New forum ethos - what exactly is it?

My twopence worth.

I have posted on and read across 3 forums - ZeroGain, PF and WigWam. However, I used to mainly read and follow ZG. However a group of posters with one memorable chappie in particular simply bullied, pontificated and were rather objectionable if anything was posted they couldn't deal with. I sent PM's to a mod warning this attitude would drive people away if something wasn't done. I don't believe I was the only one. Nothing was done - many members left / gave up involvement with ZG as did I and since then I am afraid ZG is not the forum I look at quite as much as i used to. Much of this stems from the damage that was done by just a few forum members.

BTW - i also think forums should be fun - not dry ice. Yes - balance is fine re measurement vs whatever, but the bottom line for me is, and has always been, the ears - I am far more interested in the sound than how it measures, however i am not a techie.

 

FWIW You have all the data you need to get a handle on what visitors like, find interesting, contribute to.
It's in the views /thread visits data.
Giving 'em what they want not what a few die hards (myself included)wish they'd want could be a good place to start and build on.

I could be completely wrong but ethos' tend to evolve along an upward slope of membership.
A year Zero with some general areas where ZG has still maintained traffic should be reborn as more of a foundation portfolio of ethos' that can run in parallel along several subject areas.
The problem with a objectivist/subjectivist positioning is you can suffer a loss of half your audience for half of the time.
Cooky

 

I think this idea of data mining is good, plus some personalisation, so that if you set your profile to 'High Objectivist' you can filter out posts with certain terms and phrases.


Read good to your eyes?

 

Pragmatic.

I believe measurements have their place but there's no substitute for listening (without preconceptions of course). Like some others I hate exaggerated claims and see nothing wrong with challenging them. I believe the onus is on the claimant to prove them. I don't believe that all amps, CDPs etc. sound the same but there are times (cables for example) when the differences are too small to argue about.

 

I'd argue that there is no such thing as a true objectivist, at least on a HiFi forum.

 

Forget the objective/subjective balance. Think how many forums there are in the UK dedicated to two channel... there are more audiophiles in the US and they have a fraction of the number of forums we have here.

And all of them drain the energy out of the larger, more successful forums.

It's like the People's Front of Judea.

Trouble is, there aren't enough people interested in the subject to populate these ever-sub-dividing forums, so we end up with a whole bunch of forums with five regulars and ten occasionals. Which is what we have here.

Aside from the occasional flame war making the site seem popular occasionally, that's the beginning of the end. Which is what we also have here.

So, militantly objective, foo-foo follies or something in between, the rot has set in and nothing will repair that.

Sorry.

 

You can mention my name if you like, I was that mod.

The problem was that a lot of "believers" took offence when challenged by sceptics, even when the challenge was just. I remember once someone posted that he heard a 37% improvement in sound after a tweak. I asked how was it measured and I was branded a sceptic. It was never one side that was to blame, both sides refused to see the other's point of view. Yes, we made mistakes but hopefully have learnt from them. In any case, the mod team has changed (I'm the only active mod from that team still here).

 

Why are you sorry? I find it hard to disagree with you.

 

But first you would have to define objectivist. It is a word used in the closed audiophile world but not the mainstream. If you asked, say, an academic performing scientific research in the area of sound if they were an objectivist they would look blank unless they were familiar with Ayn Rand.

So what is an objectivist?

 

and also as a one-time poster...

I just happen to have come across this thread today and thought i'd pop in a reply.

One underlying reality is that interests, priorities and available time all change.

I read very few forums nowadays - can't justify the time. When I do look I use them more as a reference than make a contribution, and I don't even need to log in to do that. I'm still slowly following my audio route as time and money allow, but most especially time. I try to spend as much time as possible listening to (or performing) music, more than chasing the dream.

But interests change. I see I-S fairly regularly, having met him via ZeroGain and whilst we'll talk hifi it's seldom the reason behind the meeting, it's just that we enjoy geeky conversation. It's usually to see some live music or just to have a beer.

There were some disruptive conversations on this forum which will have driven some people away. I hung around CysrusUnofficial for some simply because there seemed to be a lot of friendly people there even once they'd passed Cyrus by. But the akismet software suddenly decided that any attempt by me to post was spam and therefore I gave up.

It's actually given me back some spare time to do other things.

I don't know if any of this helps or adds to the conversations or progress of the forum. Remember there will always be a continuing and natural departure of posters as other things become a higher priority. It's not necessarily because of any failing in the forum or its members

Chris

 

On a HiFi forum, someone who only uses objective means (measurements, DBT etc) to evaluate kit?

 

So what's the objectivist views on objective reviews of test equipment? Do they all measure the same?

