Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Members' Lounge (General Discussion) › You will get sick of head-fi
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

You will get sick of head-fi - Page 6

post #76 of 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by obobskivich View Post


This.
I don't really care what someone wants to believe or adore or worship, what their muse is, how they get off, whatever - because that's part of their personal experience and life. I'm not saying those things don't matter, they just have relatively little bearing on my life (or to quote Joshua Graham: "whether or not God exists, what you or I believe has little bearing"). Where I take issue is when someone wants to shove their religion down my throat sideways, or persecute non-believers. In other words, dislike muggles all you want, but when they stop being muggles and start being "mudbloods" and you start wanting to hunt and enslave, we're gonna have issues.
And I see a lot of the "objectivists" as taking that tack - their tactics and arguments are more akin and similar to what you'd find with evangelists (and of course they usually have snide derision for those people too, because obviously their beliefs are the only true beliefs), than science.
If you want to make an evidence-based argument, and have actual evidence and data, you should never need to resort to scare tactics or intimidation to get people to listen. If they choose to reject your evidence or disagree with you, that's their own choice. And I think the constant back-and-forth between the school of thought that says "no, we're acting in the best interests of the unwashed savages because we are more learned and advanced, and we're going to show them how backwards they are and make them like us!" and the school of thought that says "I'm okay with me, I like me, my wife likes me, and if you can't accept that, that's okay, but I'm not changing" is what makes a lot of the more in-depth discussions here kind of sickening. And this doesn't mean one side is entirely at fault - sure the guy (or gal) who jumps on the boards and wants to tell everyone what to believe and how to feel is committing a "wrong" in doing so, but the people who hop into the mud-pit with them to wrassle are just as "wrong" (two wrongs don't make a right and all that).
And none of this is even remotely related to science or how science works, science doesn't "tell its followers" (mostly because it isn't a religion and doesn't have followers, and scientism is an unrelated thing) to go out and persecute those who disagree (the real irony here is of course that scientism, in outright rejecting all organized religion, has essentially become a religion, and just like any other organized religion, its adherents completely go against the "tenets" of the belief system they're using to predicate their world-view). But don't tell those who feed on carnage that - they might just lose it. ph34r.gif

 

I particularly like the last paragraph, but I agree with the post in general. Some people are always going to think they know what's best and that people who don't agree need to have it explained to them as though they were children, to be ridiculed for disbelieving, and then, if all else fails, to be silenced so that they don't inspire any more dissent. This applies to everything, not just science, but here we're getting dangerously close to politics, which we'd all better not get into. I get the feeling the nice, civil tone in this thread might take a turn for the nasty if that happened.

 

There's a reason politics and religion are usually banned subjects on forums. It's the same reason that the science forum is one unto itself and is the only place that things like DBT may be discussed. There's no answer to political or religious questions because none of the concepts described in religion or politics have been played out to their conclusion. There's no "point of rightness" to look back from in hindsight and say, "okay, we definitely picked the right system." It's no different with random arguments about random subjects on the Internet, with the endless circular arguments and flame wars. Nobody is ever going to solve it because there either is no solution or we're so far from one as to make the whole thing pointless.

 

 

EDIT: Decided to take something out since it went somewhere I didn't want to go.


Edited by Argyris - 10/25/12 at 3:42pm
post #77 of 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by Argyris View Post

I particularly like the last paragraph, but I agree with the post in general. Some people are always going to think they know what's best and that people who don't agree need to have it explained to them as though they were children, to be ridiculed for disbelieving, and then, if all else fails, to be silenced so that they don't inspire any more dissent. This applies to everything, not just science, but here we're getting dangerously close to politics, which we'd all better not get into. I get the feeling the nice, civil tone in this thread might take a turn for the nasty if that happened.

I believe there is a French expression that goes something like "colors and tastes" - and roughly means what you're saying. I have no intention of discussing religion or politics (mostly because I have no interest in either, this isn't a value judgment or indictment either, I just think HBO is more entertaining than CNN, if you catch my meaning; I know there are plenty of people who disagree, and that's perfectly okay - there's a reason we have something like 600 channels on cable in this house!).
Quote:
There's a reason politics and religion are usually banned subjects on forums. It's the same reason that the science forum is one unto itself and is the only place that things like DBT may be discussed. There's no answer to political or religious questions because none of the concepts described in religion or politics have been played out to their conclusion. There's no "point of rightness" to look back from in hindsight and say, "okay, we definitely picked the right system." It's no different with random arguments about random subjects on the Internet, with the endless circular arguments and flame wars. Nobody is ever going to solve it because there either is no solution or we're so far from one as to make the whole thing pointless.

