You are here

Log in or register to post comments
dormston
dormston's picture
Offline
Last seen: 9 years 10 months ago
Joined: Jun 1 2007 - 12:05pm
DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?

Interested to see what some folks might think about this decision?

As a newbie to this site I have no biase whatever, however, DUP has provided me with superb links to some of the more obscure sites I could ever think about...equally the comments in some of the posts I have read are just so stupid that DUP probably does some typing whilst testing wine (or something equally brain killing...) and lets it go with both triggers when the mood takes...

He / she /it is obviously a one off and unique character with a stunning knowledge and very fixed opinion about many aspects of this totally crazy hobby. A free spirit with some real nasty, but truthful and heartfelt bite...who might depart this site...(?) or sad idiot locked in chains for the next month and deserves all the punishment possible?

bobedaone
bobedaone's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 years 5 months ago
Joined: Feb 1 2007 - 12:27am
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?

I have mixed feelings about DUP, also known as Carl Engebretsen (see John Atkinson's gallery for a picture). I'm a relative newcomer, myself. DUP can raise some interesting points, and is not as stupid as the character he plays. That being said, he's a constant irritant who butts in on threads and goes off-topic, or creates his own posts that never really deviate from his common theme. It's difficult to put him on "ignore" because others respond to him, causing context loss.

Do I dislike the guy? Not really. He's never said anything that quite offended me personally. At least he has a sense of humor.

Do I agree with the ban? That's harder to answer. I trust Stephen and John's judgment, and am relieved that it's a temporary banishment. I am very against censorship, especially online. However, DUP's behavior often prevents others from enjoying themselves here. It's a fine line we're walking.

I support the ban insofar as it allows people with knowledge and experience to share (like Jan Vigne, for instance) to do so unhindered. DUP isn't always wrong, but he has helped me far less than most other forum members whose input I value a great deal.

That's my two cents.

ohfourohnine
ohfourohnine's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Sep 1 2005 - 7:41pm
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?

What I or anyone else might think about the decision regarding Carl's participation in this forum doesn't matter in the least. The action doesn't amount to censorship of the net, but only management of this privately provided discussion forum. Those responsible have done what they are entitled to do.

On the other hand, I can see why you might think it appropriate to raise the question - getting one's two cents in is all the rage these days. Look at talk radio and twenty-four hour "news". Given the prevailing environment, I guess it's difficult to recognize that most of what JA and Stephen, and Britney Spears for that matter, do is none of anyone else's business.

dormston
dormston's picture
Offline
Last seen: 9 years 10 months ago
Joined: Jun 1 2007 - 12:05pm
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?

My motives behind the question were not to be fashionable, voyueristic or biased in any way. I was hoping that by joining forums on a site so highly respected on a global basis as this is (?) that underpinning all the nasty / silly / brain dead rubbish that I would find the creme de la creme winning through all, or most of the time...eventually...

I also trust the moderators / editors otherwise I would have not joined in the first place...I would have went to any one of around fifty other sites...

What we (both you and I) are doing within maybe a couple of hours of me making the post are stirring up HUGE and INSTANT reaction of some kind...and it will be interesting to see further responses...

Rulers moderate...or should that be moderators rule!

Britney does what?

Jeff Wong
Jeff Wong's picture
Offline
Last seen: 11 years 3 months ago
Joined: Sep 6 2005 - 3:28am
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?

I'm sure the decision was difficult for Stephen and John. No doubt, they struggled with free speech issues, and understandably so. But, it was probably the right decision; there are times when someone or something impinges on the ability of others to conduct themselves freely, and something must be done about it. DUP has more often than not disrupted the free flow of thematic threads. I tolerated his monomania for over 1000 posts and eventually had enough (and I've actually been to the guy's home!) Even though I eventually put him on 'ignore', I found myself less and less interested in participating in the forum--too much DUP, too much negativity. I miss the regularity of posts from the likes of Buddha and Clifton. I'm thrilled with the input of Elk and Erik, and Jan (when he or she isn't sparring with Carl).

lionelag
lionelag's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 5 months ago
Joined: Apr 18 2007 - 9:40am
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?

