Improving ASR as a member/moderator

[krabapple]

Unfortunately I think that this is often due to DAC B (its cross-eyed snaggle-toothed cousin), being shown to have 0.0003db better SINAD.
Often here.
My 2c.

That's blaming the messenger, when the culprit is the person misreading the message.

 

[Sokel]

That's blaming the messenger, when the culprit is the person misreading the message.

No, is just that people find comfort to authority (of the reviewer usually, no matter if objective or subjective) and don't look at the charts or have no way to interpret them any other way.

This couple of better THD+N figure screams better sound quality in their minds, they have no other way to justify a glorified review.
And there comes disappointment after they get it, and there comes doubt, etc, the usual full circle.

Specially when science is the brand, as if science finds are a settled matter and not the exact opposite.

 

[krabapple]

No, is just that people find comfort to authority (of the reviewer usually, no matter if objective or subjective) and don't look at the charts or have no way to interpret them any other way.

This couple of better THD+N figure screams better sound quality in their minds, they have no other way to justify a glorified review.
And there comes disappointment after they get it, and there comes doubt, etc, the usual full circle.

in other words...they misread the message of SINAD numbers

 

[Chr1]

No. They don't understand their relevance.
Or lack thereof.

The problem being that it is not always clear to newbies. Making this clearer would be helpful imho.

 

[Sokel]

in other words...they misread the message of SINAD numbers

No. They don't understand their relevance.

Both.
But that's not the problem.
The problem is that they end up with say, couple of DACs, an old -105dB THD+N/ 1kHz and a new -120dB THD+N/1kHz one and they can hear no difference (obviously, with music at home and speakers) .

Who do you think they blame after that? What's the nature of their doubts?
Expectation is a bitch.

 

[krabapple]

No. They don't understand their relevance.
Or lack thereof.

Again, something 'misreading' encompasses.

Ah, semantic argument, the Intenet loves it.

 

[amper42]

The SINAD chart comparing audio devices is meaningless for anything over 105dB.
It offers the illusion of higher is better without any mention of quality or features.
You learn to ignore it once you have actually tried some of these devices in your audio system.
Higher SINAD may indicate a better design but its certainly not a guarantee.
I found the feature set of the device is 1000% more important.

 

[krabapple]

Please let this thread not become yet another rehashing of the meaning of SINAD.

 

[Audionaut]

So not just hard on moderators but members too

When I look at the team of moderators at ASR, I see Amir and you, Rick.
That's it.
When I put that in relation to the number of members, I find it amazing on the positive side that the forum is largely free of major tensions.
It's probably not as tension-free as I perceive it to be, but that's down to your moderation, which I have always found to be appropriate to the situation and pleasant on a human level.
So, from me, you get positive feedback in every respect, combined with the wish that you continue to enjoy moderating here at ASR for a long time to come.

 

[RickS]

My post was not criticism...

Just saying that some come on here just to get banned and stir the pot.
I have nothing against banning those folks... on the contrary.

As for the 'ill informed' .. yep.. tough call to say which person is simply misinformed and which are/turn into trolls.
In any case ... addressing the misinformation they are spreading is important even if just trolling.

Let's just say I am glad it is not my job and feel that in the majority of 'bannings' it seems to have been appropriate in mpov.

Btw, if seemed defensive, was not intended. Despite the accusation by detractors that ASR members reject those with differing opinions, the staff tries to keep that in balance. A couple of higher profile bans many have helped drive this misconception, but Amir tends to be fairly tolerant. The staff has usually followed his lead as well.

Think most would agree that it is incorrect to take a few outlier cases and conclude that there is a tendency to ban opposing opinion. However, this misconception is readily reinforced as current AI shortcomings tend to focus on the complaints rather the overall more positive result. AI also seems to struggle to differentiate between a moderated forum, free speech platforms and platforms that actively censor member content. ASR has been more focused on human bias as a factor in audio decisions. Am seeing that members are pushing back hard on comparable biases in AI models. AI bias is likely a topic in need of its own thread, but wanted to share my observation as it relates to this one.

 

[Mort]

Despite the accusation by detractors that ASR members reject those with differing opinions

But we do. I mean that's the whole point of site.

When the vegans troll the barbeque site, the meat eaters are entitled to reject veganism.

 

[Mnyb]

But we do. I mean that's the whole point of site.

When the vegans troll the barbeque site, the meat eaters are entitled to reject veganism.

I prefer when the astrologist pester the astronomy sites asking for horoscopes

 

[RickS]

But we do. I mean that's the whole point of site.

