Toward a Better WBF…

[Lee]

I think WBF has a lot of things going for it…lots of serious audiophiles, loads of true experts, considerate forum ownership, and much thoughtful discussion. However, I think there is more than enough disagreeable and downright rude posts on some threads.

May I humbly suggest we try as a forum to do three things…? And I am guilty myself on these so there is much work to be done in my own posting as well.

1. Let’s respect different and unpopular opinions on sound quality. Don’t like MQA? That’s fine. It’s not doing great but on sonic attributes many of us hear improved quality. Let’s respect that. Don’t like a particular approach like SET/horns or drivers/solid state then let’s respect and learn from our different approaches.

2. Let’s think more about presenting a compelling argument. I think when we can reference experts or AES research, we learn more. I‘m smart enough to know I certainly don’t have all the answers. Far from it. It seems to me that audio is actually a very complex and fast-changing subject.

3. Let’s think more about the impact of system setup. I think this subject is covered pretty well here but my thinking is that understanding the listener’s space and setup may account for some of the sonic differences that people report here. I don’t mean to dismiss anything that’s not a fancy listening room as many have constraints due to expensive city apartments, wife acceptance factor, etc. I heard some fancy rooms with poor setup and lousy sound.

Is this a reasonable request, or am I off base?

 

[bonzo75]

I think you are missing addressing the points where those with an agenda wrongly justify certain approaches/components. In that case

Audio isn’t as fast changing and complex as you want to make it out to be. Lot of gear is just plain overpriced hyped stuff irrespective of set up. You really can’t do much if a loudspeaker has poorly designed crossovers, mismatched drivers, and is sold to audiophiles purely on branding. Coke, Pepsi, are good examples, and we have many eating sugary Kellogg cereals thinking they are healthy.

WBF is a great forum already, respecting the incorrect might make it peaceful but not better. Dodging with intellectual dishonesty like it happened on the other thread will be discouraged

 

[Lee]

I think you are missing addressing the points where those with an agenda wrongly justify certain approaches/components. In that case

Audio isn’t as fast changing and complex as you want to make it out to be. Lot of gear is just plain overpriced hyped stuff irrespective of set up. You really can’t do much if a loudspeaker has poorly designed crossovers, mismatched drivers, and is sold to audiophiles purely on branding. Coke, Pepsi, are good examples, and we have many eating sugary Kellogg cereals thinking they are healthy.

WBF is a great forum already, respecting the incorrect might make it peaceful but not better. Dodging with intellectual dishonesty like it happened on the other thread will be discouraged

What intellectual dishonesty? There was a difference of opinion. This is an example of what I am referring to. Not respecting the opinions of others. And you are dismissing a storied loudspeaker brand with much innovation you don’t like by labeling it as branding. That’s another example of the rudeness I am referring to.

 

[mtemur]

WBF is a great forum already, respecting the incorrect might make it peaceful but not better.

+1

 

[Mike Lavigne]

i guess i'm not aware of any thread or situation prompting this thread idea. did i miss something? if so maybe describe what is the root cause of this thread subject (a link would be helpful) so i can think about it with the complete picture.

it's a mistake to try and steer things. my opinion is that the culture of WBF is about right (never perfect and always ebbing and flowing as it should with a healthy forum). zero fireworks is not the goal.

try to be nice, but don't hold back, and think before you hit 'post reply'.....is about as far as i would go. we want to encourage participation, not have members feel like they need to check off a list. they already have their own sense of things. and the TOS to guide us.

 

[Joe Whip]

Be nice but don’t hold back is just about right. If I do not agree with an opinion, like on MQA , just take it just like it is, an opinion. Trying to smooth things over seems just like an attempt to avoid having your audio assumptions challenged.

 

[Republicoftexas69]

You all have made great points, I think most can see through the folks with agendas, yes some may be a bit abrasive. I think it all goes back to what we learned in kindergarten, be nice. Even if you know the other person is wrong.