+1. I mean, I agree with the science side where DBT is a real scientific research implement, and all of that. But that's a full-time job to do it right, not a hobby. And it isn't fun imho (and again, I know there are people who find it fun to perform those, and that's why we have Monster.com and tons of jobs in this life!).
Quote:
EDIT: When did the forum add an automatic censor? Never had that happen to me before.

What got censored? (Don't circumvent the censor just to show off lol). I don't see anything in your post that has ***'s on it. I know there has been an auto censor for a while though, but I don't know how complete it is - I think it only grabs certain words, because usually a really vile/curse-laden post is gonna get reported anyways (seriously what other reason would anyone have to drop f-bombs and similar? Except maybe in the music discussion board, if we're talking about a performer like Mickey Avalon or Eminem where even track-lists are explicit), and they're trying to avoid the Scuntthorpe Problem as well (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scunthorpe_problem). (Watch that get auto-censored and demonstrate the problem in real-time).

Anyways, I know in one of the posting guidelines stickies, Currawong and Erik asked people to not use really offensive language, and in general I think that's a fair request. Head-Fi isn't an "adult only" board, and if the language/discussion gets too racy, it runs the risk of being dropped onto a Websense or similar blacklist, and I think that plus the acknowledgement that a good portion of this board is children (really there's a lot of 13-15 year olds running around, and no I'm not naive enough to believe they're unaware of offensive language, but I still don't think that means we should dump it on their heads), it makes sense to keep it PG (well and that in general I think there's not a lot of reason to use crass language when addressing a group or in public settings).
Edited by obobskivich - 10/25/12 at 4:07pm
post #78 of 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by obobskivich View Post


I believe there is a French expression that goes something like "colors and tastes" - and roughly means what you're saying. I have no intention of discussing religion or politics (mostly because I have no interest in either, this isn't a value judgment or indictment either, I just think HBO is more entertaining than CNN, if you catch my meaning; I know there are plenty of people who disagree, and that's perfectly okay - there's a reason we have something like 600 channels on cable in this house!).
+1. I mean, I agree with the science side where DBT is a real scientific research implement, and all of that. But that's a full-time job to do it right, not a hobby. And it isn't fun imho (and again, I know there are people who find it fun to perform those, and that's why we have Monster.com and tons of jobs in this life!).
What got censored? (Don't circumvent the censor just to show off lol). I don't see anything in your post that has ***'s on it. I know there has been an auto censor for a while though, but I don't know how complete it is - I think it only grabs certain words, because usually a really vile/curse-laden post is gonna get reported anyways (seriously what other reason would anyone have to drop f-bombs and similar? Except maybe in the music discussion board, if we're talking about a performer like Mickey Avalon or Eminem where even track-lists are explicit), and they're trying to avoid the Scuntthorpe Problem as well (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scunthorpe_problem). (Watch that get auto-censored and demonstrate the problem in real-time).
Anyways, I know in one of the posting guidelines stickies, Currawong and Erik asked people to not use really offensive language, and in general I think that's a fair request. Head-Fi isn't an "adult only" board, and if the language/discussion gets too racy, it runs the risk of being dropped onto a Websense or similar blacklist, and I think that plus the acknowledgement that a good portion of this board is children (really there's a lot of 13-15 year olds running around, and no I'm not naive enough to believe they're unaware of offensive language, but I still don't think that means we should dump it on their heads), it makes sense to keep it PG (well and that in general I think there's not a lot of reason to use crass language when addressing a group or in public settings).

 

I had initially spelled out BS, mainly for emphasis. When it auto-censored it, I went back and replaced it with the acronym. Ultimately I decided to ax that part of the post, anyway, figuring I may have ended up stirring up some flames of my own with some of what I said. Of course now that you quoted it they'll know regardless, but at least I'm on record here of having thought better of it.

 

I agree about the language thing, though. There's nothing wrong with asking people to keep it clean. If nothing else it forces people to settle down and think if they're really upset, or else try to be a little more creative than just cursing every second word. I also found that Scunthorpe thing amusing. I'd never heard of that before.

