Belated hello from me.

[mercury1 (trolling as Dave K)]

Hi Guys,
As so charmingly requested by Marco late yesterday I would like to take this opportunity to introduce myself, FWIW. He does have a point, it is the 3rd or fourth time he's aked, so sorry for that, I did promise to do it earlier. In answer to his later question as to why this is necessary, yes, I am a little shy, but that's no excuse.
My oldest friends call me Joe so I will extend this courtesy to my friends on this forum.
My location is within a few short miles of the beautiful Peak District, presently looking even more beautiful with it's covering of snow.
With regards to my set up, this is in a constant state of flux, being a mixture of new, second hand and a little home made. The home made stuff is very basic, I'm no electronics wiz kid, but I'm learning to solder. I am not a badged box collector, kit names mean very little to me in any sense, and I'm not really interested in chasing the ultimate sound. Listening to tunes (or choons) is much more my thing, from an emotional standpoint, if that makes any sense to anyone. My main source is computer flac files but I do like the sound of vinyl, when I can be bothered to connect up my old turntable, and I am trying to juggle with 2 channel and AV with the minimum number of boxes and speakers, if you follow.
This leads on nicely to my tastes in music. It is very wide and perhaps easier to state what I don't like. I don't like much modern pop, but I'll exclude some 'Take That' from that, I'm not a big fan of heavy metal head banging music, but there are exceptions to that. I like much classical music but it must have a tune, so this rules out most of the modern classics. Basically, if it's got a tune that I will be able to recall on hearing the first bar or so, it's likely that I like it.
No pics I'm afraid because it's not a very photogenic or audiophilicly pleasing and I don't need you well meanig guys to tell me that.
Sorry for the delay :)

[Spectral Morn]

Welcome to AOS Joe.


Regards D S D L

[Marco]

Hi Joe,


Hi Guys,
As so charmingly requested by Marco late yesterday I would like to take this opportunity to introduce myself...


You'll get used to the wry sense of humour here! :eyebrows:

Thanks for complying with my request and welcome to the forum. It's important for new members to 'give a little of themselves' in order to maintain the sense of community we've developed. AoS is more than simply an audio message board - it's full of real people and not merely 'Internet personas'.

Have you got any system pictures you could post in our Gallery? If so, please do, as seeing the system you're running allows others to identify with your 'hi-fi journey' to date, as it were.

Enjoy! :cool:

Marco.

[DSJR]

Give a LITTLE of ourselves Marco?????

I seem to be dredging all kinds of poo from my past on here :)

Welcome Joe! We still want piccies, photogenic or not :lol:

[Barry]

Welcome to AoS Joe.

Your avatar reminds me of the face of a 'novelty' clock. Do you by any chance have a cat that can do that?

This is a mild example of some of the zany humour we indulge in here, as well as chatting about music. Oh, and audio equipment gets the occasional mention!

Enjoy the forum.

[Beechwoods]

Thanks for saying hello and a bit about yourself. It really does make for a more friendly place when we've said hello properly :) Given your avatar picture, you may find the following smiley useful!

:uhho:

:lolsign:

[Jonboy]

Hello Joe, and welcome aboard.

[mercury1 (trolling as Dave K)]

