Has censorship come to this board?

[skeptic]

Apparantly the format isn't the only thing that has changed here In the past, this has been a very free and open place to discuss just about anything people who post care to including those subjects not related to cables. Even flame wars including anglo saxonisms were tolerated to a degree and allowed to burn themselves out. It was only a couple of years ago that anyone even had to register to post here. Many of the people who post here post at other audio related sites including Cable Asylum. That goes for Jon Risch as well. He used to post here frequently. I don't know if he just tired of this place, has been too busy with being moderator of Cable Asylum, or felt his views were too discredited to show his face very often but he apparantly still makes a rare appearance here. Because of the number of people who do post there or those who left there and come here as a real refuge to a place of free expression, there is still a lot of interest about what goes on there, although not by me. I was only there for a very brief time several years ago, left in disgust quickly and never established any attachment or interest in it.

Well now it seems that by locking a thread and telling people who post here that discussion of that site and their moderator is off limits, censorship has arrived here and their actions cannot be criticized without meeting the approval of our own new censor in chief. Is it the approaching Thanksgiving holiday or has this new ominous element put a chill in what was ordinarily a very active message board.

If it continues and it becomes apparant that we must watch our words because we have our own new Communist Gestapo censor to deal with, I am outta here. And that means all the boards. No more advice or counseling to newbies about speakers, amplifiers, phonograph cartridges or recordings. That would make this not the kind of place I would frequent. And unlike some others, if I leave, I for one am NEVER coming back under this moniker or any other.

[FLZapped]

How sweet of you to notice.....especially since the thread was starting to go a different direction of it's own volition.

Well, Happy Thanksgiving anyway.

-Bruce

[skeptic]

We have to consider the possibility that the new censor is a shill or mole for Cable Asylum and he is actually somehow associated with them or is even Jon Risch himself under an assumed moniker. Why would anyone want to protect Cable Asylum from criticism on this board? What motive would there be for the moderator to become an extension of the censorship imposed there? Does Ted, or Rod, or Jon or whoever just call up the new moderator and say, stifle that thread or don't allow any discussion or criticism of CA, especially when it starts getting close to the possibility that CA is not a open forum but actually a cleverly disguised soft sell advertising campaign for the cable industry?

Jon Risch and Cable Asylum are a legitimate topic for discussion and opinion here. Jon Risch has presented papers to the AES expressing his views publicly and he and his web site about cables are often referred to in postings at CA....by himself (a legend in his own mind.) His off the wall ideas and the no DBT policy were reason enough to compare the censorship imposed there to the free and open discussion we enjoyed here up to now. His new policy of apparantly deleting posts which challenge him or his views are reprehensible enough but when THIS message board becomes a feifdom protecting him from any discussion here as well, we have to examine whether or not this is the intent of the people at AR or whether the new commissar of truth has taken it upon himself to tell us what we are free to discuss and what we aren't. If this message gets deleted, it will generate a large number of complaints on the other message boards on this site, to the AR board, and on other sites where the CA goon squad hasn't taken control yet. The censorship here is far more insidious and dangerous to free speech than the anti DBT rule or even the deletions at Cable Asylum. Let's hope it gets nipped in the bud.

[FLZapped]

It's time to volunteer as a moderator....

[TinHere]

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.

[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.

[Mwalsdor_cscc_edu]

And seeing there is moderation in place what is the big surprise that this power would be used? If you don't like it take your concerns up with them and if you're still not happy you can always go elsewhere. Personally, I see no place for the discussion, or the degree of discussion, of personalities within any of the specific forums. The sub-title for this forum is "Cables and Interconnects - discuss them here.", not Peyton Place. Try the "Non-Audio" forum for your personal gripes of individuals or other audio forums.

I moderate another audio forum and wouldn't appreciate anyone continually bashing another person, whether they were a member or not. And that goes for other forums as well. Take your compliants to the source directly, don't bring them to "my house". The forum I host involves discussion related to Tube Audio. Non-related disussion should be directed toward the General or Off-Topic forums. Instead of censorship [how dramatic] I've relied on contacting individuals off-line asking them to either re-direct their discussion or to keep the debate "on topic" without personal attacks. I'm not interested in what happens on other forums, my desire is to keep the discussion civil and topic related. I'm not a fortune teller but perhaps that is the reason Chris chose to lock the thread in question.