Monomania is the perfect word for it. While I have my own odd gear obsessions, as I presume most people with our hobby do, you don't see me dragging Dynaco or Dual into every conversation, nor do I attack anyone who questions why I have a fascination with gear that was last highly rated when I was a child. DUP sometimes posts interesting stuff, but as good as Van Alstine's products are (and his Dynaco ST-70 and PAS-3 mods, for an example, are legendary), most of the reason I read Stereophile, and these forums, is to learn about new stuff, not argue the merits of the same stuff over and over again. There's a tendency for DUP to suck all the oxygen out of the room.

And frankly, some arguments have long since become boring. Some audiophile cables are expensive-- I'm shocked. Some people prefer the sound of vinyl to CD-- how surprising. (Not that variations of these arguments have no interest-- why do certain cable companies continue to receive the benefit of the doubt from reviewers when they've been caught repeatedly in out-and-out deception? Why do some CD players, for example the $30 boombox that my 3-year-old plays with, sound so much better than others? [It's a Memorex, of all things, and if I can't find out what DAC chip it uses online, I'm going to have to take it apart while my little boy is asleep...])

Monty
Monty's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Sep 16 2005 - 6:55pm
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?


Quote:
[It's a Memorex, of all things, and if I can't find out what DAC chip it uses online, I'm going to have to take it apart while my little boy is asleep...])

Heh, just put it in front of him while he's awake and he'll take it apart for you!

bifcake
bifcake's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Nov 27 2005 - 2:27am
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?

I liked DUP. I didn't think he said anything that would even remotely justify any sort of a ban. He mostly ranted and raved against what he perceived as deception and snake oil prevalent within the audio industry. Whereas he didn't articulate his thoughts in the most concise manner, I thought that his sentiment was on the money.

There are a few members on this forum who are more prone to force a bland, noncontroversial discussion, rather than engage in a critical discussion of the audio industry.

I'm sure if DUP were a bit more clever and presented his rants in a clearer way, he wouldn't have been banned. Alas, his style gave the tight asses a way to dump on him.

ethanwiner
ethanwiner's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Sep 1 2005 - 2:26pm
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?

I agree with this completely. If DUP was a little offensive, I can imagine it's only from frustration. Like the child screaming that the emperor has no clothes and being ignored repeatedly.

--Ethan


Quote:
I liked DUP. I didn't think he said anything that would even remotely justify any sort of a ban. He mostly ranted and raved against what he perceived as deception and snake oil prevalent within the audio industry. Whereas he didn't articulate his thoughts in the most concise manner, I thought that his sentiment was on the money.

There are a few members on this forum who are more prone to force a bland, noncontroversial discussion, rather than engage in a critical discussion of the audio industry.

I'm sure if DUP were a bit more clever and presented his rants in a clearer way, he wouldn't have been banned. Alas, his style gave the tight asses a way to dump on him.

greenelec
greenelec's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 years 2 months ago
Joined: Feb 10 2006 - 12:37am
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?

I for one, am very glad that John and Steven took this bold move. I am sure it was not an easy decision. There have been many threads on this forum I wanted to participate in but wouldn't because they were hijacked by Dup. For example, I would like to be able to dicuss cables and power cords w/o being labled stupid or a manufacurers shill. I think his return, if he does, should be very closly watched as if on parole.

dormston
dormston's picture
Offline
Last seen: 9 years 10 months ago
Joined: Jun 1 2007 - 12:05pm
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?

Good to see this one going so well. Monomania surely is a super word and anyone afflicted deserves help...or do we still lock 'them' away in big old houses in the country?

Very sad to hear such involvement (Jeff) with no future - some folks are like that and we are but shadows passing through someone's life...(probably plagiarised from somewhere).

Some great responses!!! I have no idea what the end result will ever be, but extremely interesting nonetheless...

Even the bit of fun with Memorex boombox was just wonderful...maybe a little tangent, but okay with me...and Britney is weloome anytime now that I have seen the piccies...and she can sing...gosh...maybe I am a voyeur after all...

This is my posting (whatever my motives might be) and if I find anything offensive of going away in another direction...I will request the idiot who tries to hijack the topic should be prevented from making replies to MY posting. Surely others can do the same? That, I thought was the whole point of moderators in the forums I have participated in over the past many years? The person making the post is the first stop for moderation...if it goes wrong and help is needed...and the moderator takes action. Full stop.

