Has censorship come to this board?

[jneutron]

The cable debates embody what seperates AR from many other sites. They were certainly not the reason AR declined, but rather what helped to sustain it. Regulars having heated debates and discussions is a far cry from the trolling that pervaded the old boards and led to many people leaving. With the heated cable debates AR thrived. I hope the aim of the change over isn't to eliminate an aspect of AR that kept people coming back. Jon has always been able to defend himself and his positions here even if not to the point of changing minds.

I hope Chris doesn't confuse heated on topic related debate with common nuisance trolling. It would be sad to see a bastion of free speech discussions morphed into what can be found in many other places. The cable forum at AR has always offered something special and different in the audio community, and I hope that continues to be the case. Fancy formats are available in many places, but lively audio debates often give way to a particular board's POV. Tough to find a place where all POV's can be questioned and debated until those involved decide for themselves that the issue is closed for the momment.

Whadda you know..you probably never eat at Thai USA or Poncho Villa's anyway..Or, god forbid, pop a cold one on Co Co's deck in the summertime...

Seriously, does the moderation group here feel the members want it that way, or is that policy open for discussion?

Cheers, John

[TinHere]

Whadda you know..you probably never eat at Thai USA or Poncho Villa's anyway..Or, god forbid, pop a cold one on Co Co's deck in the summertime...

Seriously, does the moderation group here feel the members want it that way, or is that policy open for discussion?
Cheers, John

Thai USA? Is that a town? I never had a margaritta, and the noise from Coco's never kept me up when I lived on my boat. I think I did see a Shamrock in a haze or two.

I'm not sure what the moderators want, but it does look like things are getting discussed.

Edited addendum:

I took a look at the post over there and my head is spinning. I didn't read the whole thing, much of it could have been in Thai, but I didn't see mention of the power chords used on the testing equiptment. Details John. Maybe that's what makes the older equiptment as capable as the latest technology. An understandable oversite John. Sometimes the big picture gets lost in the minutiae of facts. See? No degree needed, just a willingness to believe. [note to self...Remember when talking to engineers you bought a Yammie with YPAO because using the SPL meter was a daunting task.]

[markw]

I would give it a try. Let all attack jon on the merits of his arguments and tey to keep from getting personal, and hope jon does the same. Remember, this ain't the same as his home field and perhaps therules are different. Let's see.

so, I would suggest that jneutron and the others continue to body check jon. If jon can't delete posts or ban opponents, how long can he last?

If this goes unchecked, then I'd say that chris is trying to get this to a more professional level of discussion than was here previously.

But, if jon contines to get byatch slapped on the merits of others posts, well then, if posts are closed or deleted there is an issue.

Let's give Chris a try on this and try to keep this at a level above "the other".

I do wonder how far jon can continue to be battered by facts from other more knowledgleble and experienced people before he does what a man would do and admit defeat, or at least leave.

[skeptic]

Remember, this ain't the same as his home field and perhaps therules are different.

Jon has two basic problems here.

First he tenaciously argues a point which he cannot support with credible scientific proof or even evidence to suggest that he is right. Neither can anyone else argueing his case.

Secondly, he is a willing tool of the Cable Asylum board to stifle opinions that run counter to the prevailing premise, namely the value of audiophile cables to a fine sound reproduction system. (I have come to what seems to me the only logical conclusion as to why this happens and that is because it serves the financial self interest of the people who sponser that site, the only real reason for its existance.) In this capacity he acts as a censor enforcing their announced anti DBT discussion rule and apparantly, if we can believe some of the postings about it here, actually deleting postings that do not raise the issue of DBTs but for some other reason must be removed.

By combining his highly opinionated stance with his power to delete anything anyone has to say which bothers him, he has become a little tin pot god controlling the entire discussion to suit his own egotistical purposes. The question for this thread is whether or not we find ourselves with our own little tin pot god who will tell us more or less the same thing.

[Pat D]

This has curtailed his activities somewhat. No need to look at censorhip. Fortunately, neither he nor his wife were killed but as I recall she had some injuries, too. A search at AA would probably show more details.

Some people have noted that the computer logic won't accept certain words, so that is a type of censorship, I suppose.

[skeptic]

Some people have noted that the computer logic won't accept certain words, so that is a type of censorship, I suppose.

That is not censorship unless those are words which some people consider unacceptable in polite company such as anglo saxonisms. Then in the strictest sense, technically, you are correct. Otherwise that is a software glitch. However, in the truest and most meaningful sense, as long as there is no banning on the expression of some ideas, there is no real censorship. There are many words which the software will accept to express the same thoughts.

When acting as a censor, Jon Risch is merely a poodle enforcing the policies of the owners and sponsors of his board by restricting discussions to "positive experiences" with cables as Rod put it in his proposed mission statement. If anything happened to him (and I can't imagine why anyone would wish that) there would be an instant replacement which would be equally effective at squashing any real debate.

In one of my rare visits to that Bizzarro world a couple of months ago after a few postings here regarding an unusually vociferous bout there involving the banning of someone named Steve Eddy, I noted that there seemed to be far more flame wars there than here. This points out the falacy of the anti DBT rule effectively preventing such wars. Anyone who comes here making blanket statements about the superiority of some cable or other knows he will be challenged to back it up with more than just an off the cuff endorsement. In other words, shills will be exposed for what they are ususally quickly and unceremoniously by someone like mrtycrafts. So far not only has this served to keep discussions here on a much higher level by far (even if it isn't as technically detailed) than at CA, but it continues to point out the stark contrast between the real nature of the two sites and why this one is of value while the other is worthless (unless you happen to be in the audio cable business.) Will it be allowed to continue that way here? We'll just have to wait and see.

[happy ears]

All depends what is involved with censorship. I do agree that insults should be limited however debating should not. I will stand by my belief that cables do make a difference, not a big difference but it is there. Some better some worse, other people may agree or disagree. Cannot not prove this and have no desire to, I hear a difference and that is all I have to stand by. I will let others prove or disprove what I hear.

The only posts which should be deleted are those that are offensive or insulting in nature. I do not consider debating an issue to be offensive or insulting. We each have our own opinions and beliefs and a right to discuss it. So happy debating and keep the punches above the beltline.