Phono bake-off

[Daniel Quinn]

Commendable post Mr Bass .

I am not sure it is necessary to publically side with RD against any of his Bete noirs . Nobody is asking for a show of hands . indeed it is one of the reasons why attacks on RD and indeed H/S take the form of ad homnien ,because more often than not it is not possible to critique the message so all you are left with is the style of the post and the personality of the poster .

As you can see from the posts of pre , stragmangler , Mr ivimey , vinyl spinner etal below .

There is no law against middle men
there is no law against the level of profit margins
Any issue is thus a moral one

most people on this forum I would speculate agree that hifi as a hobby as a problem and that problem is ridiculously priced equipment with questionable efficacy , foo products, cut and past understanding and myopic marketing creating a neurosis to upgrade and part you from your money.

Most people on this forum are rather narcissistic and adopt the attitude "me I am a clever audiophile , I am not fooled by foo or high end prices , I can build stuff , I know what good sound quality is , silly people can do what they want , that isn't my problem its a free society , people can charge what they want if people are silly enough pay it"

forgive my pomposity but it such a sense of individualism that is largely responsible for the state we are in .

However , should somebody question the ridiculous situation then the least any of you can do is deal with content not personality

[Dave the bass]

Commendable post Mr Bass .

Thank you Mr Quinn.

[andrew Ivimey]

Other than this clarification by Danno to the Bass this thread is back on a merry-go-round carousel.

I'm getting off. There is no point.

[Nick]

However , should somebody question the ridiculous situation then the least any of you can do is deal with content not personality

I am sorry, but despite Richard suddenly falling to the ground and saying someone pushed him, this is not a case of bullying. Richard always it seems, makes himself the subject by his continuing use of first person. "I will always reply like this", "I will never back down" and so on (they are not specific examples but you should get the point). So then saying that the response is about the person not the subject is at best disingenuous.

Richard then complains that I am only replying to cherry picked parts of his posts as he sees it, so I reply to all of the post, and that seems to be wrong as well.

most people on this forum I would speculate agree that hifi as a hobby as a problem and that problem is ridiculously priced equipment with questionable efficacy , foo products, cut and past understanding and myopic marketing creating a neurosis to upgrade and part you from your money.

Most people on this forum are rather narcissistic and adopt the attitude "me I am a clever audiophile , I am not fooled by foo or high end prices , I can build stuff , I know what good sound quality is , silly people can do what they want , that isn't my problem its a free society , people can charge what they want if people are silly enough pay it"

forgive my pomposity but it such a sense of individualism that is largely responsible for the state we are in .

Again, like Richard and Greg, you presume to belive you know what people here think and what their feelings are about these things. Just because you say we are in a "state" doesn't make it so.

However , should somebody question the ridiculous situation then the least any of you can do is deal with content not personality

No one has a problem with someone questioning this, what the problem is when that person then keeps saying the same thing because we don’t happen to agree with him or care, suggests that people who I and others regard as friends should be killed, and then rail endlessly and rather boringly against a enemy faction that only he can see.

I agree that some on here have replied is a way that is less than ideal, but certainly not Dave, and I would say not Andrew.

Remember DQ, the person who you are defending has admitted in the past to outing someones sexuality on a forum because they were disagreeing with him.

[Dr Bunsen Honeydew]

"I am sorry, but despite Richard suddenly falling to the ground and saying someone pushed him, this is not a case of bullying. Richard always it seems, makes himself the subject by his continuing use of first person. "I will always reply like this", "I will never back down" and so on (they are not specific examples but you should get the point). So then saying that the response is about the person not the subject is at best disingenuous."

FFS that is so stupid and out of context. THEY ARE REPLIES to people who have decided I am the subject. I cannot reply without *I* because they have made it about *me*.

[Dr Bunsen Honeydew]

"Remember DQ, the person who you are defending has admitted in the past to outing someones sexuality on a forum because they were disagreeing with him."

YOU ARE LYING. you are quoting a meme, next you will be saying I am a fireraiser and nva amps are unsafe ANOTHER libelous meme.