Hi Guys and thanks for the welcome. I've been visting the site for quite a while so the welcome doesn't surprise me but it's nice anyway :) . One of the attractions of this site for me is the good natured banter that takes place and this fits in very well with my outlook on life. However I have noticed that there are occassions when some members seem to suffer from a sense of humour failure and, IMHO, grossly over react or seem to be over sensitive, to humorous comments or comments that they don't agree with. As they say, if you can't take it, don't dish it out. I'm not advocating a totally permissive posting policy by any means but if we pride ourselves on, and even encourage, good natured banter then surely we have to accept that not everyone will think the same things are funny. Religion and politics can be prime candidates for humour for many members but can be thought to be off limits by others, as an example. Surely what must be taken into account on such occassions is intent? - Just my two pennyworth as is often said here :)
Now if you'll permit me another two pennyworth as a welcoming gesture :) , I would like to return to the subject that I launched myself into last night, namely the shocking welcome, IMHO, that was meeted out to theoldtrout. In brief she posted a link to a provocative article (but probably only really provocative to dyed in the wool audiophiles) that was skeptical about some of the claims and counterclaims made by believers in certain doctrines and compounded this sin by suggesting that someone (not a member here, AFAIK) had got God disease, hardly offensive to most people I suggest - I wonder if His Holiness would be offended by being so described?
This culminated in their Welcome post being deleted in it's entirety, together with their name from the list of members, they were accused of lying about their gender and background, and equated with the Devil, all by members of management. If that behaviour doesn't warrant an apology then gentlemen you are not worthy of that title. All IMHO, of course :).
This abhorrent behaviour would have been bad enough if meeted out to a pleb member like me but to be meeted out to someone who was described by one of these same managers as "someone who was otherwise likely to have been a good contributor" is a major mistake. Don't forget that most of what you lot were objecting to was not authored by theoldtrout, her major sin as far as I can see, was to state that she was one of those who needed proof - surely this applies to most of you guys? Her proof is scientific, much of yours is your ears, thats the major difference.
There's much more I could say on this subject but I'm likely to outstay my welcome so I'll close with this request. Are the members of the management prepared to act collectively like the gentlemen that I suspect them to be and grovel an apology to theoldtrout, re-instate her name to the membership list and her Welcome post to it's rightful place (so others can judge for themselves) and invite her back into the fold? IMHO it's a measure of you all as men as to how you all respond to this situation. If it's any comfort to you I wouldn't be surprised if she politely told you were to stuff any such invitation, and who could blame her?
Joe.

[Alex_UK]

Welcome to AOS Joe.

Enjoy the forum.

I can't comment on your last post, as I didn't get a chance to follow the link, or see the responses but I think there was definitely something in the snow affecting the forum this week, it is not normally like that! Well, not all the time!

[Steve Toy]

I was wrong to believe that "theoldtrout" was someone else, someone we may know from elsewhere, trolling under a pseudonym. For this I apologise.

However, the ban was justifiable on two counts:

1) To refer to anyone with a faith as having god disease is offensive, arrogant and bigoted. Richard Dawkins is clearly an arrogant prick of the highest order. The likes of Albert Einstein and Stephen Hawkins were/are much more humble, intelligent and command respect for refusing to rule out the existence of God.

This is not a forum for devout believers in superstitious nonsense (or foo in our hobby) nor is it for neo-con right-wing religious fundamentalist nutjobs. This is a forum for the open-minded, the genuinely curious and for those who accept that the more you learn the more you realise how little you know. Knowledge is power but its acquisition should be a humbling process. To refute the existence of God and to refer to those who either believe in God or believe there might be a God as suffering from god disease warrants a ban in itself for its sheer arrogance. Atheism on its own is fine but coupled with blatant contempt for those who are not fellow-atheists is unacceptable.

2) We don't view scientific proof in terms of measurements and double-blind testing as being the only way to evaluate kit. We are for people who trust their ears. Recent polls on other fora confirm that around 80% of audiophiles (or recorded music lovers as we prefer to call ourselves) are prepared to trust their ears when making purchases or even effect tweaks that cost nothing other than perhaps a little time.

There are plenty of places on the internet where the vociferous minority of arrogant, sneering objectivists or skeptics (sic) as they prefer to call themselves can enjoy the sound of their own voices (or the sight of their own words on the screen) without having to come and piss on our parade here. There needs to be a safe haven for llike-minded subjectivists, who just happen to be in the majority, to be able to discuss tweaks and improvements to their music listening experiences without fear of ridicule from this minority of vociferous self-appointed or wannabe Which? magazine writers.

The Art of Sound is that safe haven.

Those who want to engage in tiresome objectivist/subjectivist debates each and every time someone has tried out a tweak, please do it somewhere alse and refrain from crapping all over this community.

Do it here, especially in your first few posts and you will likely be shown the door. If anyone has a problem with that....

Apart from that, a warm welcome to Joe.

[Marco]

Mmmmm... That was rather unnecessarily provocative, wasn't it - are you her husband or something? :rolleyes:

Me thinks you protest too much, Joe, and perhaps aren't who you say you are and have some (as yet) undisclosed agenda.....