OH, and before I forget to ask...have I just witnessed a five star rating sink to a three before ny very eyes??? The same as happened to me...I am intrigued now...Ethan...am I dreaming...

dbowker
dbowker's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 4 months ago
Joined: May 8 2007 - 6:37am
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?

I, for one, welcome the decision! I often wondered why it took so long! I have zero, that's absolutely NO interest in having to wade through some grumpy, rude, poor spelling guy's posts who quite obviously is mad at the world and takes it out in this forum. The point of a forum like this is not to all agree- of course not- but there needs, like any civil social interaction, to be respect and the space to explore some ideas without someone attacking the poster (and did I mention the bad grammar and spelling?). The guy probably has some giant source of unresolved frustration in other areas of his life and sees the safety of ranting on the net as his outlet. Pity, yes, but a discussion forum is not group therapy and it's members need to behave like reasonable adults (actually reasonable children is OK too, heheh).

quadlover
quadlover's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 years 3 months ago
Joined: Apr 7 2007 - 9:58am
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?

i will miss some of dup's sarcasm. i also appreciated his contribution when his focus was on the product or company (as seldom as it was) as was mentioned by an earlier reply. but i also agree things were getting out of hand past the level of adult good taste and past the spirit in which this site was created. congrats to the moderators to be willing to stand up for their rights in owning this sight, and here's hoping dup will learn his lesson and return to contribute in his unique manner in a positive(?) way.

jkalman
jkalman's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Sep 20 2005 - 7:04am
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?

We've got a witch! A witch! A witch! Burn her!

dormston
dormston's picture
Offline
Last seen: 9 years 10 months ago
Joined: Jun 1 2007 - 12:05pm
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?

This just keeps on keeping on...and your summary was really good,...as was the next input...high class and thanks!

Jeff Kalman's response is just so clever that I might be tempted to go way off course to reply directly...superb...and obviuosly begging the question of how many folks took anything above 1st grade Latin...probably a bit like Britney...easy to go way off topic and show the world (on this site anyway) how smart or messed up your mind might be...and please note my own spelling mistakes throughout this topic...they are not deliberate...or are they...

Le roi est mort, est vive le roi (plagiarised with soft backing voclas and things which sound like pan pipes...or did that quote come from somewhere even earlier...than, eh...backing vocals...)

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?

Greek chorus singers.

dormston
dormston's picture
Offline
Last seen: 9 years 10 months ago
Joined: Jun 1 2007 - 12:05pm
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?

Almost instant reply here Jan...I was really hoping you would perhaps input a wee word at some stage...

YOU HAVE MY RESPECT!

Thank you.

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?

No need. I have an M.F.A. in Theatre Arts. They would come take it away if I didn't know that one.

cyclebrain
cyclebrain's picture
Offline
Last seen: 9 months 1 week ago
Joined: Jun 16 2006 - 11:40pm
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?

Ah, to create a perfect world. One in which we all agree and all topics are pleasent. Comfortably numb.
Despite DUPs abrasive behaviour which is not productive in any way, he does bring a "question everything" attitude here which is much needed.

Elk
Elk's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 10 months ago
Joined: Dec 26 2006 - 6:32am
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?


Quote:
Despite DUPs abrasive behaviour which is not productive in any way, he does bring a "question everything" attitude here which is much needed.


If only this were true.

Unfortunately DUP isn't questioning, he is certain; anyone who is not using his chosen equipment to listen to his preferred music at his required volume is unequivocally wrong.

Of course, this is persuasively supported through precise, reasoned, factually supported argument - consisting primarily of loud proclamations of "you're stupid."

DUP even assaults first time posters. After they are DUP-mugged they don't usually return - for good reason.

OTOH, DUP occasionally assists with a good URL to a resource that helps someone resolve a problem finding a replacement part or the like. DUP's relentless Googling has at least this benefit.

I don't care that he actively misspells and is inarticulate. I hate to think what a good editor would do to my posts.

It would be great to find a way to get DUP to engage in discourse. I keep thinking that he may know something other than how to berate.

OK, back to butterflies and bunnies. I miss Art Dudley's Listener...all those bunnies!

tandy
tandy's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: May 24 2006 - 3:57pm
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?

"It would be great to find a way to get DUP to engage in discourse. I keep thinking that he may know something other than how to berate."

