The problem with the Ad-Hom rule on here?

Forum for admin topics, member introductions and general non-hifi chitchat.
NSNO2021
Posts: 1007
Joined: Thu Jul 04, 2019 1:06 pm
Location: Industrial waste lands of the north west
Has thanked: 559 times
Been thanked: 487 times
Great Britain

Re: The problem with the Ad-Hom rule on here?

Unread post by NSNO2021 »

Daniel Quinn wrote: Mon Oct 26, 2020 3:02 pm The 'It's now 50.45' posts were aimed at showing the measurements over 24 hours. It was argued that this varied significantly. I was proving it didn't.

I find it no surprise that the people moaning have a vested interest.

Finally, I fail to see lurchers point. On his own forum he doesn't have any rules. Deos he think the group consensus is better. I refer you to posts of Rd. He was forced to intervene.

It sounds to me like bleating.
I have zero vested interest in any commercial aspect relating to this forum. And for the avoidance of doubt I don't care for your bombastic, intolerant style of debate so you can firmly put me in your moaning, bleating category.
Modified Airlink BPS 3110S with LDA DC filter
TTs, Kenwood KD 8030 with AT OC9XSH, Opera Consonance Wax Engine mk2 with modified Apheta 2 MC cart, PT TOO awaiting restoration.
LDA MCJ3 phono,Schiit Freya plus pre amp, NAD M23, Audiolab 9000 CD transport, Denafrips Pontus 2 DAC, Mano Ultra2 streamer, Cisco switch, Audio Technica ATH 70 cans, Serhan Swift Mu2 mk2 speakers & NSNO W48.5 speaker cables

Lurcher300b
Posts: 933
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2016 1:58 pm
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 16 times

Re: The problem with the Ad-Hom rule on here?

Unread post by Lurcher300b »

Finally, I fail to see lurchers point. On his own forum he doesn't have any rules. Deos he think the group consensus is better. I refer you to posts of Rd. He was forced to intervene.
That's misleading, my "intervention" consisted of posting in the thread and a happy conclusion was finally reached. At no time were posts removed or changed.
The 'It's now 50.45' posts were aimed at showing the measurements over 24 hours. It was argued that this varied significantly. I was proving it didn't.
That's an example of your use of false statements to change the argument in your favor. No one was arguing that it varied significantly (whatever that means). You started by saying it didn't change. I pointed out that it did, You then started to argue as if "never changing" was identical to "only a bit". A debating trick, but not of any help in the context of the topic as I had already pointed out that the frequency was not the defining factor. But because you seem to want to win at all cost, you chose to ignore that and try and force me into arguing on your terms about something I had no interest in.

If you had really wanted to "show the measurements over 24 hours" you could have just referred to a graph that showed those measurements over a 24 hour period.

And if all fails, claim "vested interest" which is of course in the "have you stopped beating your wife" category and impossible to answer in a neutral and fair way.

Daniel Quinn
Posts: 8586
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2012 7:16 am
Has thanked: 24 times
Been thanked: 399 times

Re: The problem with the Ad-Hom rule on here?

Unread post by Daniel Quinn »

You were being disingenous when you simply stated it varied.

And I looked for alternative explanations. And of course moaning about my accusation of a vested interest, doesn't mean you hav'nt got one. Your posts lead me to believe thats the explanation.
Last edited by Daniel Quinn on Mon Oct 26, 2020 5:13 pm, edited 3 times in total.

User avatar
CN211276
Posts: 6522
Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2016 9:29 am
Location: Cardiff
Has thanked: 1401 times
Been thanked: 976 times
EUROPEAN_UNION

Re: The problem with the Ad-Hom rule on here?

Unread post by CN211276 »

valvesRus wrote: Mon Oct 26, 2020 3:55 pm
savvypaul wrote: Mon Oct 26, 2020 3:43 pm Get stuck in and fight it out, chaps. It is the only way we (might) make progress. And it is preferable to snide remarks and snipes that are crafted to stay just within the rules.
This topic needs input from many others, It does not need to be just an adversarial exchange between DQ and myself.
The forum rules are quite clear and I do not see a problem with the Ad -Hom one.
These users thanked the author CN211276 for the post:
Lindsayt (Mon Oct 26, 2020 5:29 pm)
Main System
NVA BMU, P90SA/A80s (latest spec), Cube 1s, TIS, TISC(LS7)
Sonore OpticalRendu, Chord Mscaler & Qutest, Sbooster PSs
Network Acoustics Eno, ifi iPurifier3, AQ JB FMJ, Cisco 2940 & 2960
DH Labs ethernet, BNC & USB cables, Farnells cat 8 ethernet cable

Second System
NVA P20/ A20, Cubettes, LS3, SSP, SC
Sonore MicroRendu, Chord Mojo 2 MCRU PSs, AQ Carbon USB cable & JB FMJ

Headphones
Grado SR325e/Chord Mojo, Beyerdynamic Avetho/AQ DF Colbat

RIP Doc

User avatar
savvypaul
Posts: 8635
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 7:14 pm
Location: Durham
Has thanked: 1657 times
Been thanked: 2978 times
Contact:
Great Britain

Re: The problem with the Ad-Hom rule on here?