As for moderators also being contributors. Most of our moderators are also our most prolific members. And while I do not always agree with how everyone runs "their ship" I focus on what happens within my one forum, while sharing my other concerns "off-line". And due to the quality of our membership I've not had to resort to the use of "administrative control" during my term. Like anyone else, some days treat me better than others but accepting my greater responsibility to our readership I choose my words and actions with respect for others.

MikE

[skeptic]

I moderate another audio forum and wouldn't appreciate anyone continually bashing another person, whether they were a member or not. And that goes for other forums as well. Take your compliants to the source directly, don't bring them to "my house".

First of all, you clearly are biased in favor of moderators having the right to use their powers of censorship without challenge by participants on their own board or anywhere else. You think that you and your counterparts should be beyond criticism for your actions not only in your own little kingdom of Audio Kharma but here and anywhere else as well. You think you are beyond the right to be held up to scrutiny or accountable in public by other people if you unfairly use your powers to enforce unreasoned censorship. You are WRONG.

I have taken my complaint directly to the source. This board. I have stated my position clearly, that being that if censorship to the extent that any civil discourse about anything including the actions of other moderators of other boards including Jon Risch or yourself is out of bounds, then the rules are no longer acceptable to me and I'll leave. But everyone should know why and decide for themselves if that is the kind of new limitations they want to put up with. I see no reason to divert my comments to another board on this site where the participants who are directly involved with it might not see it. I don't go to the General board EVER myself and I wouldn't expect anyone here to look for my comments there.

I occasionally post on your site and even on your board under a different moniker. But it isn't one tenth as interesting or stimulating as this one because the back and forth exchange is far more limited although I don't know the reason why. That's what's in jeaopardy here right now.

I don't have any problem with a moderator also being a contributor but he must keep the two roles separate and not unfairly use his singular and absolute powers to skew the discussion or debate because he has no other way of advocating his point of view. But that is just what Jon Risch has apparantly done if the reports we are getting on the other thread that was locked are right. He is not merely enforcing a one sided rule which puts completely free and open discussion out of bounds, but he is now deleting entire posts which have nothing to do with his anti DBT rule because he can't refute them.

If you don't like my posts or those like it, don't read them. Bashing is a perjorative term which infers that an individual is being unfairly attacked for actions he didn't take or are being described in exaggerated or untrue ways. Nothing could be further from the truth. The actions, whether the moderator of this board or of any other so far being discussed, have been written about in objective terms and the opinions seem fair and reasoned to me. I know that you largely agree with Jon Risch's opinions on cables and you play the same role on your board, he plays on his. Therefore your sympathy for him is understandable. What will you do if I decide to come to your board and advance an arguement about my rejection of vacuum tube amplifiers as a cult retro phenomenon being exploited as a niche market with outrageously priced ancient designs, delete me too?

[Mwalsdor_cscc_edu]

You make me laugh with your presumptions and attitude. You pretend to know what my motives are based on what responsibilities I have on another forum. I'm not pro-moderation and I see my role there as host not as some demigod. I could care less if that were incorporated here or any forum I choose to visit. As long as people are respecful. If that should change I would probably find another forum, than simply b!tch out loud. Either lead by example, join the administration [where you can affect change] or just go. Anything else is blowing hot air for no purpose than to hear an echo.

The forums are seperated for a reason, if you choose not to repect that then you come under the same scrutiny as those you wish to hold to a higher standard. There is a word for that.

My post or the discussion has nothing to do with anyone's preference of audio sites. Like the "new AR", if you don't like it than don't go there.

All your kind and Jon are doing is arguing amongst yourselves. It has little to do with the major or the subject at hand. Which is fine but should be re-directed to a non-audio forum.

I never said I didn't like your posts, and read posts like them for my amusement. Though, my reply wasn't directed at you, instead the broader subject - moderation. You just took it as such judging by your reply.

Sympathy for Jon? Please, I don't like the guy let alone feel for the role he has adopted.

As for my moderating style? There is a new poster that is generating alot of discussion at AK, and has even posted in my forum. As I told the other mods, I'm not so quick to judge him or concern myself with his motives. I'll ignore him as long as he doesn't become uncivil. Fools are not excluded from posting on any public forum. And no, that was not directed at you.