Hi Elk. I have provided links from PHd chemist, PHd from the Audio Enginnering Society etc, a chair of a committee no less, and other links. He not only ignored the information, but actually demonstrated contempt and ridiculed the information. That from one with a GED.

You hit the nail on the head; why first time posters often do not post again. I have seen this over time at other forums as well.

Objectivists will attack and attack, post after post trying to squash any dissenting opinions, taking over strings etc.

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?


Quote:
Objectivists will attack and attack

You certainly didn't mean to imply dup is "objective".

jkalman
jkalman's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Sep 20 2005 - 7:04am
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?


Quote:
Objectivists will attack and attack, post after post trying to squash any dissenting opinions, taking over strings etc.

To be fair to both objectivists and subjectivists, it takes two to tango.... Both sides have the power to drive away newcomers if they are too aggressive.

tandy
tandy's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: May 24 2006 - 3:57pm
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?


Quote:

Quote:
Objectivists will attack and attack, post after post trying to squash any dissenting opinions, taking over strings etc.

To be fair to both objectivists and subjectivists, it takes two to tango.... Both sides have the power to drive away newcomers if they are too aggressive.

Problem is dup has repeatedly demonstrated, over 2,100 times that he is a gripe, ridicules just about everything in sight, including PHds in multiple disciplines, and has virtually no idea of what he is saying, nor does he want to learn.

No one is pushing him to enter every conversation. He does not have to attack everyone in sight.

He is just around to pester people and squelch dissenting information. You don't see us going over to audioholics and starting arguments over there.

Hey Jan. I think he calls himself scientific and an objectivist. Go figure.

jkalman
jkalman's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Sep 20 2005 - 7:04am
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?


Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
Objectivists will attack and attack, post after post trying to squash any dissenting opinions, taking over strings etc.

To be fair to both objectivists and subjectivists, it takes two to tango.... Both sides have the power to drive away newcomers if they are too aggressive.

Problem is dup has repeatedly demonstrated, over 2,100 times that he is a gripe, ridicules just about everything in sight, including PHds in multiple disciplines, and has virtually no idea of what he is saying, nor does he want to learn.

No one is pushing him to enter every conversation. He does not have to attack everyone in sight.

He is just around to pester people and squelch dissenting information. You don't see us going over to audioholics and starting arguments over there.

Hey Jan. I think he calls himself scientific and an objectivist. Go figure.

Perhaps it isn't fair to generalize about everyone in a particular category, objective or subjective, simply because DUP or someone from the subjective pool acts a certain way. DUP does not represent all objectivists to me, but he is being unfairly used to generalize and slander people who want nothing to do with him yet subscribe to aspects of objectivist thought.

It takes two sides to continue an argument. Just imagine, if people didn't spend time arguing with DUP, and disengaged from him, they could use that time arguing about whose subjective opinion of a cable's sound is correct or incorrect instead.

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?


Quote:
That being said, he's a constant irritant who butts in on threads and goes off-topic, or creates his own posts that never really deviate from his common theme. It's difficult to put him on "ignore" because others respond to him, causing context loss.


Quote:
I tolerated his monomania for over 1000 posts and eventually had enough (and I've actually been to the guy's home!) Even though I eventually put him on 'ignore', I found myself less and less interested in participating in the forum--too much DUP, too much negativity.


Quote:
There's a tendency for DUP to suck all the oxygen out of the room.


Quote:
For example, I would like to be able to dicuss cables and power cords w/o being labled stupid or a manufacurers shill.


Quote:
The point of a forum like this is not to all agree- of course not- but there needs, like any civil social interaction, to be respect and the space to explore some ideas without someone attacking the poster


Quote:
but i also agree things were getting out of hand past the level of adult good taste and past the spirit in which this site was created. congrats to the moderators


Quote:
DUP even assaults first time posters. After they are DUP-mugged they don't usually return - for good reason.


Quote:
I have provided links from PHd chemist, PHd from the Audio Enginnering Society etc, a chair of a committee no less, and other links. He not only ignored the information, but actually demonstrated contempt and ridiculed the information. That from one with a GED.