 

I wonder how we should go about nudging this thread back on topic. I think we're kind of in the general ballpark with talking about how stuff in forums just seems to go round and round and never get answered, so it shouldn't be too difficult. I've stayed away from the various equipment forums since my initial pet peeve, the endless recommendation threads, are still as numerous as ever. And since I'm out of the loop with some of the newer cans out there I find I'm not really able to recommend stuff very well anymore since many of the half dozen or so headphones I have enough experience with to offer a proper recommendation have sort of gone out of fashion, and there might well be better alternatives these days that I don't know about.

post #79 of 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by Argyris View Post

I had initially spelled out BS, mainly for emphasis. When it auto-censored it, I went back and replaced it with the acronym. Ultimately I decided to ax that part of the post, anyway, figuring I may have ended up stirring up some flames of my own with some of what I said. Of course now that you quoted it they'll know regardless, but at least I'm on record here of having thought better of it.

Fixed. Agreed.
Quote:
I agree about the language thing, though. There's nothing wrong with asking people to keep it clean. If nothing else it forces people to settle down and think if they're really upset, or else try to be a little more creative than just cursing every second word. I also found that Scunthorpe thing amusing. I'd never heard of that before.

The whole "count to 10 thing" really would make the world spin'round a lot easier. Then again, I've read some interesting research on fight-or-flight in modern society and how it apparently contributes to higher stress loading and may mediate certain medical conditions (this got featured on some Science Channel documentary series, Through The Wormhole maybe, I don't remember). So perhaps letting the beast out of the cage sometimes isn't so bad. I don't know.
Quote:
I wonder how we should go about nudging this thread back on topic. I think we're kind of in the general ballpark with talking about how stuff in forums just seems to go round and round and never get answered, so it shouldn't be too difficult. I've stayed away from the various equipment forums since my initial pet peeve, the endless recommendation threads, are still as numerous as ever. And since I'm out of the loop with some of the newer cans out there I find I'm not really able to recommend stuff very well anymore since many of the half dozen or so headphones I have enough experience with to offer a proper recommendation have sort of gone out of fashion, and there might well be better alternatives these days that I don't know about.

I think that's an interesting phenomenon too - it'd be interesting to do a traffic/content analysis of the database to confirm, but my thinking is that the majority of the site and its time is focused on suggesting equipment to new people, not discussing existing equipment for old people. But I don't know if that is true or not, or if I'm just biased (well I know I'm biased! but you get what I mean tongue.gif) based on my perspective.
post #80 of 215

I'd say you're almost certainly right. I've got nothing against helping people find what they're looking for. But I wish sometimes they'd search a little harder on their own before asking immediately. Tastes and budgets might be up to the individual, but these things are far from unique since there are only a finite number of general classes that different headphones fit into, and chances are very good somebody else has asked for a set with the exact qualities any given new poster might be looking for.

 

I think Skylab was talking about something similar in another thread that he posted. People were demanding in their PMs that he take the time out and give them a detailed comparison of a couple different headphones with music he didn't even listen to. Sometimes people just think they're entitled to information and won't look on their own.

 

I think it might be a good idea to direct all the recommendation threads to a separate subforum. That way, new users would be guided to a place full of questions that are exactly like the one they're thinking about posting, and maybe the equipment forums will be a little less noisy. I think the main problem doing this is the thousands of existing recommendation threads, which can be added to at any time and will still end up in their respective equipment forums. I suppose the administrators could move them as they come up and gradually shift everything over to the new forum.

post #81 of 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by Argyris View Post

I'd say you're almost certainly right. I've got nothing against helping people find what they're looking for. But I wish sometimes they'd search a little harder on their own before asking immediately. Tastes and budgets might be up to the individual, but these things are far from unique since there are only a finite number of general classes that different headphones fit into, and chances are very good somebody else has asked for a set with the exact qualities any given new poster might be looking for.

I think Skylab was talking about something similar in another thread that he posted. People were demanding in their PMs that he take the time out and give them a detailed comparison of a couple different headphones with music he didn't even listen to. Sometimes people just think they're entitled to information and won't look on their own.

I think it might be a good idea to direct all the recommendation threads to a separate subforum. That way, new users would be guided to a place full of questions that are exactly like the one they're thinking about posting, and maybe the equipment forums will be a little less noisy. I think the main problem doing this is the thousands of existing recommendation threads, which can be added to at any time and will still end up in their respective equipment forums. I suppose the administrators could move them as they come up and gradually shift everything over to the new forum.

All of this and more has been tried, but the "entitled" part is the problem - everyone has some story about why their situation is different, and why they don't need to follow the rules that everyone else follows, and why this means they need to be spoon-fed.
post #82 of 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by Argyris View Post

I'd say you're almost certainly right. I've got nothing against helping people find what they're looking for. But I wish sometimes they'd search a little harder on their own before asking immediately. Tastes and budgets might be up to the individual, but these things are far from unique since there are only a finite number of general classes that different headphones fit into, and chances are very good somebody else has asked for a set with the exact qualities any given new poster might be looking for.

