2. misc-audio
  3. 135391-109217

Some of the Worst Offenders in Bad Audio Forum Behavior Are Not Regular Forum Members

I've noticed first hand a disturbing trend over at Stereophile for the past couple of years that whenever someone knowledgeable challenges the mantra put forth by some of their editors, the Chief Editor, Mr. Atkinson, demands that the poster put forth personal information about themselves and any possible affiliations they may have with regard to employment that Mr. Atkinson might consider some kind of conflict of interest. Most notably, this occurred recently with a user named Archimago - a popular member of Computer Audiophile who extensively examined MQA, it's claims, and the claims made for it by Stereophile staff. Mr. Atkinson repeatedly challenged the author for his identity and professional affiliations - without which, he would disregard the message conveyed by said forum member. Mr. Atkinson has gone even further in other instances of which I personally witnessed first hand. He insists on banning from Stereophile's forum anyone whom he believes has a duty to publicly identify themselves without specifying the criteria behind the demand - other than that an industry affiliation might exist. I would encourage readers here to visit Computer Audiophile and search for Archimago /MQA discussions to see what I'm on about first hand.

The point of raising this is not necessarily to drag Mr. Atkinson through the mud but to highlight a key aspect of hypocrisy with respect to Mr. Atkinson's "policy" and how that relates to ALL online forums. Time and again, we're reminded in various forums when ideas are presented and challenged in a heated atmosphere - "FOCUS ON THE SUBJECT MATTER - NOT THE CREDENTIALS OR PERCEIVED FAILINGS OF THE INDIVIDUAL MAKING HIS OR HER POINT". This in my view has always been good advice. When we "play the ball" and not  "the man", it is much easier to maintain a civil exchange of ideas/experiences.  So where does Mr. Atkinson's insistence on identifying qualifications of the person fit in to this concept? It seems that every time he or a staff member is personally challenged for facts, he resorts to this "policy" as a form of censorship.  So basically what I"m saying here is that there's plenty of evidence that in some circles, the very people who should be encouraging us all to focus on the merits of the message - letting it stand or fall on its own without involving the supposed "credentials" of the messenger, - these people are in fact the worst offenders among us. Instead of setting a good example and sticking to it, they are doing the opposite while on occasion imploring the rest of us "regular members" to "do as I say - not as I do". I no longer participate in Stereophile forums because of this obvious cute form of censorship that has been employed. I hope that kind of thing never happens here on Audiogon. My guess, however, is that since Agon moderators aren't in the business of promoting/reviewing certain products that come along, that issue is not likely to present itself.
In any case, how do you feel about the privacy rights of other forum members? Should everyone be required to put forth their real name and potential industry affiliation or should that only apply to people who appear to be trying to sell something other than knowledge in the course of posting?
cj1965

Showing 3 responses by whart

whart's avatar
whart
3,144 posts
 
Perhaps you should write to Mr. Atkinson and express directly to him the concerns you are raising here. I quit reading magazines long ago so have no sense of the current editorial tone of Stereophile. If the staff is obnoxious on other fora, that doesn’t reflect well on the publication in my estimation. I do believe that disclosure of professional or commercial interests is appropriate, but if you say that Atkinson is not even-handed in imposing such requirements, you should bring that to his attention as well. Do they still publish a "reader" "Letters" section?
PS: I think the real danger in not disclosing industry or commercial interests isn’t necessarily the heavy-handed sales pitch, but the presentation of information, as such, without revealing possible bias (or the appearance of bias). I don't think such bias is a foregone result of an industry or commercial affiliation. Valuable information can be provided by those involved in product development, particularly since I doubt there is much funding available outside of industry applications for such research. It would seem to me that any one in the industry or with commercial ties to it should also use their real names (unless there is some 'whistleblowing' aspect to their activities), but perhaps I'm in the minority. 
whart's avatar
whart
3,144 posts
 
@cj1965- this thread has certainly morphed. Your initial complaint was that JA at Stereophile unfairly discriminated against those with contrary views by demanding their credentials, rather than focusing on the merits of the comment about a particular piece of gear or technology. Now, your view seems to be that the high end is ridden with bling, fluff and unwarranted performance claims. But, aren't you painting with too broad a brush? I don't find my longtime use of an LP player to be an exercise in nostalgia, but the reflection of decades of investment in the format that I would be hard pressed to duplicate in digital for many reasons, not the least being the cost of equipment delivering arguably comparable performance, leaving aside the difficulty, if not impossibility, of finding these recordings other than on early, and now hard to find pressings.
I'm not suggesting that one accept hyperbole, but few here do-- to the contrary, the best threads seem to focus on real world experience by a universe of users with no agenda other than sorting the wheat from the chaff. These are not credentialed reviewers, but people who put their own money into the various products and can speak with some authority about their experience. Wasn't that precisely what you were arguing for when you started this thread?
whart's avatar
whart
3,144 posts
 
@cj1965- I wasn't focused on turntables either. I was addressing the crux issue--dismissing a point of view rather than dealing with it on the merits. And suggested that forum users here aren't gullible, and offer a viewpoint that is valid, despite lacking credentials-- the very thing you take JA and Stereophile to task for at the outset. But, as I pointed out, you have now broadened the scope of the thread to dismiss a lot of high end as bling or marketing based, among other things, on nostalgia. And in that context, I raised a valid point about the merits of turntables based on considerable experience. You now suggest i start another thread on that subject, but it really goes to the heart of your original point, doesn't it? 

More to discover