MikE

[skeptic]

Actually, I enjoy reading your posts too. Hope your new Moth amp is meeting your expectations. Sorry if I over-reacted. It just annoyed me that the other post was locked up for no legitimate reason. Bruce would never have done that. I hope Chris has had second thoughts about it himself.

[Mwalsdor_cscc_edu]

MikE.

[Chris]

Apparantly the format isn't the only thing that has changed here In the past, this has been a very free and open place to discuss just about anything people who post care to including those subjects not related to cables. Even flame wars including anglo saxonisms were tolerated to a degree and allowed to burn themselves out. It was only a couple of years ago that anyone even had to register to post here. Many of the people who post here post at other audio related sites including Cable Asylum. That goes for Jon Risch as well. He used to post here frequently. I don't know if he just tired of this place, has been too busy with being moderator of Cable Asylum, or felt his views were too discredited to show his face very often but he apparantly still makes a rare appearance here. Because of the number of people who do post there or those who left there and come here as a real refuge to a place of free expression, there is still a lot of interest about what goes on there, although not by me. I was only there for a very brief time several years ago, left in disgust quickly and never established any attachment or interest in it.

Well now it seems that by locking a thread and telling people who post here that discussion of that site and their moderator is off limits, censorship has arrived here and their actions cannot be criticized without meeting the approval of our own new censor in chief. Is it the approaching Thanksgiving holiday or has this new ominous element put a chill in what was ordinarily a very active message board.

If it continues and it becomes apparant that we must watch our words because we have our own new Communist Gestapo censor to deal with, I am outta here. And that means all the boards. No more advice or counseling to newbies about speakers, amplifiers, phonograph cartridges or recordings. That would make this not the kind of place I would frequent. And unlike some others, if I leave, I for one am NEVER coming back under this moniker or any other.

It's too bad that I didn't see this thread before I went on my holiday vacation, or I would have answered it quickly before it started. Let me make a few points and challenge your accusations.

Let me first ask why the first hint of any type of moderation on this site should bring about cries of censorship, communism or conspiracy? What used to be a VERY active community (here on AudioReview) has become home to numerous trolls and flamebait for the past couple of years because there had been almost no moderating. The first attempt in two years to clean up the discussions and try to get this forum back to the "audio-related" subjects that made it so great in the first place draws this type of harsh criticism? I'm a little disappointed.

If everyone kept to giving "advice or counseling to newbies about speakers, amplifiers, phonograph cartridges or recordings", there would be no need for moderating at all. Unfortunately, we all know that is not realistic, and that people will push the limits of appropriate discussion in a PRIVATE forum such as ours. Yes, it's true, we will be drawing the lines a little more as to what is acceptable behavior in our forums, as we used to do back when Norbert was running things. We will not censor anyone, but we will delete or lock inappropriate threads and posts that we do find cross the line. All it takes is a little common sense and respect - something that should have been used anyway. It should go without saying, but I guess if you don't say it, people will not use it.

About the thread that was locked - I locked it because it had gone on long enough, and people were complaining about it. Yes, other members were complaining about it, so I chose to lock it. If you want to debate a topic, that's fine. But we would rather people not go to great lengths to try and discredit another site, or other people here on our site. When other members begin complaining, it's obvious that the members have decided it's gone on long enough. We allowed it to take place, but it kept degrading. We would like to increase the quality level around here, and flaming will be a little less tolerated. I personally don't know enough about how Cable Asylum is run, but I don't think it's right for us to allow an ongoing flame session on their policies - do you? If you don't like their site, don't use it. But why use up our forum resources to complain about their policies or ethics? It won't solve anything will it?

[jneutron]

What used to be a VERY active community (here on AudioReview) has become home to numerous trolls and flamebait for the past couple of years because there had been almost no moderating. The first attempt in two years to clean up the discussions and try to get this forum back to the "audio-related" subjects that made it so great in the first place draws this type of harsh criticism? I'm a little disappointed.
Yes, it's true, we will be drawing the lines a little more as to what is acceptable behavior in our forums, as we used to do back when Norbert was running things. We will not censor anyone, but we will delete or lock inappropriate threads and posts that we do find cross the line. All it takes is a little common sense and respect - something that should have been used anyway. It should go without saying, but I guess if you don't say it, people will not use it.

