of interest at the detriment of objectivists who like to engage them. And I am ready to police and sanction objectivists violating such rules.

I am still not hearing why subjectivists who are now given the safe heaven they asked for, are unwilling to use it. Or whatever they want to have fixed in the title and description of the forum.

your being naive my lord.. willfully or otherwise.

 

[Steve Williams]

The entire forum including General Audio Discussion forum is available for mixed participation. We are creating this other space in exclusionary manner because people keep saying they are suffering at the hands of the other group. So here it is.

BTW, I agree with you. We should have all figured out how to get along as we did in the prior 5 years and not need our force and power to keep people separate. But we are hear and I rather do something than just argue .

Thankfully I can see Amir is agreeing with me and the other mods as we have said repeatedly that the forum functioned flawlessly for the first 5 years until he changed from an absentee owner to one who was going to be part of the admin team. The problem is that there is no solution but rather more chaos as we have no way to correct the problems he has created. This subjectivist forum is just darn silly and will solve nothing as we are already finding by the posts here already

 

[Gregadd]

I have asked you repeatedly what you want it t.no say and you have not given me anything.

I created the forum because good point was made by a number of members that they want a place to share experiences without being challenged by objectivists. These are their words so that is what was on top of mind when I wrote. Another thing that was on my mind in the description was everything I wanted to say to objectivists to stay out of the forum. There was nothing for subjectivists to read into it other than "ah, we have a place where we can do what we have been asking, i.e. free of the other camp bothering us."

The other forum was created by Steve without consultation with me. He wrote the text and quickly under pressure from subjectivists, changed it from Science or whatever it was called to the incorrect title of "Measurement." I voiced my objection to it, he didn't care, so we live with it. Compare that to the protests some of you are putting forward.

Let's not be revisionist.
Creation of this forum has nothing to with protecting subjectivist and everything to do with protecting objectivist and pressing your agenda. You previously stated there is a conspiracy to drive objectivist from this forum and you were not going to allow it. That was the post that prompted me to suggest you take a vacation. In that thread I already told you why I think segregation is a bad idea.
I have no intent of participating in any such thread or doing anything that would lend it credibility. I have no desire to put lipstick on a pig.
A safe haven for subjectivist and objectivist alike should be WBF as a whole. That's why I came here.

 

[amirm]

Thankfully I can see Amir is agreeing with me and the other mods as we have said repeatedly that the forum functioned flawlessly for the first 5 years until he changed from an absentee owner to one who was going to be part of the admin team.

Did not agree with that in the slightest. What I said that we did not need segregation for 5 years, not what you saying. What has happened has happened and you created one for objectivists and here we are one for subjectivists as repeatedly asked.

The problem is that there is no solution but rather more chaos as we have no way to correct the problems he has created. This subjectivist forum is just darn silly and will solve nothing as we are already finding by the posts here already

Nothing silly about it. We have made the measurement forum work. It is your job to go and make this one work instead of sitting here complaining. Post a topic about audio and discuss it in peace. Why are you here instead complaining about it?