Quote:
Originally Posted by Aimless1 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Agree or not, many people simply do not care about the science, DBT, logic nor proof. They do care about what they hear. Therefore it simply does not matter if they are right or wrong as it relates to proof, from their POV.
|
You're assuming they can hear differences in a digital cable. That's not possible. None of the "open-minded" people who disagree with me will actually address this claim. One would think they'd jump at the chance to expose something they claim to believe is so logically flawed, but they don't. Always the same straw man and insulting language.
Analog cables invariably alter the information as it is being transferred from one side to the other. That's a fact. The debate, between believers and skeptics, is whether those differences are actually audible. However, a digital cable does not alter the information as it passes through the cable, in a way which could cause anything other than random distortion. That is also a fact; something that's true regardless of who happens to accept it. Therefore, any claim regarding hearing SQ differences between digital cables is false and misleading, even if it wasn't intended as such.
I'm not demanding proof. I'm asking people to understand that posting information about digital cables should be done with, and not apart from, the understanding that false information may well be exposed as such. There's nothing in PhilS's suggestion which denies the possibility for this. You certainly seem to be acting as if there was.
Quote:
They simply want the ability to post unmolested by those who believe otherwise. IF someone begins a thread requesting no discussion of the science behind cables, should they do so without be challenged, harrassed and harrangued? I've noticed many skeptics think this is unacceptable for what appears to me (a cable skeptic) self righteous reasons. I believe otherwise. I believe they should have that right. |
Again, I'm not advocating people be "molested," harrassed, and harrangued.
There is a saying about limited rights that I think is applicable here. "The right to swing your fist ends where the other person's nose begins." The point being, that to confer or protect one person's right, invariably entails limiting or removing someone else's right. Therefore, it's not just a matter of granting rights to be "unmolested" -- which is loaded language in itself, but will probably end up being true seeing as how both sides "molest" each other with reckless abandon -- but a question of that "solution" is worth taking away others' rights to state that there is no possibility of a difference in sound quality between digital cables.
Quote:
For them subjective opinions are valuable and meaningful. Logic, DBT and scientific facts have no bearing for them, nor should it be part of the discussion when asked not to include it. |
Subjective opinions, that are categorically impossible, are not useful to anyone. They would achieve something vastly more useful to themselves, than an infinite number of posts containing subjective opinions about the SQ of digital cables, if they simply started a discussion (in the appropriate forum) about digital cables and whether they do or do not affect the sound quality. Ask questions, get answers, and draw conclusions. These endless debates about who is to be censored when are ... unproductive, to put it mildly.
Quote:
Many here seem to believe if it is wrong (as defined by them) then the opinions should not be allowed to stand unchallenged. Again, I disagree with what to me is an extreme position. To me, this is akin to the NRA (National Rifle Association) and their politics in action. My way or the highway is what I hear. |
That's true of some people on both sides. However, everyone must listen to reality. If you jump off a high cliff and explode into a bloody mess on the ground at 100 kph, it doesn't matter whether you believed you'd be alright. People who disagreed with you (before the jump
) wouldn't be close-minded, either. Where beliefs (including skeptical beliefs) and reality collide, reality wins. No one was willing to even discuss the factual claim I've made. They just act like it's false, and paint me as being close-minded.
Quote:
I seem to recall the pendulum had swung towards the cable believers originally. Now it has swung to the cable skeptics. IMHO it needs to swing back to neutral ground where both sides can express their views individually, freely without hassle from the other "side". There will no doubt be many threads where both are welcome to post. |
Expressing the view that digital cables have varying SQ would be fine, but what you're advocating is that view be encoded into the forum rules such that no one could point out, in any thread where the OP requests, that such claims are inherently impossible. That would degrade those threads into nothing more than a breeding ground for delusion, not a valid exchange of opinions and useful information.