 

I think Skylab was talking about something similar in another thread that he posted. People were demanding in their PMs that he take the time out and give them a detailed comparison of a couple different headphones with music he didn't even listen to. Sometimes people just think they're entitled to information and won't look on their own.

 

I think it might be a good idea to direct all the recommendation threads to a separate subforum. That way, new users would be guided to a place full of questions that are exactly like the one they're thinking about posting, and maybe the equipment forums will be a little less noisy. I think the main problem doing this is the thousands of existing recommendation threads, which can be added to at any time and will still end up in their respective equipment forums. I suppose the administrators could move them as they come up and gradually shift everything over to the new forum.

i think 90% of the time a person can figure out what headphone they should purchase just by reading other threads involving said headphone. i've made all but one purchase this way, and guess what? i ended up getting what i thought i was going to get each time just by reading others impressions. in other words, i got what i expected. if that makes sense. 

 

read reviews, read recommendation threads, look at graphs, learn about the headphone, and often times you can get a pretty close idea of what it sounds like. it makes more sense to post a thread saying "ok, i've got it down to two headphones" with the person knowing what in the heck they're looking at in the first place. this place has a nearly infinite amount of wealth on nearly every headphone known to man, often across multiple threads.

 

a newbie forum with stickies would be nice. so would threads with various headphones detailed in an organized, categorized fashion.

post #83 of 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spareribs View Post

First I want to say that Head-fi is great, amazing and wonderful. It is a blessing actually. However, over time, you will get sick of it and and even vomit. Another flavor of the month, another latest hot head phone, another great amp. The cycle repeats and repeats. It's no wonder that many senior members jump ship and bail!

 

I love head fi but eventually when you stick with it, you get the pattern and get sick of it. In the mean time, the shopping is great if you are still searching for your dream amp and upgrade from those bad ear buds. I love head-fi but it's like eating the same pizza if you continue with it.

You say something about hating it because of being on it too much? ? *cough cough* rolleyes.gif

 

Ater a while and depending on where you go on the forums, and your experiences you can develop an Anti Head-Fi barrier. I have. Most things don't get to me anymore basically. 

 

I get into some FOTM interests every now and then but they usually dont' materialize into anything. I don't get much of an impulse to buy anything anymore either.

 

You guys are talking about ways of middle paths and what not. I just develop infinity by pure quantity developed tolerance. 

 

My lack of budget for this stuff and staying in set threads I prefer also helps. Its not that I don't have a budget but I set it away and for other stuff.


Edited by bowei006 - 10/25/12 at 6:33pm
post #84 of 215

Head-Fi is really two fold. 

 

A)      On-line Head-Fi

 

B)      Real life Head-Fi at a meeting

 

 

 

Really they are synergistic and super important as a balance of the hobby. You research a bunch then validate at meets.

post #85 of 215

Taking the middle path, I guess listen to both sides. Understand them. Then make up your mind. Be aware of possible choices.

This way its atleast easy to track how your tastes have evolved.

post #86 of 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by obobskivich View Post

This.
I don't really care what someone wants to believe or adore or worship, what their muse is, how they get off, whatever - because that's part of their personal experience and life. I'm not saying those things don't matter, they just have relatively little bearing on my life (or to quote Joshua Graham: "whether or not God exists, what you or I believe has little bearing"). Where I take issue is when someone wants to shove their religion down my throat sideways, or persecute non-believers. In other words, dislike muggles all you want, but when they stop being muggles and start being "mudbloods" and you start wanting to hunt and enslave, we're gonna have issues.
And I see a lot of the "objectivists" as taking that tack - their tactics and arguments are more akin and similar to what you'd find with evangelists (and of course they usually have snide derision for those people too, because obviously their beliefs are the only true beliefs), than science.
If you want to make an evidence-based argument, and have actual evidence and data, you should never need to resort to scare tactics or intimidation to get people to listen. If they choose to reject your evidence or disagree with you, that's their own choice. And I think the constant back-and-forth between the school of thought that says "no, we're acting in the best interests of the unwashed savages because we are more learned and advanced, and we're going to show them how backwards they are and make them like us!" and the school of thought that says "I'm okay with me, I like me, my wife likes me, and if you can't accept that, that's okay, but I'm not changing" is what makes a lot of the more in-depth discussions here kind of sickening. And this doesn't mean one side is entirely at fault - sure the guy (or gal) who jumps on the boards and wants to tell everyone what to believe and how to feel is committing a "wrong" in doing so, but the people who hop into the mud-pit with them to wrassle are just as "wrong" (two wrongs don't make a right and all that).
And none of this is even remotely related to science or how science works, science doesn't "tell its followers" (mostly because it isn't a religion and doesn't have followers, and scientism is an unrelated thing) to go out and persecute those who disagree (the real irony here is of course that scientism, in outright rejecting all organized religion, has essentially become a religion, and just like any other organized religion, its adherents completely go against the "tenets" of the belief system they're using to predicate their world-view). But don't tell those who feed on carnage that - they might just lose it. ph34r.gif

Hello Mr O'Bob!