However, meanwhile, let's give you the benefit of the doubt!

The reason why 'theoldtrout' was banned was because of her blatant lack of tolerance and demeaning disrespect for other people's beliefs. This is a recurring and common problem with 'objectivists' and/or those of a scientifically-minded bent when it comes to the subject of audio.

We have no problem whatsoever with people disagreeing with the subjectivist stance of AoS, and the associated material written on the forum, but it must be portrayed whilst showing some respect for our subjectivist stance, otherwise quite simply you don't belong here. If 'theoldtrout' or you are going to attempt to portray us somehow as fools then expect to be treated with the contempt you deserve!

Our subjectivist views are covered in Our Ethos. Have you read it?

I'm afraid that as a practising Catholic (and thus believer in God) that others and I here found the reference to "God disease" extremely offensive.

Think about it this way.... Try replacing "God" with "Gay", for example, and ask yourself how the above statement comes across, and what the reaction would be like then?

If I have to explain what is wrong with that in any more detail then clearly neither 'theoldtrout' or you belong here.


(but probably only really provocative to dyed in the wool audiophiles)


So is this why you're here (and why 'Angela' joined) to poke fun at people with a different audio mentality?

AoS could be seen as a forum full of "dyed in the wool audiophiles", although I'd hesitate to accept such a superficial and presumptuous label, so I'm sure that many people here would take exception to that comment alone!

Answer me this: are you here for any kind of constructive purpose or simply on a jolly to wind-up people who think differently from you?

Marco.

[Steve Toy]

It might be an idea to read what I wrote at the bottom of page 1....

[Marco]

I just did - LOL! (missed it before).

Great post - that just about covers it!!

Marco.

P.S I think this guy is either Dave K or JC Brum (both of whom are banned from this site). I will thus make the necessary investigations ;)

[Steve Toy]

I doubt it's Dave K. He's not smart enough. JCBrium is a possibility but we need to investigate thoroughly this time or just give him enough rope... ....like last time.

[Steve Toy]

This snow is making a few idiots want to troll on our site. This is a rather infrequent problem here so please don't blame management.

[mercury1 (trolling as Dave K)]

Dear Steve and Marco,
Please read this carefully as I will say it only once (Hello, Hello).
There must be some misunderstanding, either I made a mess of my case for re-instating theoldtrout or you guys are just not reading me correctly. I hereby apologise for my part in any misunderstanding. I'll try again, briefly and then, if I fail I'll let the subject drop, OK?
Anything I have posted before is how I genuinely feel, with no agenda, hidden or otherwise, other than to discuss subjects that interest me. I do not lie - please accept this - I may mistakenly mislead someone but never deliberately. I abhor arguments but have a strong sense of trying to right a wrong as I see it. I do tend to take people at face value until I have reason not to, that is, to give people the benefit of the doubt. I admit that this simple naivete has given me cause for regret in the past but I can't change the way I am. Accordingly I only saw in theoldtrout what they wrote, I did no 'reading between the lines' as you guys apparently did. Most times, given your experience in monitoring this forum, you would have been right to do so and I would have been proved to be a naive fool again. This time it wasn't the case, IMHO
A) I had never heard of theoldtrout in any way, shape or form until I read her post the other day, I like you assumed she was a guy.
B) theoldtrout did not say that she supported the views expressed in the article, she just said that she needed proof - what educated person doesn't, other than with regards to religion, which I accept is largely an act of faith for most people, though perhaps not all.
C) the God disease remark, IIRC, was not hers, she just referred to it in the article - no personal such expression was made by her.
D) in short I believe that you attributed offensive remarks to her that were not made by her and not necessarily supported by her - in fact you guys mis-read just about everything about her.
E) we are all guilty at some time of expressing our personal opinion in a way that may offend others that don't share it, eg Dawkins being an utter cock .


