Then you haven't read this thread, the one before it and the same one on every other forum!
Speaking of reading, the present progressive tense in that and the following sentence should indicate to you that I'm focusing on
now, not the past. If it helps to improve clarity, you can insert "now" in each of the sentences.
Those people can't read. I have not advocated MQA in any form or fashion. As I have said 1000 times, I am here to correct misinformation posted about it. If something is wrong, it needs to be corrected. That is what objectivity is about. Caring about truth and reality. You can't turn a blind eye to someone saying wrong things about MQA just because you hate it too.
Proxies are not necessarily fanatic cheerleaders or obvious vocal advocates. You've quite clearly been providing the types of technical answers that MQA would like to have provided.
Heck. You've even said your purpose is to
"make sure incorrect technical or business/industry information is not spread." Your the one who proclaimed yourself a watchdog for business/industry who is out to correct bad consumers.
That being said, you've gone well beyond simple analysis and technical corrections of misinformation. Look at the number of ad hominem attacks you've made in this post alone? That's not objectivism.
As to closed formats, you all consume it a million times a day so don't come complaining about that. You use an iPhone? Can you download your favorite apps and pay for it how you want? You can't right? You play netflix? It has DRM and encryption. You watch cable to Satellite TV? Ditto wih their conditional access and closed terminals. So don't tell you care about closed formats. You could care less if you weren't agitated to have this fight over MQA.
I'm not a fan of any closed format, but especially the unnecessary use of one when an open format alternative exists.
I've also been a serious advocate of all forms of openness--open source, open access, open content, open formats--since you were employed in an antithesis culture at Microsoft, during Microsoft's heyday of FUD about open source and engagement in monopolistic behaviors.
But hey. If you really want to engage in whataboutism, how about starting a new discussion about open formats and the audio industry? You might find it enlightening. Even Microsoft has grown in its attitudes towards openness in the last ten years. Have you seen the Edge browser?
I have never seen so many people lose sight of what is relevant and what is not. Two major content distributors have announced high-res audio without MQA and you still worry what marketing this little company has done? You have been manipulated into becoming foot soldiers to fight someone else's battle and you don't even realize it.
Why the double standard? You feel you must point out technical misinterpretation, but other people can't point out the other issues they see with MQA, simply because
you say it might fail?
I'm sure MQA agrees with you. Great that Amir is correcting all of those bad consumers regarding technical information, and then shutting down their other criticisms. He's doing a great job at changing the current narrative. What a good proxy!
So I'll repeat my questions, because it sounds like you need to answer them for yourself
Why did you appoint yourself MQA's proxy? Why didn't you decide to stay more neutral?