About the thread that was locked - I locked it because it had gone on long enough, and people were complaining about it. Yes, other members were complaining about it, so I chose to lock it. If you want to debate a topic, that's fine. But we would rather people not go to great lengths to try and discredit another site, or other people here on our site. When other members begin complaining, it's obvious that the members have decided it's gone on long enough. We allowed it to take place, but it kept degrading. We would like to increase the quality level around here, and flaming will be a little less tolerated. I personally don't know enough about how Cable Asylum is run, but I don't think it's right for us to allow an ongoing flame session on their policies - do you? If you don't like their site, don't use it. But why use up our forum resources to complain about their policies or ethics? It won't solve anything will it?

Hmmm...I do see the huge number of problems in general, but not in cables....

You said, on the thread you locked out...."I feel it has gone on long enough"...not "others were complaining".. That is something else entirely..now...is there a threshold of complaints, or is it moderator's choice?? if 12 people are active and two others complain, does it get shut down?? If John Curl complains, does he carry more weight? Did more complain about your lockout than the thread itself?

Start of thread: 11-20-2003 8:55 PM
Shutdown: 11-24-2003 7:52 PM.

Four days doesn't seem long..

Never having seen moderation here, I think it would be nice to know the new rules in advance.

Yes, it is a private website, and can be run anyway the owners wish..I will abide with the owners, but would certainly like to see freedom to speak, within socially accepted norms..

I personally think you acted too hastily...but do not envy you your choices.

Cheers, John

[skeptic]

Let me first ask why the first hint of any type of moderation on this site should bring about cries of censorship, communism or conspiracy? What used to be a VERY active community (here on AudioReview) has become home to numerous trolls and flamebait for the past couple of years because there had been almost no moderating. .

Yes, it's true, we will be drawing the lines a little more as to what is acceptable behavior in our forums, as we used to do back when Norbert was running things. We will not censor anyone, but we will delete or lock inappropriate threads and posts that we do find cross the line.

About the thread that was locked - I locked it because it had gone on long enough, and people were complaining about it. Yes, other members were complaining about it, so I chose to lock it. If you want to debate a topic, that's fine. But we would rather people not go to great lengths to try and discredit another site, or other people here on our site.

We would like to increase the quality level around here, and flaming will be a little less tolerated. I personally don't know enough about how Cable Asylum is run, but I don't think it's right for us to allow an ongoing flame session on their policies - do you?

But why use up our forum resources to complain about their policies or ethics? It won't solve anything will it?

The first thing to understand as I pointed out is that there are a lot of people who post at both sites, and more than a few like me who once posted at the other site and gave it up because the censorship there was not merely restrictive but so unfairly biased that it made it obvious that the site was used to promulgate a particular point of view at least IMO was for the purpose of commercial exploitation of the participants. Therefore some of us, me for one, is very alert and sensitive to any indication that this site is headed in the same direction.

This is still a very active community and when trolls do visit here, one or more of the regular members identifies him/her as a troll and they are quickly dispatched. Some of us think Burce was a very good moderator. Now who's flame throwing?

I for one will be watching to see exactly where and how the lines are drawn and I will make my decision of whether or not to continue to participate based on it.

People who make public pronouncements, especially public personna who have credentials, published papers, technical websites, and moderate a well known board will be open to public comment and scrutiny and will be judged by their actions and what they say, if not here than elsewhere. Nobody is beyond criticism, especially when it is justified and even the Queen of England can't stop people from talking about her family. This is human nature.

The quality here is very high already. With over 1000 participants reading some postings, there are bound to be some people who will disagree with most or all of them and when the topic is controversial, there will be some who will also complain. Those are generally the most interesting and stimulating discussions. There is no requrement that anyone read every message on every thread. And people will say things in the heat of disagreement that they might reconsider later however, this is part of the spontaniety that makes this place as good as it is. Stiffling every discussions because someone's feelings might get a little hurt, even someone who doesn't often visit here could make this a very boring place.

Therefore, IMO, Cable Asylum their policies and the actions of their moderator are a legitimate topic for conversation here especially when some of the people who post at both sites have something to say about it and the way they were treated there but are not allowed to post there. Are you suggesting that they have not voice here either?

Use up fourm resources? Are you serious? How many terrabytes of space are available. Which grain of sand on the beach is missing, which droplet of water in the ocean is gone from the endless capacity for messages at this site?

