New forum created for subjectivist members

[Steve Williams]

Gosh Amir

Tell the whole story. You were threatening to ban me for things that were said years ago that you chose to make public. It was you who told me to seek legal opinion about owners and the TOS. I did just that and confirmed to you what he said. I then told you that if you knew this all along why were you threatening to ban me. You love to cherry pick and tell only parts of a story to suit your needs. Do you recall threatening to ban me. I took your advice and sought legal opinion and found it correct. A poll was started by ack about owners being above TOS. I voiced my opinion. You remained against it. I look at it this way that as long as you continue to act in the way you do and have such a desire to destroy things here then I look at it as I am the only one here who will have the right to object in the manner in which I do. Short of that once again there is a cry for you to conform to the TOS as well as a plea to divide the forum. This would solve immediate problems and you can do things as you see fit without reproach,question or debate.

 

[ack]

And until then he is going to violate it left and right with cursing me?

That's exactly what happens when rules do not apply to certain people and tempers run high - effectively, a verbal war, because they can. You are correctly attempting to use proper language, but he's showing you what can happen when rules don't apply to some and what it feels like to others... You expect him to go by your rules of conduct or those set forth by the TOS, but you are not willing to accept to play by the only rules actually written on paper by both of you; so he's reacting, and admittedly, not well. This is why I said the conversation is not going well. Now, are you going to ban each other?

EDIT: I just saw you subsequently said this to Steve: "I wrote the TOS as terms to use to govern the membership. It was never written to address you and I." - so now you have excluded him from the TOS yourself and in writing. What are we to expect now...

 

[spazmatron]

if we were at war and you both were in charge i would consider it my duty to shoot you both as sure as bare's poo in the woods you're going to get us all killed.

 

[Steve Williams]

To address PeterB's meltdown and departure no doubt a casual comment made at the doorway to a room st THE Show by someone added fuel to the fire. What amir failed to remember was in the thread started by tomelex "my review of reviewers " where you took s stand against all reviewers and that if they were to be any good at all, said reviewers must possess professional equipment such as that possessed by yourself ( something on the order of $70K). In summary that sir was the sentinel event that caused the uproar with Peter and created strong objection by members including JackD). It resulted in a huge loss of some of the best members this forum has seen. Your insults to professional reviewers was answered here by former member Mep who IMO is a true and sincere audiophile whose only love was the music. He has become of recent a reviewer and I seem to remember your saying that a reviewer isn't worth much opinion wise unless they possess $70K worth if review gear such as you. Mark left shortly thereafter as a result. It is threads like that one which IMO an owner should be neutral. So truly that was the reason he left and the additional comment made as you say was the straw that broke the camels back got Peter

 

[amirm]

That's exactly what happens when rules do not apply to certain people and tempers run high - effectively, a verbal war, because they can.

It is unacceptable in my book to want to be a forum admin yet not be able to control your temper and lash out at people in private and in public. I don't care what the reason. If you sign up to partner with me to run a forum, this is your responsibility. Violate it and I won't listen to what you have to say.

I mean how can we govern a forum where Steve lashes out like this:

what a joke [addressing Amir]

Next time I look with my eyes I will pick the desert that looks twice as good

Straw man arguments is what you excel at

None of us seem to be greeting the fuzzy feelings from your teachings that you claim to possess for 35+ years

He has no regards whatsoever for ToS. He wants to run this forum to be on top of you guys. The last person in the world that wants to follow the rules is him. How can you defend him in this regard??? I don't know how to ask members to be respectful when my partner has no regards for that.

You are correctly attempting to use proper language, but he's showing you what can happen when rules don't apply to some and what it feels like to others... You expect him to go by your rules of conduct or those set forth by the TOS, but you are not willing to accept to play by the only rules actually written on paper by both of you; so he's reacting, and admittedly, not well. This is why I said the conversation is not going well. Now, are you going to ban each other?

My rules are the forum rules. They call for this place to be friendly and cordial first and foremost.

I have lost count of how many times he has cursed me. It is probably 50+ times. Just discussing how to pay a small fee for our forum hosting he goes on cursing me and cursing me.

What rule do you think I have violated on his behalf to garner this? And is that all it takes to violate the ToS? Having a reason in your mind?