Since I became aware of theoldtrout's real persona I have exchanged e-mails with her and she has OK'd me to put this message from her on the forum: -

"The point I was trying to make – perhaps in this case not well – and missed by Marco and his followers is that if one holds an opinion or belief then one should be able to debate it and back it up, preferably with evidence, this equally applies to audiofoolery as it does to religious belief; arguments from authority are meaningless. I have never “trolled” a web-site but posted the offending article to stimulate debate because that is how knowledge is exchanged and progress made. I’m used to “a woman can’t do this and that” and have learned to ignore it; I have done everything I have claimed".

I would prefer not to be banned for my stand on this issue but accept that management do have that right. I feel so strongly about this that I am willing to accept that treatment, so the decision is yours.
Joe.
PS
It appears from Steve's latest post that he still thinks this is a troll attack - I guess that I'm flogging a dead horse. Thinking of it, Steve (aka the Tooth Fairy), hasn't got much right about this ex-member. Sorry Steve, I guess you're just not open to persuasion are you? - pity! Go ahead with your ban :(

[Steve Toy]

No ban from me on the face of what is written above.

[Marco]

Hi Joe,

Unfortunately I don't have time to go through your above post in the detail it deserves, however just a few important points....

Firstly, please accept my unreserved apology for accusing you of being someone else. Forums such as this get trolls (often ex-members who've been banned) who join using a pseudonym just to take the piss, and I'm afraid that's how you were coming across, intentionally or not. Anyway, I accept that you are who you say you are.

However, I need to put the record straight on this matter:


theoldtrout did not say that she supported the views expressed in the article, she just said that she needed proof...


This is untrue. See here, and note her post #18 (made before she was banned).

Angela said in her own words:

http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?t=5026&page=2


It is interesting to note most of Richard Dawkins detractors suffer from god disease and do not like their belief challenged by evidence – rather similar to the original topic what? Sadly, like many scientists, Richard Dawkins does not have the spit and polish of the media savvy so can come across as arrogant but it does not detract from the fact that he can back up his claims.


The bit in bold is precisely what got her banned, as quite clearly she supported Dawkins' (an arrogant prick I dislike the same as Steve) extremely offensive remark (to people who like me believe in God). Given my status as a practising Catholic, I'm sorry, I simply could not share a forum with someone of that mentality, or more accurately, someone of that mentality who rams their aethist views down other people's throats. Also, the only "evidence" most people here need in audio is what the God-given ears at the sides of their head tell them.

Trust your senses/gut instinct with hi-fi, and have faith in your hearing acuity is what we practice on AoS! Measurements are for designers and engineers to worry about, not the end listeners of a product (unless you're into D.I.Y).

I'm just being frank the same as you are :)

Furthermore this:


The point I was trying to make – perhaps in this case not well – and missed by Marco and his followers is that if one holds an opinion or belief then one should be able to debate it and back it up, preferably with evidence, this equally applies to audiofoolery as it does to religious belief; arguments from authority are meaningless.


"Marco and his followers"? What's that supposed to mean? I'm not Robin Hood! I doubt Angela could be any more patronising if she tried!! :rolleyes:

Why do 'objectivists' always have to be so condecending to others when trying to put their point across? Do they not realise that they will get precisely nowhere with people of a different mindset if they don't show some respect for their fellow man, and instead infer that he or she is some sort of deluded idiot????? This shit really gets to me :steam:

"Audiofoolery", with the accent on "fool", I presume? Honestly, Joe, almost every word this rude and arrogant woman writes makes my blood boil, so I'm afraid there is no way I could ever put up with someone like that, hence why she was banned - and will stay banned.

What you decide to do is up to you. I think that there's a better chance of us working together, as long as there is mutual respect for each other's audio methodologies, so I'm willing to give it a go if you are :cool:

Marco.

[Alex_UK]

I doubt it's Dave K. He's not smart enough.

I appreciate the management fell out with DaveK (for whatever reason) and banned him accordingly, but I for one always got on well with Dave, and IMO this is grossly unfair and insulting to someone who is no longer able to defend himself.

[Marco]

Agreed, Alex. That was a little unfair of Steve. I'm sure he'll remove the remark accordingly :)

Marco.

