Julf wrote: > Could we please keep the discussion factual instead of descending into > silly ad hominems? First, ad hominems -can be- factual. But I get your point that you want the thread to focus on the facts of the topic, not fact or fiction about members. Your request would be so much more powerful if you applied it evenly to both those you agree with and those you disagree with. I believe keeping those -with whom you agree- on the high road is more important, but thats just me. And how would you suggest one responds to this: arnyk wrote: > Prove it. I debated whether to post or PM drmatt or PM arnyk or just sit on the proof. I dont have links ready to go, but the right keywords will lead anyone to 4 or 5 biggies. Rather than belabor this further, Ill let Arny decide how I should respond. Does he really want to relive this "proof"?
Julf, I think it would be great if all members focussed on the substance, the topics, the facts about audio and not the people, but many members here attack audiophiles, placebophiles, cool-aid drinkers and believers (in the wrong beliefs). If you would call on all members uniformly to attack myths, wrong beliefs or fallacies, rather than the holders thereof, this would be a better place. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ docbob's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=64780 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105717
_______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