[Chris]

The first thing to understand as I pointed out is that there are a lot of people who post at both sites, and more than a few like me who once posted at the other site and gave it up because the censorship there was not merely restrictive but so unfairly biased that it made it obvious that the site was used to promulgate a particular point of view at least IMO was for the purpose of commercial exploitation of the participants. Therefore some of us, me for one, is very alert and sensitive to any indication that this site is headed in the same direction.

The one good thing about me (the admin of this site) having limited knowledge of home audio, is that you don't have to worry about me forcing any point of view or being biased toward any audio theories. The only thing I will try to keep out of these forums is inappropriate behavior including flaming, personal attacks, and people who visit here only to cause trouble (trolls).

This is still a very active community and when trolls do visit here, one or more of the regular members identifies him/her as a troll and they are quickly dispatched. Some of us think Burce was a very good moderator. Now who's flame throwing?

I for one will be watching to see exactly where and how the lines are drawn and I will make my decision of whether or not to continue to participate based on it.

Understood.

People who make public pronouncements, especially public personna who have credentials, published papers, technical websites, and moderate a well known board will be open to public comment and scrutiny and will be judged by their actions and what they say, if not here than elsewhere. Nobody is beyond criticism, especially when it is justified and even the Queen of England can't stop people from talking about her family. This is human nature.

The quality here is very high already. With over 1000 participants reading some postings, there are bound to be some people who will disagree with most or all of them and when the topic is controversial, there will be some who will also complain. Those are generally the most interesting and stimulating discussions. There is no requrement that anyone read every message on every thread. And people will say things in the heat of disagreement that they might reconsider later however, this is part of the spontaniety that makes this place as good as it is. Stiffling every discussions because someone's feelings might get a little hurt, even someone who doesn't often visit here could make this a very boring place.

I unerstand what you're saying. We won't be stifling every discussion where feelings get hurt, but we also won't allow some of the flaming and personal attacks that have filled this place up in the past. We would rather see people act a bit more civil, and stick to the subject matter, instead of flaming others.

Therefore, IMO, Cable Asylum their policies and the actions of their moderator are a legitimate topic for conversation here especially when some of the people who post at both sites have something to say about it and the way they were treated there but are not allowed to post there. Are you suggesting that they have not voice here either?

Use up fourm resources? Are you serious? How many terrabytes of space are available. Which grain of sand on the beach is missing, which droplet of water in the ocean is gone from the endless capacity for messages at this site?

When I said forum resources, I was referring to hits on the database, not space. When 20 people post at the same time, it uses up system resources, making the forums work harder/move slower. So I wasn't making it up.

It's understandable that some people may want to vent their displeasure about the way they were treated on another audio site, but please keep in mind that we don't want to be the place where everyone goes to complain about their experience on other audio sites. Can you blame us? I figured closing down that particular thread would make a statement and would get people to move on. All we ask is that you keep these posts to a minimum, and keep the majority of the discussions focused on the forum's subject matter. Fair enough?

[skeptic]

It's understandable that some people may want to vent their displeasure about the way they were treated on another audio site, but please keep in mind that we don't want to be the place where everyone goes to complain about their experience on other audio sites. Can you blame us? I figured closing down that particular thread would make a statement and would get people to move on. All we ask is that you keep these posts to a minimum, and keep the majority of the discussions focused on the forum's subject matter. Fair enough?

This topic comes up briefly every few months when someone from the other board who posts here too or someone who follows that board posts about something unusual or particularly outrageous that happened there. There is a brief flurry of discussion and then it dies not to be seen again for months and months. The thread you locked was just about dead and the subject was probably exhausted had you just left it alone.

It might interest you to know that John Neutron only came here a few months ago after a particularly sharp confrontation at the other site. Some of our other participants such as PC Tower came previously for similar reasons. While I personally was not banished or even warned about my postings, it was quickly clear to me that it was not the kind of place I'd stick around in. People who left there for here or post on both boards are among the most frequent and best informed participants of this board.

There is a lot more to life than audio cables and the culture of this message board has been that people feel free to discuss more than just this one narrow topic. That is one of the reasons why it is so successful. Don't try to fix it if it ain't broke.

[Chris]

There is a lot more to life than audio cables and the culture of this message board has been that people feel free to discuss more than just this one narrow topic. That is one of the reasons why it is so successful. Don't try to fix it if it ain't broke.

