Come on; you let despicable personal attacks and complete lies like this stay hourly without comment, and delete my post simply pointing it out as such?
Really?
No, not “Really?” at all, that’s just your false narrative! It was not personal attacks, let alone “despicable” ones and there were no lies, let alone “complete” ones but as usual, don’t let the actual facts get in the way of a story!
This is why I only point out the most ridiculous, absurd contentions they make - things that are off-the-charts wrong.
Except you don’t, what you actually point out is verifiable facts which you falsely claim are ridiculous, absurd or “off the charts wrong” either because you’ve misread what has been posted or because you don’t know/understand the facts.
I actually am fascinated by the psychology behind the situation where people who are clearly intelligent and informed can defend "facts" that are literally by definition unprovable, and do so without the slightest humility.
I’m actually fascinated by the psychology behind the situation where people who are not clearly intelligent or well informed but fervently believe they are, come to a science discussion forum to defend marketing BS and/or their own made-up false narratives/assertions with nothing but falsehoods and insults “without the slightest humility” and then complain that others are without humility! And then, disappear after their falsehoods have been embarrassingly exposed, only to pop up a few days/weeks later and start all over again and “rinse and repeat” ad infinitum. Why do a few people do that, is it just a poor attempt at trolling, is it just that they’re delusional beyond belief or maybe they just like publicly embarrassing themselves repeatedly?
Is that (literally) right?
Is it banned because it always end up with the recent kind of discussions we’ve seen so far in this thread—mostly not soundstage-related?
Unfortunately yes, it is right, although not necessarily because it goes off topic, it can just be because it contradicts some marketing BS. The posting guidelines states this:
“
5. If what you want to post includes words/phrases like "placebo," "expectation bias," "ABX," "blind testing," etc., please post it in the Sound Science forum.” - The important but seemingly innocuous word in that rule is “etc.”, it means they can delete your posts or even ban you from a thread entirely, for mentioning anything they deem to be “science” or even just alluding to science and therefore that it only belongs in the Sound Science forum! Here’s an example I received:
“
You are no longer able to reply to the thread The Ethernet cables, Switches and Network related sound thread. Share your listening experience only.. Reason: Continually bringing Sound Science discussion into a non-Sound Science thread.” - Please Note that the thread title was edited and “Share your listening experience only” was added
after I posted. Also note that none of my posts included any of the words prescribed in rule #5 or words/phrases like them. It was just facts related to the Ethernet protocol specifications (eye pattern specs, cat 5 cable specs, etc.).
This is just one example of quite a few times I’ve had posts deleted on the basis that “science belongs in the Sound Science forum, that’s why we have a Sound Science forum” (paraphrasing), even though I’ve been careful not to use the prescribed words or words like them. That “etc.” effectively gives them carte blanche, as dB, Hz, Watts, Volts, Frequency Response, jitter, bytes and numerous other terms can be described as “scientific” and therefore only allowed in the Sound Science forum. Obviously, a high percentage of posts on Head-Fi include one of these terms and therefore reference science implicitly or explicitly but are not deleted. This is because deletion relies on other members “reporting” the posts, is discretionary and only appears to be employed against those using science to refute an audiophile myth/marketing rather than those supporting it, unless some other rule is also being broken (such as insults).
No, that's completely wrong. Nothing so ridiculous is in the rules.
Another great example, “
completely wrong” and “
so ridiculous” according to you, yet the facts/evidence demonstrates the opposite! And, I’m certainly not the only one who’s had posts deleted or been banned from threads for bringing Sound Science into a thread outside the sound science forum. How many more times are you going make extreme assertions like this (and “
without the slightest humility”!!), only to be demonstrated wrong?
G
