HiFi Subjectivist ¦ Audio Forum ¦ NVA User Group

+1

I agree with joe, there is no way you can win an argument online, perhaps you can resolve one to your own satisfaction if you're easily pleased, but win? No?

Another good couple of rules, especially on the internet, are ...

Sir Winston Churchill - Never engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed man.

Mark Twain - Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference.

Then , like joe you would be wrong

It seems to me that the forums do perform one useful function....by demonstrating just how divergent all our views are. You don't get agreement on anything at all....the whole hobby is a form of anarchy, which is just fine. There are no gods in audio, although there are plenty of sinners.

There is now a prevalent view of hifi history which could be called the dark ages of the flat earth linn hegemony .

Once upon a time [ 8 or so years ago ] if you advocated this view of hifi history would be looked upon as a david icke fantasist . Now everyone subscribes to their own version . That is how forums change opinion and this forum and RD did more than most.

Daniel Quinn wrote:Then , like joe you would be wrong

As long as you think you're right, that's all that really matters.

O Joe there is no point at all in being a group of 1.

Daniel Quinn wrote:O Joe there is no point at all in being a group of 1.

As I have already signalled my agreement with joe's previous statement I believe that means WE are in a group of 2 rather than joe being in a group of one as per your erroneous statement. It would appear to be you who are in the group of one, not joe.
Apology accepted D.Q. Don't even bother to write it down; joe and I will take it as read.

FFS don't have arguments about having arguments

Dr Bunsen Honeydew wrote:FFS don't have arguments about having arguments

No argument here. I'm just agreeing to differ from DQ.