Quote:
No one is pushing him to enter every conversation. He does not have to attack everyone in sight


Quote:
It takes two sides to continue an argument. Just imagine, if people didn't spend time arguing with DUP, and disengaged from him, they could use that time arguing about whose subjective opinion of a cable's sound is correct or incorrect instead.

Whajja' missing here, JK? Oh, that's right! You put me on "ignore" because you decided to pick a fight on "your" thread. Phhhhhhhhht! Somebody else ask him the question. And tell him no one is using dup to slander an entire category of people.

My description of dup begins with "object..." but ends with a slightly different suffix.

gkc
gkc's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Feb 24 2006 - 11:51am
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?

DUP? An "objectivist"? I have been away too long. Sorry, market volatility is where I make a living, and the markets have been volatile. And, I have been (ahem, he said modestly) making a living.

DUP consistently and shamelessly flogs the crap he owns. That is being objective ?

He is a mish-mash of personal biases, pseudo-scientific negatives (you know, those conceptual black holes nobody can prove or negate), and derisive personal tirades. This is an "objectivist"?

Come on. For the most part, he is a run-of-the-mill masochist. A dime a dozen. He can put on any mask (even though he wears them all badly), but he enjoys most the public floggings regularly administered by forum denizens.

As I have stated before, I have mixed feelings about banning anybody -- abuse can have its own rewards, and who is more abusable than our dear DUP.

Still, apparently, there are those who take him seriously. Stephen's comments about chasing off the newbies to our wonderful pursuit (it is more than a hobby -- an ontological fact that DUP can't deal with...) is valid. We certainly want all who ask to receive well-considered answers, or the whole thing is a damnable sham. And the whole thing isn't a damnable sham. It is a real pursuit of excellence that can lead one to spiritual joy.

So, off with his @$%&*@# head. I can handle him. But I don't think he ought to be a poster boy for sincere requests for system help, from good folks seeking honest answers.

Good, Stephen. Give him 30 days for rehab. If he can't find any inner honesty, then banish him permanently to one of Milton's "Stygian Caves."

On another subject, cheers, all, and happy listening.

jkalman
jkalman's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Sep 20 2005 - 7:04am
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?


Quote:
DUP? An "objectivist"?

I'm not stating that I think he is an objectivist. My post was a response to 301's post where he suggests that DUP is an objectivist indirectly (see the below quote). To be specific, he discusses DUP during the entire post and in the last sentence implies that DUP is an objectivist.

Personally I try not to label people either way, but if 301 wants to put him in that category, I'll leave it up to others (such as you) to argue against it. What I do find issue with is generalizing groups, such as "all objectivists are a certain way" or "all subjectivists are a certain way," and that is the topic I broached. The problem with this kind of thinking is that people tend to see others as categories instead of unique individuals with singular insights.


Quote:
"It would be great to find a way to get DUP to engage in discourse. I keep thinking that he may know something other than how to berate."

Hi Elk. I have provided links from PHd chemist, PHd from the Audio Enginnering Society etc, a chair of a committee no less, and other links. He not only ignored the information, but actually demonstrated contempt and ridiculed the information. That from one with a GED.

You hit the nail on the head; why first time posters often do not post again. I have seen this over time at other forums as well.

Objectivists will attack and attack, post after post trying to squash any dissenting opinions, taking over strings etc.

ohfourohnine
ohfourohnine's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Sep 1 2005 - 7:41pm
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?

Since it served to bring you back to the fold, if only for a little while, I suppose this thread was worth it. It still rankles me, however, that after Stephen and JA obviously did a bit of soul searching before taking the action they did, and even bothered to post an explanation of their action and the rationale behind it, that couldn't be accepted as enough said by various members of the forum.

What is it about current society which makes so many believe that anyone gives a damn about their personal opinions on every subject? What happened to humility? Certainly this forum solicits opinions on audio topics - that is its reason for being. Presuming, on the other hand, to engage in some sort of plebecite as to the correctness or lack of it in what the management of the forum admits was a difficult decision is, in my not very humble opinion, stepping over the line.

That said, I'm delighted to see any post preceded by your name and I look forward to more of them. You might even take a shot a explaining to me why my old fashioned notions about manners are out of style, or why they deserve to be.

jkalman
jkalman's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Sep 20 2005 - 7:04am
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?