 

[ack]

He has no regards whatsoever for ToS.

Yes, right now he doesn't; but again, he feels you don't either, because you have explicitly said the TOS do not apply to you, so why would he abide. And moments ago you told Steve that "I wrote the TOS as terms to use to govern the membership. It was never written to address you and I.". So you just excluded him in writing too, so I am not sure what you expect of him right now... The point of all this is again: you either both accept to play by the same rules (and you can amend the TOS so that it covers you both specifically, with higher privileges - or just write up your own separate rules), or you can't anticipate or be surprised by how people excluded by any rules will react. But I also understand you are just not willing to listen to him, because of his tone; that's also fair... but you guys are just not going anywhere either.

 

[amirm]

Your insults to professional reviewers was answered here by former member Mep who IMO is a true and sincere audiophile whose only love was the music.

This is Steve today. This is Steve from June of last year responding to Mep's goodbye message:

Only love was music? How come you didn't tell him all of that to keep him here?

 

[Steve Williams]

Me culpa Spaz. Shoot me.

The mods can also confirm that Amir was so saddened by the sequence of events that he initially said that he was going to step back and leave the forum. That lasted all of one night when he changed his mind and returned. He then agreed to step aside from the moderation team for a period of fine. He agreed. That lasted overnight and he returned with a cordial email to me that he was leaving the forum and told me he was amenable to selling his share to Jack. An offer was made consistent with an evaluation of the site. The offer was rejected and since then Amir has attempted to change the forum in a destructive pattern. The mods voiced their concerns and were admonished. One continued and was banned. He knew I could rescind the van. The only way I could do that was with the banned IP address and/or email address. These were banned. Knowing that this was the most recent ban both of these should have been at the top of the data base. I should have found them immediately. I couldn't as Amir had buried the IP address and email in the middle of the data base where only an extensive time and search would have found them. I made that search and found that they were buried there. Is this another example of an owner trying to prevent me from rescinding the ban.

I have nothing further to say and I must admit that I am ashamed that I have said what I have but what all of us find at some point is that Amir can bring out the worst in us and for that I apologize for what I have said.

I will not comment further however I know he will as he always has to have the last word.

 

[amirm]

Yes, right now he doesn't; but again, he feels you don't either, because you have explicitly said the TOS do not apply to you, so why would he abide. And moments ago you told Steve that "I wrote the TOS as terms to use to govern the membership. It was never written to address you and I.". So you just excluded him in writing too, so I am not sure what you expect of him right now...

I expect him to do what we ask you to do: be polite. Be respectful. Be professional. Don't lose sight of the fact that this is a forum and hobby. These are at the heart of ToS just the same. So there is no reason for him to refuse to follow them. I am following them without his buy-in.

The point of all this is again: you either both accept to play by the same rules (and you can amend the TOS so that it covers you both specifically, with higher privileges - or just write up your own separate rules), or you can't anticipate or be surprised by how people excluded by any rules will react. But I also understand you are just not willing to listen to him, because of his tone; that's also fair... but you guys are just not going anywhere either.

That's just one reason. The other reason as I keep showing is that when he is emotional he is not truthful. He just isn't. And the third reason is that it is not in his nature to be a partner to someone. He wants to be at the top whether the topic is a conflict with me, myles, david, peter, etc. That is fine but he should not have partnered with me.

 

[Joe Whip]

It may be a good idea to out to move on. Exposing this "dirty laundry" in public is not wise. IMHO.

 

[rbbert]

...what all of us find at some point is that Amir can bring out the worst in us and for that I apologize for what I have said.

I will not comment further however I know he will as he always has to have the last word.

Oh so true

 

[LarsS]

Uh huh.

Tim

Tim,

You seem as an amiable person, wish I could could have a forum between the two of us ... not very many of the likes as you here now it seems.

Prior my retirement from HAL rules were - disagreements were never allowed to be solved electronically (eMail, Discussion forum aso), Face to Face or verbal communication (phone/skype) way to settle it. I think that still holds true.

/Enjoy life
Lars

 

[NorthStar]

Me and my wife enjoyed a glass of wine (white) just now .. isn't life wonderful sometimes?