 

[Lee]

i guess i'm not aware of any thread or situation prompting this thread idea. did i miss something? if so maybe describe what is the root cause of this thread subject (a link would be helpful) so i can think about it with the complete picture.

it's a mistake to try and steer things. my opinion is that the culture of WBF is about right (never perfect and always ebbing and flowing as it should with a healthy forum). zero fireworks is not the goal.

try to be nice, but don't hold back, and think before you hit 'post reply'.....is about as far as i would go. we want to encourage participation, not have members feel like they need to check off a list. they already have their own sense of things. and the TOS to guide us.

I certainly don’t want people to hold back. It’s good to be challenged. My concern was more around the rudeness and personal attacks in some replies.

 

[Lee]

Be nice but don’t hold back is just about right. If I do not agree with an opinion, like on MQA , just take it just like it is, an opinion. Trying to smooth things over seems just like an attempt to avoid having your audio assumptions challenged.

I am not indicating in the OP to avoid any assumptions being challenged. I am merely suggesting that we do it politely and respectfully.

 

[AudioBear]

Whilst we are trying to make this forum a better place, can we please drop the 'wife acceptance factor' line. Perhaps both partners have a love of music and interest in HiFi and perhaps both partners are also interested in design and style... just saying.

 

[Lee]

Whilst we are trying to make this forum a better place, can we please drop the 'wife acceptance factor' line. Perhaps both partners have a love of music and interest in HiFi and perhaps both partners are also interested in design and style... just saying.

Sure. Maybe we need to call it partner acceptance factor…or design considerations.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

I certainly don’t want people to hold back. It’s good to be challenged. My concern was more around the rudeness and personal attacks in some replies.

i respect those feelings, Lee. i don't like it either.

but the forum has to have a bit of the Wild, Wild, West freedom to be open and healthy. low level boorish behavior is not covered in the TOS. thick skin is preferred. the community has to step up or use ignore.

 

[dminches]

If you look at theTOS:

2. Cordial participation is a key requisite of being a member in our forum.

I think that should guide people as to how they interact on the forum.

 

[Lee]

If you look at theTOS:

2. Cordial participation is a key requisite of being a member in our forum.

I think that should guide people as to how they interact on the forum.

Yes, I realize that. But you don’t seem to enforce that rule very often.

 

[jazdoc]

I will self reference an ancient but evergreen post:

How To Compose A Sucessful Critical Commentary

Ran across this and thought it might engender some interesting discussion... Daniel Dennett poses an apt question that probes some of the basic tendencies and dynamics of today’s everyone-is-a-critic culture: “Just how charitable are you supposed to be when criticizing the views of an...

www.whatsbestforum.com

 

[dminches]

Yes, I realize that. But you don’t seem to enforce that rule very often.

1. We only look at posts reported to us.
2. The definition of cordial is a gray area.
3. If a reported comment doesn’t lead to a tit for tat we tend to let it go.

 

[bonzo75]

i guess i'm not aware of any thread or situation prompting this thread idea. did i miss something? if so maybe describe what is the root cause of this thread subject (a link would be helpful) so i can think about it with the complete picture.

it's a mistake to try and steer things. my opinion is that the culture of WBF is about right (never perfect and always ebbing and flowing as it should with a healthy forum). zero fireworks is not the goal.

try to be nice, but don't hold back, and think before you hit 'post reply'.....is about as far as i would go. we want to encourage participation, not have members feel like they need to check off a list. they already have their own sense of things. and the TOS to guide us.

Lee is just worried people are challenging his claims that dCS apex and XVX are at the forefront of ground breaking technology, MoFi is quality, and long term loans are fine etc. he wants us to be cordial and let those comments slip by

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Lee is just worried people are challenging his claims that dCS apex and XVX are ST the forefront of ground breaking technology, MoFi is quality, and long term loans are fine etc. he wants us to be cordial and let those comments slip by

you sir, are a sh*t stirrer.

 

[bonzo75]

you sir, are a sh*t stirrer.

no, just nipping his post in the bud. You are doing it politely, industry shouldn’t think they can dictate these terms on an audiophile forum.

 

[Lee]

1. We only look at posts reported to us.
2. The definition of cordial is a gray area.
3. If a reported comment doesn’t lead to a tit for tat we tend to let it go.

Fair enough. Thanks for the moderation work you do.