[Joe]

Ditto. I also remember a lot of stuff in the Bible about loving your enemies, judging not lest you be judged and found wanting, and only casting stones if you were without sin yourself

[Alex_UK]

Thanks Marco, hopefully you'll know by now that I'm pretty easy going, and a lot of the "fractious" stuff that goes on here sometimes goes over my head, or I choose to ignore it but just occasionally I feel I need to "get out of my box" so sorry for that! ;)

[Marco]

No problem, Alex. Never feel that you can't point out things that concern you, as you're perfectly entitled to. No-one is perfect - we're all human, so even admin make mistakes :)

Marco.

[Steve Toy]

Ok I'll re-word it: it wouldn't be Dave K's style. I can't see him being anything other than himself. A trollster able to conceal his true identity he aint!

[Alex_UK]

Thanks Steve, that's a better way to put it.

[anthonyTD]

Hi Guys and thanks for the welcome. I've been visting the site for quite a while so the welcome doesn't surprise me but it's nice anyway :) . One of the attractions of this site for me is the good natured banter that takes place and this fits in very well with my outlook on life. However I have noticed that there are occassions when some members seem to suffer from a sense of humour failure and, IMHO, grossly over react or seem to be over sensitive, to humorous comments or comments that they don't agree with. As they say, if you can't take it, don't dish it out. I'm not advocating a totally permissive posting policy by any means but if we pride ourselves on, and even encourage, good natured banter then surely we have to accept that not everyone will think the same things are funny. Religion and politics can be prime candidates for humour for many members but can be thought to be off limits by others, as an example. Surely what must be taken into account on such occassions is intent? - Just my two pennyworth as is often said here :)
Now if you'll permit me another two pennyworth as a welcoming gesture :) , I would like to return to the subject that I launched myself into last night, namely the shocking welcome, IMHO, that was meeted out to theoldtrout. In brief she posted a link to a provocative article (but probably only really provocative to dyed in the wool audiophiles) that was skeptical about some of the claims and counterclaims made by believers in certain doctrines and compounded this sin by suggesting that someone (not a member here, AFAIK) had got God disease, hardly offensive to most people I suggest - I wonder if His Holiness would be offended by being so described?
This culminated in their Welcome post being deleted in it's entirety, together with their name from the list of members, they were accused of lying about their gender and background, and equated with the Devil, all by members of management. If that behaviour doesn't warrant an apology then gentlemen you are not worthy of that title. All IMHO, of course :).
This abhorrent behaviour would have been bad enough if meeted out to a pleb member like me but to be meeted out to someone who was described by one of these same managers as "someone who was otherwise likely to have been a good contributor" is a major mistake. Don't forget that most of what you lot were objecting to was not authored by theoldtrout, her major sin as far as I can see, was to state that she was one of those who needed proof - surely this applies to most of you guys? Her proof is scientific, much of yours is your ears, thats the major difference.
There's much more I could say on this subject but I'm likely to outstay my welcome so I'll close with this request. Are the members of the management prepared to act collectively like the gentlemen that I suspect them to be and grovel an apology to theoldtrout, re-instate her name to the membership list and her Welcome post to it's rightful place (so others can judge for themselves) and invite her back into the fold? IMHO it's a measure of you all as men as to how you all respond to this situation. If it's any comfort to you I wouldn't be surprised if she politely told you were to stuff any such invitation, and who could blame her?
Joe.

bye dave!!! :wave:

[Marco]

Ok I'll re-word it: it wouldn't be Dave K's style. I can't see him being anything other than himself. A trollster able to conceal his true identity he aint!

...And so it proved to be!! :lol: ;)

Marco.

[Steve Toy]

I said that when we suspected he was Angela. I did not suspect him of being Mercury1 due to the date of registration but apart from that he did nothing to conceal his true self. He may have created a number of sleeping personas btw.

[Beechwoods]

You're right Steve. You can add user 'Mercury' to the list, following a bit more investigation.

[Marco]

I said that when we suspected he was Angela. I did not suspect him of being Mercury1 due to the date of registration but apart from that he did nothing to conceal his true self. He may have created a number of sleeping personas btw.

"A trollster able to conceal his true identity he aint!"

I think you've missed the "he aint" bit, mate. I was agreeing with you that as a 'trollster' he makes a good plumber!! :lol: :lol:

Marco.