DUP was not "Non Stereophile Compliant", he was just rude, a bullying bore, and most of the time made no sense whatsoever. The complaint's not his point of view, it's his inability to respect ANY other view than his own (which everyone is still a little confused about, heheh).

Look at the forum closely and you'll see every stripe of music lover, gear-head and whatever in between. But it can only work if we can all have some base line of respect and allow a conversation to grow organically. Jumping in and posting a repetitive rant between every other post is not wanting conversation, it's just wanting to be the center of attention. Like a kid who's knocking stuff over, pushing other kids around and yelling "look at me!!!" DUP needed another Time Out. Why is an online forum ANY different than any other public space? You play by the rules or don't play, it's simple really.

DUP was a lot less rude than some other members on these forums who are just as preachy and hard to take. At least he made good points and he stuck to the core issues of the argument rather than engage in amateur psycho-babble as some others have done. If there is banning to be done, let it be done even handedly. Otherwise, let it work itself out.

Has Stereophile ever banned anyone for out right lies about the properties of their high priced BS cables?

Then why the heck ban the only one who tells the truth about this sordid business?

Your Pal & Audiophile

Louballoo

LB, I'm running to the nearest high end emporium to purchase my own set of "high priced BS cables" to protest all the whiny, populist crusaders who claim to speak for the greater good of all audiophiles. Then I'm going to download all your posts and throw my computer away (apologies to Mr. Wilde).

my daughter was over earlier who teaches high school and read the forum over my shoulder with amusement as i explained this post and the issue of dup's second ban for now 90 days. as she so plainly stated, "it does not matter how much he brings to the table in constructive discussion in terms of his knowledge (up for debate in itself but that is another point) but if he is that disruptive to the column, treats fellow contributors with little or no respect and repeats himself to the point of driving everyone nuts, then there has to be a guideline for punishment." in this case censorship for 30 days did not make a difference in his manners and style. so ja and sm upped the punishment to 90 days. hopefully this will teach dup a lesson as i personally think he has a lot of positive to contribute, he just does not present it in any form of positve manner. this type of censorship tells all who use the forum that it is for free exchange of ideas to the limit of good taste.

OK Kids, recess is over! Get back to class!

Before this denigrates into direct name calling and even more active demonstrations of disrespect, let's get back to discussing audio.

Quote:
OK Kids, recess is over! Get back to class!

Before this denigrates into direct name calling and even more active demonstrations of disrespect, let's get back to discussing audio.

Discuss audio?

How boring :-)

Quote:
DUP was a lot less rude than some other members on these forums who are just as preachy and hard to take. At least he made good points and he stuck to the core issues of the argument rather than engage in amateur psycho-babble as some others have done.

http://forum.stereophile.com/forum/postlist.php?Cat=0&Board=DeadZone

Quote:
The extreme vast number of audiophiles I know..will have nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with any internet board, as they rightfully feel that they are filled with vile and attack prone assholes. And these kind, gentle, and reasonable folk have no time for such utter crap in their lives.

Wow. This thread is now on six pages and counting. I guess I'm not helping by adding to it. But there is a real issue.

The quote above shares the feeling of at least three audiophile friends I know. All three, in my opinion, know much more about audio than I. For one of those three, audio is his profession. Although I tell them about my experiences here and seek their advice, I ask whether they are interested in contributing to this forum due to their knowledge and experience. So far, their negative response is always communicated kindly, but unquestionably clearly.

Just read JV's response to DUP in the dead zone.

JV has often baited DUP , sometimes DUP responds with a mildly harsh response.

I have never seen DUP resort to the vulgar name calling that JV used ,

I don't think either should be banned, but if DUP is banned then JV should be banned as well.

IMO, any other action is hypocritical.

People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

People, stop already.

Truce!

Back away from the keyboard . . .

Quote:
Just read JV's response to DUP in the dead zone.

JV has often baited DUP , sometimes DUP responds with a mildly harsh response.

I have never seen DUP resort to the vulgar name calling that JV used ,

I don't think either should be banned, but if DUP is banned then JV should be banned as well.

IMO, any other action is hypocritical.

I'm with you on that one.

Quote:
People, stop already.

Truce!

Back away from the keyboard . . .

How about showing some good faith in your readership and accept that scepticism of advertizers claims is no reason to ban audiophiles.

Lets free DUP. I'm sure you will find him a less aggresive person when the cards are not continually stacked against him.

The day when Stereophile will side with its readership is just around the corner. I am sure there are plans in the works to bring an objective journalist into the stereophile staff.

It must happen if Stereophile wishes to retain any credibility at all.