When the vegans troll the barbeque site, the meat eaters are entitled to reject veganism.

I understand but there is a difference between rejecting the individual preference and rejecting the individual entirely (as bans tend to do).

 

[Satiomeliom]

Been thinking about writing a "Discussion 101" at some point.
Heated arguments usually should be avoided, but they can be seen as a symptom of how far apart the opinions are. Where there is truth, there must be tension. A great discussion can be exhausting in that regard. As long as there are enough facts left in a conversation or statements that point to facts, one must ignore any personal remarks to keep the discussion going.

 

[BlueTunes]

Been thinking about writing a "Discussion 101" at some point.
Heated arguments usually should be avoided, but they can be seen as a symptom of how far apart the opinions are. Where there is truth, there must be tension. A great discussion can be exhausting in that regard. As long as there are enough facts left in a conversation or statements that point to facts, one must ignore any personal remarks to keep the discussion going.

Second only to banning, i also detest the labeling of a forummer as a "troll".
It is basically forum bullying and only aims to cancel and negate someone you are opposed to (for whatever reason) with the minimum of effort.
I just searched the forum for the term. Bingo, 1st result was someone leaving the forum before he started (17 posts) because he was "trolled".
It is a debate killer and forum kryptonite.

Anyone using it should have to explain themselves back out of a weeks time-out.

 

[RickS]

I've only noticed this thread today, hence my comments now.
In the OP, you insinuate you are on your own? I hope not. Moderation is a thankless task born by those who sacrifice their time for the good of others to the benefit of the topic they cherish.
You get the odd narcasist mods, (go see Reddit lol) but that a fault of the Admin, not the forum.

I hope you have got help and are not continuing to do this a-mono.

My opinion on moderation comes from my time as a moderator on a forum that really didn't bother with it much, save to keep out the odd bot or mute a forummer or topic that had gone nuts (and that was only a short time-out and only for the very worst of stuff which usually meant something, something legal lol).

The forum didn't need it.
Nobody posted porn or NSFW stuff because, well, it was just crass and the forum was better than that.
Arguments generally sorted themselves out.
Actual trolls got jumped on by the others until they shut up.
Bots were immediately spotted and reported.

This meant that mods could forum and not be overwhelmed reading every post or thread which would have made the job miserable.

Keep up the good work.

Thanks, but appears you missed the point of my OP. I may have the sole moderator title but do not operate without support from Amir and other members. For the most part, ASR does self-moderate, but as you note, there are exception situations and someone has to handle those. ASR is very popular and objectively taking on the industry hype has made it a target. This stance means that we also encounter more hard-line push back from those who may be ignorant or apathetic to audio science.

 

[RickS]

Been thinking about writing a "Discussion 101" at some point.
Heated arguments usually should be avoided, but they can be seen as a symptom of how far apart the opinions are. Where there is truth, there must be tension. A great discussion can be exhausting in that regard. As long as there are enough facts left in a conversation or statements that point to facts, one must ignore any personal remarks to keep the discussion going.

Might help if you can get folks to read. Credibility would also be key. IF for ASR member consumption, it would need Amir's support.

 

[Satiomeliom]

Might help if you can get folks to read. Credibility would also be key. IF for ASR member consumption, it would need Amir's support.

Yeah its propably not going to happen but i will let you know in case i manage to compile my thoughts. Thank you ^^

 

[Audionaut]

Been thinking about writing a "Discussion 101" at some point.

However, there are already 1001 models for this.
In my opinion, one of the most useful is Ruth Cohn's model of theme-centered interaction (TCI). Some of the discussions here in the forum could perhaps be conducted in a more relaxed manner if people remembered TCI.
TCI describes group communication as a balance between three factors: I – We – Topic.
I: One's own perspective, experience, and opinion.
We: The group and how we interact with each other.
Topic: The actual subject of the discussion.

Many forum debates eventually lose this balance.
This is usually because the I dominates ("I know better") and the We is damaged (personal jibes), often causing the topic to disappear completely.

Just a quick interjection on my part, but it won't change anything on ASR.

 

[sonitus mirus]

Maybe we need a subjectivist corner where they can post whatever they want.

The 'courteous' subjectivist thread.

Subjectivists are hardly short on places to post their views. They are free to post them here too. The difference is that here people can respond, disagree, and ask for evidence without that being treated as misconduct. The occasional timeout from the mods is also reasonable, not as punishment for dissent, but when the same claims are repeated ad nauseam after ample contrary data has already been presented.