Quote:
Since it served to bring you back to the fold, if only for a little while, I suppose this thread was worth it. It still rankles me, however, that after Stephen and JA obviously did a bit of soul searching before taking the action they did, and even bothered to post an explanation of their action and the rationale behind it, that couldn't be accepted as enough said by various members of the forum.

What is it about current society which makes so many believe that anyone gives a damn about their personal opinions on every subject? What happened to humility? Certainly this forum solicits opinions on audio topics - that is its reason for being. Presuming, on the other hand, to engage in some sort of plebecite as to the correctness or lack of it in what the management of the forum admits was a difficult decision is, in my not very humble opinion, stepping over the line.

I don't profess to have a definite answer to your queries. Perhaps it is just human nature to question status quo. I do think you have earned your Brownie points for the day though. Perhaps that too is also just another one of those quirks of human nature.

ohfourohnine
ohfourohnine's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Sep 1 2005 - 7:41pm
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?

What? You still here? Aren't you the guy who threatened to take his toys and go away several days ago?

My question was addressed to Clifton. Your opinion is of no consequence to me.

bobedaone
bobedaone's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 years 5 months ago
Joined: Feb 1 2007 - 12:27am
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?

Clay, I certainly don't think your notions are out of style in the least. I have a lot of respect for you, as well as John and Stephen. In fact, after your first post on this thread, I questioned my own motives for responding in the first place. I suppose that voicing an opinion has its own merits, providing it isn't done maliciously.

I firmly believe that John and Stephen made the right decision, and would feel the same irrespective of whatever conclusion they may have drawn. Without well-intentioned people like you, Jim, and Stephen, I never would have remained a member of this forum beyond the time required to receive answers to my questions.

I saw this thread as an opportunity not to speak for or against the ban, but rather a place where I could lay out my opinion of DUP, which, like that of some others, is neither positive nor all-condemning.

What I said about the ban itself was that I was glad it was temporary, which isn't to say I disagree with its enactment.

I know your first post was not directed solely at me, but some of it must have been, which is why it caught my attention, and why I am taking the time to respond to you here. You're a highly valued forum member to me, and one whom I do my best not to alienate.

I guess if I had been this clear in my original post, I wouldn't have risked offending anyone. Hindsight, eh?

I hope you understand where I'm coming from here and that I meant nothing against John and Stephen by posting on this thread.

All the best,

ohfourohnine
ohfourohnine's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Sep 1 2005 - 7:41pm
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?

I'm afraid you misunderstand me, Erik, and I want to be sure to rectify that. My first post on this thread was directed at the originator of the thread. I felt raising the question of who thought what about DUP's banning was inappropriate behavior. I still think that, but obviously that makes me out of step.

I reentered the thread after following it through its course as a opportunity to establish a dialog with Clifton, and my invitation to him to comment on why my position on this issue ought to be out of step was a sincere one. Past history tells me that Clifton might have some interesting things to say.

I believe that lots of things are none of my business and I've lived through a period when many were of the same belief. I shudder at the popularity of television shows which put cameras in police cars and broadcast confrontations between the police and miserable miscreants who are real people with real problems which are also none of my business. I think Britney Spears' methods of child rearing are none of my business. Clearly not many agree with that attitude these days. I really wonder why.

My reference to censorship on the net was a response to that element of your post, but, the fact that you posted didn't offend me. I assume that, given the difference in our ages, we'll have a number of disagreements and, based on history, they'll continue to be handled with mutual respect. It goes with the territory.

"Your son is a Communist", they said. "My son is 25", he replied. "If he were not a Communist, I'd disown him. If when he's 35, he's still one, I'll disown him."

bifcake
bifcake's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Nov 27 2005 - 2:27am
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?


Quote:
DUP? An "objectivist"? I have been away too long. Sorry, market volatility is where I make a living, and the markets have been volatile. And, I have been (ahem, he said modestly) making a living.

DUP consistently and shamelessly flogs the crap he owns. That is being objective ?

He is a mish-mash of personal biases, pseudo-scientific negatives (you know, those conceptual black holes nobody can prove or negate), and derisive personal tirades. This is an "objectivist"?

Come on. For the most part, he is a run-of-the-mill masochist. A dime a dozen. He can put on any mask (even though he wears them all badly), but he enjoys most the public floggings regularly administered by forum denizens.