You should get your facts right as this is libel.

[Nick]

It starts with

No way! if something needs reacting to I will react.

Then it becomes about you, because you make it about you by the way you react.

[Nick]

"Remember DQ, the person who you are defending has admitted in the past to outing someones sexuality on a forum because they were disagreeing with him."

YOU ARE LYING. you are quoting a meme, next you will be saying I am a fireraiser and nva amps are unsafe ANOTHER libelous meme.

You should get your facts right as this is libel.

Quote from your forum by you.

Well it seems TonyL is still fuming about me because I outed him. Well it seems the poor bitch is still :angry-screaming: BTW how can outing someone be homophobic they are doing it to each other all the time. Pink Fish Media started as a Californian gay media site. It was all a tease to wind him up because of the way he treated me with biased moderation, which clearly succeeded beyond all expectations.

[Daniel Quinn]

Nick , I am pretty sure speculation is not actually a plea to know a fact And by state I meant state of the nation

I also do not defend Richard ,I contextualise the responses of those that respond but refuse to deal with what he posts . Which I see you have now used a line of attack .

[Dr Bunsen Honeydew]

Again, which seems to be your method here - quoted out of context. The origins were very different, it started as a tease (too long and complicated to repeat the circumstances). He decided to create a vendetta about me and nva at PFM with no right of reply. So it was a "run with it because it winds him up so much". it was from a comment of an ex Mod, who is openly Gay, at the London bake off show that he is scared stiff of being outed. So because of spiteful bitchiness at PFM a mild joke turned into a get your own back. It was retaliation as it was the only weapon I had.

It is very simply solved, a truce is declared and the silliness on both sides will stop. But he threw so many toys out of his so many prams and feels he can hurt and damage nva to have it banned, even to be mentioned by name, at PFM. It doesn't and it wont.

In reality I couldn't give feck if he is Gay, I find it daft that in these days people are still scared to admit it. If I had something else to tease him about when the need arose I would use it. Examples of the desire to tease him are many, including members praising some nva product they have bought, thread is removed and often the member banned.

So not as you state, which is the libel, and out of context. If the same happened here and you created a vendetta against me and nva, I would find something to tease you about in return.

This is the beauty of HFS, without it I am shut off, now I cannot be shut up, and HFS is de rigueur for him to watch, as with many others, which makes him bounce up and down in his little pink socks (example of tease)

It is also another example of I will never give into or put up with bullying, and if needed will bully back.

[Daniel Quinn]

I remain ambivalent as to if bullying a bully is an appropriate response as it is probably deconstructive .

My eldest boy (12) was placed in isolation for a day for punching a lad at school. His justification was that this lad was strangling a girl and he would not stop.

I did not appreciate his machismo vigilante justification .

[Dr Bunsen Honeydew]

"No one has a problem with someone questioning this, what the problem is when that person then keeps saying the same thing because we don’t happen to agree with him or care, suggests that people who I and others regard as friends should be killed, and then rail endlessly and rather boringly against a enemy faction that only he can see."

Again playing with reality, who have said should be killed. I said hi-fi retailers should be killed off. The reasons being obvious, no longer needed but still taking the slurp.

[Dr Bunsen Honeydew]

Physical violence is a completely different thing DQ. Can you imagine a fight or a morning duel between me and Noddy, I wouldn't be able to keep a straight face.

[Nick]

I agree, bullying is never ok, but I don't as I said see any sign of group bullying here. I tried to keep Phil out of the exchange by deleting his first two posts (and immediately PMing as to why I had done so) but sadly he was to intent on getting a post in to notice the PM. I am sure if he was still here Greg would have had his dig as well. But to claim that Dave was bullying is (as Max has said better than me) is just incorrect.

[Dr Bunsen Honeydew]

It was a gang bang bully session that fed on itself, as mob behaviour usually does. DTB's two posts were off subject deliberate personal insult, and in my mind that is bullying in the context of the overall bully session. He was pointed at as they were so obvious.