We had "moules au frites" for dinner, our two cats (Saba & Trisse) insisting on joining us. Here's a link to one of them, which we took care of thirteen years ago being abandonden -- > http://www.katthemmet.nu/aktuellt/2015-1/2015/12/12/lasses-12e-jul.aspx

Amir, Steve ... et.al. ... all yours if needed ...

/Best
Lars

PS: Skating away tomorrow on Sthlms lakes ... DS.

Cool. :b

 

[rbbert]

Uh huh.

Tim

Someone would have to be pretty narcissistic to bask in repetitive praise. I may be a bit self-centered at times, but hardly like that.

 

[Gregadd]

You had no evidence. You had an accusation that I was up to no good when I had nothing but good intentions to create a forum where I myself cannot speak my peace. A forum where its opposite was created by Steve.

You want this to go toward direction of resolution Greg? Give advice to Steve. Tell him why he must not waive his rights and be subject to ToS. That is what is needed.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Edit: Amir
I have known you as a member of this forium since its' inception. I don't pay attention to eveyrone who posts here. I always look fr your avatar. I assume you started WBF because you thought you had something to offer audiophiles. Yes that term is often maligned but that is what we are. And that audiophiles had something to offer you. I always thought you were a gentlemen whose oosition where well thought ut and researched . The fact that I did not always agree is another issue.I remember when I learned ou were banned.I thought how could that happen. I thought you to be the vooice of reason. I remember my first year olaw school professor said,It's easy for a judge to convince the winnere that he should have won.The mark of a good judge was to convince the loser that maybe he should have lost. To some degree you had that ability.
Your current behavior is a serious aberration from the Amir I used to know. Trust me(not my ears)your current behavior is a serious blemish on your reputation. Each time you post it is clear you sink further and further into the mire. Every time you reveal a private message or somtething that iwas told to you in the moderator/administrative deliberation process you tarnish your reputation. With each post and act you appear more biased and agenda driven.
I wonder if you have a confidant with which you can consult. Somebody who caan take a look at this situation and give you an honest opinion. Maybe your wife.
If you don't turn things around you are going to precipitate the mass exodus of members. There are not going to threaten you with leaving if you don't change. They are merely going to find soemthing else to do, or somewhere else to pursue thier hobby. Oh you care. Don't try to engange in anny sour grapes argument,
I am not saying Steve has engaged in exemplary behavior in this matter. Far from it. As the great Oprah said, is this the hill you want to die on?

 

[BlueFox]

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.

Peter, to me this is the gist of the problem. As an engineer I love data and measurements. There is nothing at all wrong with that. The problem is I also know that science has come no where near in understanding how changes at the atomic level can affect audio. We are just scratching the surface, and in the future we will know a lot more. Yet, some people think that current science is capable of explaining everything, and therefore if someone is hearing some things that cannot be adequately measured and explained then they must be delusional. That is what really irritates me.

Invariably, if someone says that cable, or component, 'X' changed the sound then someone pops in and says "No you don't. You are simply weak minded and delusional, and falling prey to marketing.' Then a fool with a multimeter, and a Cisco Networking certificate, starts challenging you to a blind test to prove to you that you are delusional. I am so fed up with this Culture of Stupidity that I will fight back.

The funny part is all I want to do is listen to music, and read others impressions of how some new gear sounds. Unfortunately, the close minded, know-it-alls have driven away many who could make useful posts, and simultaneously attracted the worst of the worst from other sites.

 

[amirm]

Peter, to me this the gist of the problem. As an engineer I love data and measurements. There is nothing at all wrong with that. The problem is I also know that science has come no where near in understanding how changes at the atomic level can affect audio. We are just scratching the surface, and in the future we will know a lot more. Yet, some people think that current science is capable of explaining everything, and therefore if someone is hearing somethings that cannot be adequately measured and explained then they must be delusional. That is what really irritates me.

Invariably, if someone says that cable, or component, 'X' changed the sound then someone pops in and says "No you don't. You are simply weak minded and delusional, and falling prey to marketing.' Then a fool with a multimeter, and a Cisco Networking certificate, starts challenging you to a blind test to prove to you that you are delusional. I am so fed up with this Culture of Stupidity that I will fight back.