Very nicely put! Basically summarizes my stance on Sci Fi Fo'

Thanks!
Chris J
Edited by Chris J - 10/26/12 at 4:48am
post #87 of 215

I'm confused here. People don't like the negative tone of "objectivists" but will diminish the only part of the forum that's allowed to openly discuss the perspective by calling it the "sci-fi forum," comparing defenders of the stance to religious zealots, or even lobbing criticisms while admitting never to have visited the sub-forum. If you're concerned about matters of tone and tolerance in others, please take a moment and look at what your own actions are. 

post #88 of 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by JadeEast View Post

I'm confused here. People don't like the negative tone of "objectivists" but will diminish the only part of the forum that's allowed to openly discuss the perspective by calling it the "sci-fi forum," comparing defenders of the stance to religious zealots, or even lobbing criticisms while admitting never to have visited the sub-forum. If you're concerned about matters of tone and tolerance in others, please take a moment and look at what your own actions are. 

I'm not confused!

post #89 of 215

Hi JadeEast...Decidedly not "objectivists" but some objectivists. And some subjectivists too.

 

In my own case, I gave up on the forum as what happens there is hardly science. For example, last year I followed up some of the literature cited.  I found it had often been taken out of its proper context and misunderstood. I spent a little time proposing hypotheses and studies that could begin to settle some questions, but responses were unenthusiastic.

 

There is a huge pool of talent in this group together with a common love, so why could we not settle some of these questions I thought? For sure, no-one else is motivated to fund the science around 'the audiophile experience'.

 

The more I thought about it, the more I saw the practical and economic problems. Unfortunately, deciding many of these questions would involve large groups of listeners and calibration and standardization problems of a lot of equipment! I think the latter problem intractable. None of the gear we use is reference grade - and even reference grade equipment needs recalibration.

 

I therefore regard the lack of enthusiasm as tacit understanding of these problems within the group.  It's just not practical and we (the group) implicitly  know it's not.

 

So what sustains the forum? Looked at in terms of what the forum does, rather than what it says it does, I think it's 'the debate'.

 

I see debate per se as serving philosophical more than scientific aims. Many people are skilled at this and find it illuminating. Despite my comments earlier in this thread, I respect this.

 

It's simply not for me, as what I like about doing science is that argument is followed by practical test. If testing is impractical, argument is shelved and more fruitful territory sought. This is not any better or worse than any other human activity. It's simply what appeals to me.

 

As well, yesterday you said this: "How are we to negotiate between two possibly fundamentally incompatible positions? How would you like people who hold opposite values...".

 

I think I got where you're coming from. It's one of the big questions of ourselves as human beings, isn't it? Some of my theoretical work indirectly bears on this - ingroup/outgroup discrimination (stereotyping); conformity, polarization of various kinds and other group phenomena; and the function of discourse in all of this.

 

So far, practical solutions seem elusive.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by JadeEast View Post

I'm confused here. People don't like the negative tone of "objectivists" but will diminish the only part of the forum that's allowed to openly discuss the perspective by calling it the "sci-fi forum," comparing defenders of the stance to religious zealots, or even lobbing criticisms while admitting never to have visited the sub-forum. If you're concerned about matters of tone and tolerance in others, please take a moment and look at what your own actions are. 

post #90 of 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by JadeEast View Post

I'm confused here. People don't like the negative tone of "objectivists" but will diminish the only part of the forum that's allowed to openly discuss the perspective by calling it the "sci-fi forum," comparing defenders of the stance to religious zealots, or even lobbing criticisms while admitting never to have visited the sub-forum. If you're concerned about matters of tone and tolerance in others, please take a moment and look at what your own actions are. 

You're conflating and building up a straw-man. There is a big divide between science and scientism - "objectivists" are generally more towards scientism than science. I'm also pretty sure that everyone currently posting in this thread is an actual scientist or engineer; this isn't some anti-science anti-intellectual rant, it's a derision of scientism and other woowoo.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Members' Lounge (General Discussion) › You will get sick of head-fi