As I have stated before, I have mixed feelings about banning anybody -- abuse can have its own rewards, and who is more abusable than our dear DUP.

Still, apparently, there are those who take him seriously. Stephen's comments about chasing off the newbies to our wonderful pursuit (it is more than a hobby -- an ontological fact that DUP can't deal with...) is valid. We certainly want all who ask to receive well-considered answers, or the whole thing is a damnable sham. And the whole thing isn't a damnable sham. It is a real pursuit of excellence that can lead one to spiritual joy.

So, off with his @$%&*@# head. I can handle him. But I don't think he ought to be a poster boy for sincere requests for system help, from good folks seeking honest answers.

Good, Stephen. Give him 30 days for rehab. If he can't find any inner honesty, then banish him permanently to one of Milton's "Stygian Caves."

On another subject, cheers, all, and happy listening.

DUP may not have been an upstanding netizen, he may not have been an objectivist, he may have been a masochist and he may have been sometimes rude, crude and obnoxious. Alas, one thing he was not is a pooh-say.

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?


Quote:
DUP may not have been an upstanding netizen, he may not have been an objectivist, he may have been a masochist and he may have been sometimes rude, crude and obnoxious. Alas, one thing he was not is a pooh-say.

I believe your second setence is contradicted by your first sentence.

jkalman
jkalman's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Sep 20 2005 - 7:04am
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?


Quote:
What? You still here? Aren't you the guy who threatened to take his toys and go away several days ago?

My question was addressed to Clifton. Your opinion is of no consequence to me.

Nope, I just put Jan on ignore. If my opinion is of no consequence to you, then why let it move you to post?

"The lady doth protest too much, methinks!"

jkalman
jkalman's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Sep 20 2005 - 7:04am
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?

BTW, I don't care that DUP was banned, and I don't protest his banning nor support it. Personally, I think the guy was harmless and he didn't bother me to any great extent. In fact, he kept some of the other more aggressive people here busy enough to prevent them from harrassing other members. Now those members roam free picking fights with their next "DUP." I do find it humorous that some people here have been trying to get him intentionally "burned" for quite some time, and that those same people played on his foibles in order to excite him. A little bit of schadenfreude on my own part I suppose, because in truth it is unfortunate and not too comical.

gkc
gkc's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Feb 24 2006 - 11:51am
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?

Yo, Clay. I have a theory about the "manners" thing, in our time. I cannot profess to be an expert in the field, since I exhibit my own brand of rudeness from time to time. Yet, I usually regret the outburst or action later, and I am never all that reluctant to apologize.

I think the personal prime directive, now, is ego protection. Good manners tend to be seen as signs of submission, as deference to a superior being in the pecking order. You just don't volunteer for such gestures, out of fear that the other fellow will now, somehow, occupy a superior status. You have to show him/her you mean business, or an impression of weakness will be communicated. It is just another extension of the "me first" attitude that, in other contexts, we admire as "edginess" or "attitude." Many actually flaunt their rudeness as a badge of independence and self-importance.

Sigh. I was raised in a kinder, gentler era. I suspect DUP feels obligated to crash on through the veneers of common courtesy, just to show everyone he is nobody to be messed with, and an expert to boot. Just a guess. I have no Psychology shingle hanging in my room...

Life is still good. The tunes keep comin' and fishing is good in the Sierras. Only the Shadow knows what drives the DUPs of this world.

Cheers, and happy listening.

RGibran
RGibran's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 months 14 hours ago
Joined: Oct 11 2005 - 5:50pm
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?


Quote:

Quote:
That being said, he's a constant irritant who butts in on threads and goes off-topic, or creates his own posts that never really deviate from his common theme. It's difficult to put him on "ignore" because others respond to him, causing context loss.


Quote:
I tolerated his monomania for over 1000 posts and eventually had enough (and I've actually been to the guy's home!) Even though I eventually put him on 'ignore', I found myself less and less interested in participating in the forum--too much DUP, too much negativity.


Quote:
There's a tendency for DUP to suck all the oxygen out of the room.


Quote:
For example, I would like to be able to dicuss cables and power cords w/o being labled stupid or a manufacurers shill.