The funny part is all I want to do is listen to music, and read others impressions of how some new gear sounds. Unfortunately, the close minded, know-it-alls have driven away many who could make useful posts, and simultaneously attracted the worst of the worst from other sites.

So now you have a place to go and post in this forum without that problem. Are you going to use it?

 

[RBFC]

I will state that the "Rules for Moderators" was not written by and approved by both site owners, thereby incomplete as they stand. The rules do have the provision that we moderators cannot criticize Amir (even in private) or we will be sanctioned/banned. The "violations" are up to his discretion, so if we say something he doesn't like, he feels he can take action against us. The whole spirit of this is punitive and vengeful.

I pray for WBF to re-emerge as the entity of old, where we had problems that seemed solvable. Know that the moderators are helpless to act on this matter, so we await resolution along with the membership. I extend my deepest respect to all the members who've voiced their opinions and tried to offer solutions.

Lee

 

[amirm]

I will state that the "Rules for Moderators" was not written by and approved by both site owners, thereby incomplete as they stand.

Of course it was. Here is the full thread in the private admin forum for Steve and I:

-----

I thought I create this thread to articulate what I think should embody our activities regarding moderators.

1. Moderators must be active members of our forum. This is required for them to gain the buy-in of the membership as otherwise they come across as security guards, only there to chastise the membership and nothing else. This will also help our forum grow. Moderators that are not interested in the forum itself, cannot play this role.

2. Moderators must treat the membership fairly with total disregard as to whether they are in their audio camp or not. Looking at their records of recommended sanctions must reflect this over months. And of course their conduct both in the admin forum and in the membership. Violating this means violating the trust of the membership to be treated fairly and immediately dismisses the person from being a moderator.

3. Moderators need to accept that you and I steve have serious disagreements regarding the forum. They must not take sides or in any way engage in battling the other co-founder. They are not brought over as the army of one co-founder versus another. They are here to help manage the membership with more eyes and ears than you and I can provide.

4. Moderators must embody the core value of WBF which is friendly conduct. Unfriendly behavior both in private and in public will result in them losing their post. They must at all times be the model of professionalism, emotional maturity, wisdom and thoughtfulness.

5. Moderators need to understand that they are not above our Terms of Service when conducting themselves in our admin forums.

6. Moderators cannot set policy for the forum. Only co-founders can. They can provide constructive opinion from time to time but in no occasion are they to do that in public. Legal matters is completely outside of their purview.

This is my view. If you disagree Steve, I like to understand why.

Simply put the mods will follow the TOS

There was a bunch more than that. You are in agreement with the rest?

I said I was

Now that we are in agreement

Would you please give me an explanation why you think otherwise?

And why you think these rules are not proper for you to follow?

 

[Frank750]

Peter, to me this the gist of the problem. As an engineer I love data and measurements. There is nothing at all wrong with that. The problem is I also know that science has come no where near in understanding how changes at the atomic level can affect audio. We are just scratching the surface, and in the future we will know a lot more. Yet, some people think that current science is capable of explaining everything, and therefore if someone is hearing somethings that cannot be adequately measured and explained then they must be delusional. That is what really irritates me.

Invariably, if someone says that cable, or component, 'X' changed the sound then someone pops in and says "No you don't. You are simply weak minded and delusional, and falling prey to marketing.' Then a fool with a multimeter, and a Cisco Networking certificate, starts challenging you to a blind test to prove to you that you are delusional. I am so fed up with this Culture of Stupidity that I will fight back.

The funny part is all I want to do is listen to music, and read others impressions of how some new gear sounds. Unfortunately, the close minded, know-it-alls have driven away many who could make useful posts, and simultaneously attracted the worst of the worst from other sites.

Bud, I think you have hit the nail directly on the head with your post. I feel exactly the same way. This forum has been spiraling out of control for some time now and it all coincides with the arrival of a few, and I stress few, who only seem to be here to tell the rest of us how stupid we are.

I certainly have no problem with engineering discussions or applying data points to a topic but the degree some have gone to make those of us who rely on our ears feel like imbeciles amazes me.

It's a real shame what's going on here, embarrassing quite frankly. I feel for Steve, I think he was running an excellent forum, best on the Internet. But, his partner in this endeavor seems to have come completely unglued and the rest of us are left to watch the melt down unfold on these pages.