I've been with the company for over 4 years now and have watched the AudioReview forum participation drop significantly over the past couple of years. I'd say there's a little room for improvement. Yes, I agree that is successful overall, but it needs a little help to regain its old form.

"Don't try to fix it if it ain't broke" .

This statement would have carried more weight if the quality of discussions and the traffic levels hadn't proven otherwise. We have specific forums for specific subject matter in hopes to group similar discussions together. We now have a forum dedicated to non-related topics for those who want to go off topic. I'm hoping that will satisfy people who need to talk about other topics. That should keep the technical forums more focused.

Overall, I think we're on the same page.

[TinHere]

It's too bad that I didn't see this thread before I went on my holiday vacation, or I would have answered it quickly before it started. Let me make a few points and challenge your accusations.

Let me first ask why the first hint of any type of moderation on this site should bring about cries of censorship, communism or conspiracy? What used to be a VERY active community (here on AudioReview) has become home to numerous trolls and flamebait for the past couple of years because there had been almost no moderating. The first attempt in two years to clean up the discussions and try to get this forum back to the "audio-related" subjects that made it so great in the first place draws this type of harsh criticism? I'm a little disappointed.

If everyone kept to giving "advice or counseling to newbies about speakers, amplifiers, phonograph cartridges or recordings", there would be no need for moderating at all. Unfortunately, we all know that is not realistic, and that people will push the limits of appropriate discussion in a PRIVATE forum such as ours. Yes, it's true, we will be drawing the lines a little more as to what is acceptable behavior in our forums, as we used to do back when Norbert was running things. We will not censor anyone, but we will delete or lock inappropriate threads and posts that we do find cross the line. All it takes is a little common sense and respect - something that should have been used anyway. It should go without saying, but I guess if you don't say it, people will not use it.

About the thread that was locked - I locked it because it had gone on long enough, and people were complaining about it. Yes, other members were complaining about it, so I chose to lock it. If you want to debate a topic, that's fine. But we would rather people not go to great lengths to try and discredit another site, or other people here on our site. When other members begin complaining, it's obvious that the members have decided it's gone on long enough. We allowed it to take place, but it kept degrading. We would like to increase the quality level around here, and flaming will be a little less tolerated. I personally don't know enough about how Cable Asylum is run, but I don't think it's right for us to allow an ongoing flame session on their policies - do you? If you don't like their site, don't use it. But why use up our forum resources to complain about their policies or ethics? It won't solve anything will it?

I hope the stalwarts, who have remained here for good times and bad, are allowed to discuss the topics they deem relevant. I think that a term such as "Nazi" should be self censored as it trivializes what it really represents, otherwise posts that express rancor about a topic that concerns the audio community, and not just this site, should be allowed. We're all in same building just in different rooms by the choices we make. Lively debate has been the cornerstone here. There are many places to go to preach to the choir and discuss the "benefits" of what is questioned here. I hope this site doesn't dissolve into the amalgam that constitutes most of the other sites and retains it's identity of a place where almost anything can be disscussed and nothing is accepted as truth without the recourse of debate. Demanding proof and questioning claims is a valuable lesson for anyone starting in this pursuit unaware that there are two schools of thought. I realize your aim isn't to stifle debate, but without knowledgable people discussing the issues there is little to be learned. I hope they are given the leeway they have asked for, and moderation is saved for the "sublimely abhorrent".

[Chris]

I hope the stalwarts, who have remained here for good times and bad, are allowed to discuss the topics they deem relevant. I think that a term such as "Nazi" should be self censored as it trivializes what it really represents, otherwise posts that express rancor about a topic that concerns the audio community, and not just this site, should be allowed. We're all in same building just in different rooms by the choices we make. Lively debate has been the cornerstone here. There are many places to go to preach to the choir and discuss the "benefits" of what is questioned here. I hope this site doesn't dissolve into the amalgam that constitutes most of the other sites and retains it's identity of a place where almost anything can be disscussed and nothing is accepted as truth without the recourse of debate. Demanding proof and questioning claims is a valuable lesson for anyone starting in this pursuit unaware that there are two schools of thought. I realize your aim isn't to stifle debate, but without knowledgable people discussing the issues there is little to be learned. I hope they are given the leeway they have asked for, and moderation is saved for the "sublimely abhorrent".