Your Pal

Louballoo

This has exactly ZERO to do with The Man keeping the objectivists down. It has everything to do with DUP being a perpetual nuisance. I could give two shakes if DUP doesn't like expensive wires and low-powered amplifiers. Big deal. I recognize his opinions as those shared by many people in this hobby. The issue is his behavior. Period.

This is not "Stereophile vs. readers". There is no conspiracy. Now take a road trip to Roswell and don't come back until you can tell us who really shot JFK.

Quote:
............ I could give two shakes if DUP doesn't like expensive wires and low-powered amplifiers. Big deal. I recognize his opinions as those shared by many people in this hobby.............

If as you say there are many in this hobby that share DUPs views - why then is there no one on Stereophiles staff that also shares this reasoning?

Times are changing and I think many of the current reviewers are already considering alternate professions for when the inevatable comes and steady stream of BS is universally recognized for what it is.

Your Pal and Audiophile

Louballoo

Agreed.

Opinions are fine with me, just not the same one for everything. It has bothered me when threads get out of hand and off topic.

I don't find it unfortunate that DUP was banned again, whether right or wrong. What is unfortunate is that after the first ban he did not change what he did to get banned the first time. Stereophile has given us the Privledge , not right to use this forum, which we should all remember.

Quote:

Quote:
............ I could give two shakes if DUP doesn't like expensive wires and low-powered amplifiers. Big deal. I recognize his opinions as those shared by many people in this hobby.............

If as you say there are many in this hobby that share DUPs views - why then is there no one on Stereophiles staff that also shares this reasoning?

Times are changing and I think many of the current reviewers are already considering alternate professions for when the inevatable comes and steady stream of BS is universally recognized for what it is.

Your Pal and Audiophile

Louballoo

Good question, Louballoo. Why would the staff of a magazine dedicated to the notion that components sound different from one another not include people who don't think components sound different than one another?

Seems like a slam dunk.

Wine Spectator maintains staff that think all wines taste the same, and Road and Track has a stable of drivers who only want to cruise to work listening to XM..."A car is a car, just so long as it has a cup holder and a radio.." So, Stereophile should have staff to use space telling readers all this stuff sounds the same. Yup, that'll preserve the health of the magazine, for sure!

There are plenty of sites that exist in the realm of DUP, I don't understand his jihad against this site and those who wish to discuss matters with which he disagrees. (In fact, DUP does not exist on any of the other audio foums I visit. I wonder why he chose only this forum to bless with his presence? You'd think DUP would be happily spamming all the audio forums, but that doesn't seem to be that case. I wonder why? I would wager because no other forums would have been as tolerant as Stereophile was.)

With DUP, it was not a matter of his belief that his Hi Fi work in this world is done, and all other expense is folly, it was his unceasing spamming of conversations that impaired conversation he disagreed with that did him in.

How many times does a vinyl forum need DUP spamming it with endlessly supercilious anti-vinyl
topics before the owner of the board is allowed to ask him to stop it? When he won't cease and desist, is it the forum owner's obligation to support DUP's First Ammendment rights at what the owner perceives to be the detriment of the forum?

This is not a public square, this is private property. If Stereophile felt that DUP was, on the balance, more of a detriment to their party than an asset, why isn't it fair to ask him to leave?

There is a wide variety of perspectives on the hobby represented here, including many "objectivists," yet DUP was the only one asked to leave. Ethan Winer is as hard core an objectivist as I can think of, yet he is held in exceedingly high regard by me and many members.

The "DUP Situation" (it's the 15th anniversary of the release of Pulp Fiction today, hence the obtuse reference) was brought about by DUP's insistence on entering into threads in a disruptive manner that inhibited the conversational process.

DUP was prone to spamming questions about 300 dollar pairs of speakers with links to 2000 dollar per pair Legacy speakers accompanied by endless watts/slam tirades - independent of the topic at hand. DUP interrupted vinyl discussions with anti-vinyl spamming. DUP, at one point, had evolved a tactic of trying to fill up the entire first page of the analog and cable forums with redundant anti-vinyl/anti-cable topics.

I actually have no clue why he wanted to hang out at an audiophile site.

In the gaming world, they have a term for people who exist only to foil the experience of other gamers...a "griefer."

DUP had become an "audio-griefer."

Check the Dead Zone and do a quick survey of who generated the majority of the dead posts.

This was not about his being an objectivist. We have plenty of those, but only DUP and his prolific sabotage of discourse raised his output to a level at which JA and Stephen finally said, "Basta."

Nicely, and objectively, summarized, Buddha.

Ethan is a great example of a wonderful contributor with strongly held views, expressed respectfully.

Hi Buddha.
Thanks so much for taking the time to explain this situation. I think you've summed it up very well. And now, I'm going to close this thread. I hope you all don't mind too much. If you do, please feel free to start a new thread in Rants n Raves.

Thanks again, everyone, for sharing your comments and concerns.