I take this forum's main standpoint as questioning the myths, & debunking many spurious "accepted norms". Blind testing is advocated. - I applaude all that but not always agree - case in point when Rob recommended the Audiolab 8000 to someone, it may measure well but my ears tell me different. (A blind test may prove otherwise however.)

A subjectivist doesn't take kindly to having his myths attacked. Maybe this is Too embarrassing?

 

Ethoses are the bane of forums IMO. As long as people can maintain a sense of humour and some perspective, and remember the difference between fact and opinion, there should be no need for an Ethos.

 

I agree with that, but only is so far as it applies to many forums.

It is also important to recognise that numbers don't in themselves indicate success.
As you point out, we can invite and initiate flame wars on a daily basis and I guarantee that will boost traffic and the number of posts. Other than provide some entertainment it serves no other purpose.

There is something to be said for stating 'this is what we believe, this is our goal and we are going to shape the forum to that end'. Not so rigid that you get ten members and one post per day, that is utterly pointless, but their is nothing wrong with catering for a sizeable niche.

There are some wonderful small forums out there where visitors get truly useful information, focused thinking and no screaming or shouting.
The US based based classic loudspeaker forum is a good example. Anything you want to know about vintage loudspeakers is likely to be archived there, along with insightful posts and some great discussion. Around 5000 members and 5-10 active threads each day, but genuinely useful ones - not 'well my NAC72 pisses on your NAC82 cos I've removed one of the rubber feet' - type of repetitive nonsense.

A place needs some theme and focus.

 

That gets the heart of the matter and identifies the problem.

The audiophile sector of what you might call the AV industry is seeped in mysticism and belief based thinking. Challenging it doesn't always sit comfortably and asserting that people cannot place 100% reliability in their perceptions of audio equipment performance can can leave a bad taste. You can see this clearly when suggesting that people challenge their own current thinking and opinions by injecting a little more rigour and control into their own methods - this is usually met with hostility or flat refusal. There isn't a desire in many minds to be more objective because it risks having to do an awful lot of back peddling!

Yes, but certainly not to then dictate what is better or worse to the individual.

Objective methods apply to evaluation only - identifying real differences with some degree of accuracy. Having done that, the final part of the process is purely subjective.

You must have both but must see where each fits the process. That's why you cannot have a purely objectivist or subjectivist forum, or sections within a forum IMO.

 

Hi Dev - genuinely cannot recall who I sent a PM to - but well remembered if it was you. However, this guy was just plain rude on purpose i feel- there is rude and rude of course see WigWam which can become outrageous in a campy kind of way; but posters there kind of know where the boundaries are - the ZG posts of a while ago were just nasty and became the subject of quite a few private concerns amongst forum members- I really believe all of that malarky did a great deal of harm to ZG.

I'd love to see the kind of debate and discussion we used to have (without the crap), as i think all 3 forums I mentioned have their own character - and that makes them especially interesting. I used to find ZG a very friendly forum excepting the incidents which sent a lot of members away. Aren't we sensitive souls ;-)

 

But isn't this precisely what's been happening here for the past twelve months or so?
I don't see a tidal wave of objectivists signing up which probably indicates the model as pursued of late isn't attractive enough.
Endless repeats of objectivist pulpit thumping gets a tad boring pretty quickly to be honest.
Though I can see the attraction of evangelical zeal, an empty church ain't worth a sh*t.

 

There is certainly no subjectivist bashing here. The discussions, certainly if I've initiated them tend to be focused around a thread with a theme and some form of active test, one in which forum users can participate where possible.
So we look at various commonly held 'truths' and seek to test them.
That is how you debunk the worst excesses of pure subjectivism (ie those not willing to accept that measurements have any place).

The moderation issue is entirely separate.
There hasn't been a single moderated post in terms of posted opinion in the 18 months or so I've been here, and certainly in recent years to my knowledge. Breaches of the AUP are a different matter but have nothing to do with opinion.
Would I want to participate in or moderate a primarily subjectivist forum that eschews technical testing and blind tests? - most certainly not and that's not why i'm here.
Such a forum holds no interest for me and would be a complete waste of my time.

If that is what people want (and I'm not seeing that so far) I need to know as these days I don't spend my time talking to brick walls!

On the point of where objectivism fits within the overall audiophile 'scene' - I'd agree it represents a minority view but that doesn't make it wrong, or mean that it shouldn't be represented, or that the balance cannot change. It has previously - it wasn't always this way
So we'll always be around!

 

Goes back some way, but the chap in question was eventually banned. The damage had been done though.

 

'more signal, less noise'


I think we would all sign up to that, but not to much more creed


"It's the music stupid ... "

So, here's to beauty and some open ears