Are you trying to win some sort of "most obnoxious" prize?
Yes... and I am winning !
I think you are misinterpreting this.
Those that DID claim they could tell the difference and posted their results had made a guess while they thought they could hear it and they chose ever so slightly (as in coin toss result) in favor of the 0.02 Percent distortion over no distortion. Coin toss difference really !
The 0.3% was a bit easier to hear. The 3% distortion was even clearer to pick out.
Is it possible (obnoxious as I am) that there was no 'clear preference' for 0.02% versus no added distortion that the difference between no distortion and 0.02% distortion is equally inaudible and can't be really told apart but is due to 'gambling' as in 50-50 outcome of any BT without an obvious difference ?
So you disagree with the conclusion that was drawn by the tester himself ?
when we look at the average responses as a "group of audiophiles", we can see that there is still a preference for the "low distortion" samples B (-175dB/0.0000002%) and C (-75dB/0.02%) over the "high distortion" samples A (-50dB/0.3%) and D (-30dB/3%).
What I can say from the "objective" results based on this blind test is that as a group, listeners still prefer the sound of lower non-linear distortion
The fact that you conclude most people have a preference for 0.02% distortion (-75dB) is a conclusion you drew.
Flip a coin 62 times in a row and you get the same 'spread' as that between those that said they could hear a difference.
Add to that those that can hear differences between the 3% file and other files will state they heard differences and rightfully so (as well as expected).
Claiming that all of these individuals had a (clear) preference for 0.02% over no added distortion is just ... well... misinterpretation ?
(sorry for the obnoxiousness, I can't help it)