Unread post by savvypaul »

valvesRus wrote: Mon Oct 26, 2020 3:55 pm
savvypaul wrote: Mon Oct 26, 2020 3:43 pm Get stuck in and fight it out, chaps. It is the only way we (might) make progress. And it is preferable to snide remarks and snipes that are crafted to stay just within the rules.
This topic needs input from many others, It does not need to be just an adversarial exchange between DQ and myself.
A high proportion of your posts here have been responses to DQ. I think I referred to you as DQ's stalker at one point.

The sub text of most of your responses to DQ has been 'I don't like the 'way' that DQ responds (I would find it more impressive if you addressed 'what' DQ states in his responses).

After 18 months of the above, and with the gift of an un-moderated thread, I expected something more significant than 'would somebody else please join in'.

Yes, DQ can be abrasive, curt, occasionally rude, but at least he is creating original content about hi-fi.
These users thanked the author savvypaul for the post:
Lindsayt (Mon Oct 26, 2020 6:30 pm)
I am in the hi-fi trade
Status: Manufacturer
Company Name: NVA Hi-Fi
https://nvahifi.co.uk/

valvesRus
Posts: 562
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2018 2:34 pm
Has thanked: 25 times
Been thanked: 63 times
Great Britain

Re: The problem with the Ad-Hom rule on here?

Unread post by valvesRus »

Daniel Quinn wrote: Mon Oct 26, 2020 4:54 pm
You were being disengenous when you simply stated is varied.
DQ, I know you have (or would like us to think you have ) a vast grasp of the English language, but disengenous (sic) is not a word you could ever apply to Nick. Had you had the chance to get to know him you would realise that.

valvesRus
Posts: 562
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2018 2:34 pm
Has thanked: 25 times
Been thanked: 63 times
Great Britain

Re: The problem with the Ad-Hom rule on here?

Unread post by valvesRus »

savvypaul wrote: Mon Oct 26, 2020 5:04 pm

Yes, DQ can be abrasive, curt, occasionally rude, but at least he is creating original content about hi-fi.
It has been known. :lol:

User avatar
savvypaul
Posts: 8635
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 7:14 pm
Location: Durham
Has thanked: 1657 times
Been thanked: 2978 times
Contact:
Great Britain

Re: The problem with the Ad-Hom rule on here?

Unread post by savvypaul »

valvesRus wrote: Mon Oct 26, 2020 5:06 pm
savvypaul wrote: Mon Oct 26, 2020 5:04 pm

Yes, DQ can be abrasive, curt, occasionally rude, but at least he is creating original content about hi-fi.
It has been known. :lol:
Why the laughing face?

If you think DQ is rude, explain why, and explain why it bothers you.
I am in the hi-fi trade
Status: Manufacturer
Company Name: NVA Hi-Fi
https://nvahifi.co.uk/

valvesRus
Posts: 562
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2018 2:34 pm
Has thanked: 25 times
Been thanked: 63 times
Great Britain

Re: The problem with the Ad-Hom rule on here?

Unread post by valvesRus »

savvypaul wrote: Mon Oct 26, 2020 5:12 pm
valvesRus wrote: Mon Oct 26, 2020 5:06 pm
savvypaul wrote: Mon Oct 26, 2020 5:04 pm

Yes, DQ can be abrasive, curt, occasionally rude, but at least he is creating original content about hi-fi.
It has been known. :lol:
Why the laughing face?

If you think DQ is rude, explain why, and explain why it bothers you.
Sorry for not making myself clear. The comment was in reference to "but at least he is creating original content about hi-fi."

Your posting about "Yes, DQ can be abrasive, curt, occasionally rude, " is spot on, and I don't think anyone would disagree with YOUR assessment.

Lurcher300b
Posts: 933
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2016 1:58 pm
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 16 times

Re: The problem with the Ad-Hom rule on here?

Unread post by Lurcher300b »

but at least he is creating original content about hi-fi.
If anything, that's the bit I would question. If he was creating original content, then it would cancel any other negative over his posting style. But all I generally see is a self promoted Richard "mini me" without any of the originals whit or understanding, and I just see the repetition of dogma. But I am clearly biased and only out for my own interests.

Post Reply