We are not looking to stifle debate, but we would like to minimize the side effects of debates - those being the flame wars and personal attacks that have plagued our forum for some time now. We will not attempt to dictate the subject matter, but we would like it to pertain to audio/video if it's posted in the A/V forums, and we would like people to use common sense and use maturity/appropriate behavior. As I said, this should go without saying, we obviously need to say it.

[skeptic]

I think that a term such as "Nazi" should be self censored as it trivializes what it really represents, otherwise posts that express rancor about a topic that concerns the audio community, and not just this site, should be allowed.

As I said, I chose this word very carefully and I understand its full implications and signifigance. It is an historical fact that the totalitarian method for surpressing intellectual challenge to its dogma is to both control the means of production and dissemination of opinion using it to promulgate it own point of view relentlessly and imposing total censorship on all other points of view. Those who dare to speak out are not merely not allowed to speak but are punished in every other conceivable way the authorities have available to them. In Nazi Germany it meant the gestapo hauling the offender off to a concintration camp to meet a sorry fate. In Soviet Russia and other communist countries, it meant a visit from the MVD (state security) who would assist the offender's tranisit to the Gualg Archipelligo (must reading for understanding the 20th century.) All dissent no matter how seemingly innocent is viewed as a challenge to The State's authority and is treated as an act of open revolt. At Cable Asylum dissent results in a warning followed by banishment which in the sense of being able to participate in debate means the same thing. Yes this is a very powerful word with a very powerful message. And it is the correct message as far as I am concerned and when I can no longer express it here, I'm leaving since this place will have become no better than the other one.

[DMK]

when I can no longer express it here, I'm leaving since this place will have become no better than the other one.

First of all, in response also to your original post on this thread, I find much to disagree with in your posts, particularly those concerned with music. But that pales in comparison to the disagreement I would have were you not allowed to post what you believe. That "other" audio board is run PRECISELY the way I do NOT want to see this one run. The moderator runs his ship exactly as you posted. He posts things as facts that fly in the face of science. As such, he opens himself up to scrutiny on A/R. That said, I choose not to engage in further discussions on A/R as to what he does on his own board. That's his problem and that of his followers. But when he comes to A/R, he's fair game.

Chris, if Skeptic and others are stifled here, I will follow them out. I'm taking you at your word below that that is not your intent. As Skeptic says, this forum ain't broke. It's the one place people can go to get BOTH sides of the WHOLE story. If we disagree, we're free to engage in discourse.

[TinHere]

As I said, I chose this word very carefully and I understand its full implications and signifigance. It is an historical fact that the totalitarian method for surpressing intellectual challenge to its dogma is to both control the means of production and dissemination of opinion using it to promulgate it own point of view relentlessly and imposing total censorship on all other points of view. Those who dare to speak out are not merely not allowed to speak but are punished in every other conceivable way the authorities have available to them. In Nazi Germany it meant the gestapo hauling the offender off to a concintration camp to meet a sorry fate. In Soviet Russia and other communist countries, it meant a visit from the MVD (state security) who would assist the offender's tranisit to the Gualg Archipelligo (must reading for understanding the 20th century.) All dissent no matter how seemingly innocent is viewed as a challenge to The State's authority and is treated as an act of open revolt. At Cable Asylum dissent results in a warning followed by banishment which in the sense of being able to participate in debate means the same thing. Yes this is a very powerful word with a very powerful message. And it is the correct message as far as I am concerned and when I can no longer express it here, I'm leaving since this place will have become no better than the other one.

I'm sure you chose your words very carefully and said what you did for impact. Nobody gets killed here and that's why I said what I did. I actually didn't even remember who said it, just that I thought it was over the top. Not an issue I would like to debate on this venue. In deference to the your contributions and the knowledge you impart I would rather see that in the rare moment than see this site lose what you have to offer. I hope you give Chris a fair chance and see what he did as his attempt to make things better even if you don't agree. Like I said earlier, and you said, it probably would have just died on it's own when those interested in it were ready to move on. Everyone else could ignore the thread. I wonder if those that complained are regular participants or like me just pop in once in awhile. If the complaints were from newcomers to the site maybe Chris felt compelled to show them that there will be some moderation in the hopes of having them return and contribute. Not saying right or wrong, just maybe a reason from Chris's perspective to intervene at least once. FYI...All I had to say was said on the forum and NOT in a private communication to Chris.