Quote:
The point of a forum like this is not to all agree- of course not- but there needs, like any civil social interaction, to be respect and the space to explore some ideas without someone attacking the poster


Quote:
but i also agree things were getting out of hand past the level of adult good taste and past the spirit in which this site was created. congrats to the moderators


Quote:
DUP even assaults first time posters. After they are DUP-mugged they don't usually return - for good reason.


Quote:
I have provided links from PHd chemist, PHd from the Audio Enginnering Society etc, a chair of a committee no less, and other links. He not only ignored the information, but actually demonstrated contempt and ridiculed the information. That from one with a GED.


Quote:
No one is pushing him to enter every conversation. He does not have to attack everyone in sight


Quote:
It takes two sides to continue an argument. Just imagine, if people didn't spend time arguing with DUP, and disengaged from him, they could use that time arguing about whose subjective opinion of a cable's sound is correct or incorrect instead.

Whajja' missing here, JK? Oh, that's right! You put me on "ignore" because you decided to pick a fight on "your" thread. Phhhhhhhhht! Somebody else ask him the question. And tell him no one is using dup to slander an entire category of people.

My description of dup begins with "object..." but ends with a slightly different suffix.

I think I recall our moderator proclaiming he would not allow any one or group of individuals to team up against another forum member, yet this thread strikes a scary resemblance of such, particularly since the accused is temporarily unable to face his accusers.

RG

ohfourohnine
ohfourohnine's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Sep 1 2005 - 7:41pm
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?

Well, Rgbran, it appears at least you got my point. This whole thread full of piling on has no chance of doing anything beneficial and it has a potential for harm. Sometimes it really is better if people mind their own business.

Elk
Elk's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 10 months ago
Joined: Dec 26 2006 - 6:32am
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?

Your point is reasonable.

I think the reason people feel the need - and the right - to comment is the forum is a community of members. Thus, the behavior of a member, positive or negative, has an impact on each forum member. This is unlike the example of Ms. Spear's child rearing that has no impact on anyone other than members of her family.

Whether this can or has gotten out of control is a valid concern. It certainly could become more destructive than illuminating.

Overall I find that the observations made have been simply expressions of opinion. Nothing scary here. Then again I am not easily threatened, possessing sharp antlers.

The irony of this in my armchair psychologist view is that DUP loves any attention he can garner and is probably greatly enjoying a thread dedicated just to him.

dormston
dormston's picture
Offline
Last seen: 9 years 10 months ago
Joined: Jun 1 2007 - 12:05pm
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?

Democracy? If you or anyone reading this assumes that there is nobody with 'the power' to pull the plug then you are dreaming...I note that you have again now kindly updated me on the private life of Britney, which although undoubtedly interesting, and as I have already mentioned, welccme here anytime...you have also taken what the previous reply was saying as total support for your point...which I think was something along the lines that I (or anyone) had the right to question decisions made by moderators / editors...it may have escaped your attention that one the hugely encouraging aspects of this whole thing...is...almost total support (with some dagger-like caveats) for the moderators and the action they have taken?

I will do a reply individually to the previous.

What's the point in any of this posting and the replies...well, I for one am not interested in long term membership of any forum where one member can tell another that the input is of no interest or consequence whatever...yet at the same time find more and more input and off-topic issues such as Britney?

Is that not one of the complaints against DUP?

You made your point very forcefully first time around and are now looking for support...that will indeed turn this whole thing into a battle of some kind...which would be very silly.

dormston
dormston's picture
Offline
Last seen: 9 years 10 months ago
Joined: Jun 1 2007 - 12:05pm
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?

I think that the time is not right to take selective quotes (some of them out of context when read as stand alone points) and whether by design or accident you are now joined with Cheapskate in a little team against me for raising the question in the first place. Until this time I have seen no chance of anyone 'teaming' against anyone alse is such a manner...even DUP is coming through with some great plus points...

No right to defend himself? Jings...if you want to take my rights to question decisions, then presumably you want to take my right to talk about them also? Whatever the outcome was ever to be, I can assure you most sincerely that I would have copied DUP on the thread and given him the chance to tear me apart.

My guess from what the folks who know him very well are saying here is that he will probably thrive on such a thread...so, if the view held by you and Cheapskate is the one which must be followed, then pleae go ask someone to shut this down immediately.

I have no problems with that question being asked and if they agree, then so be it.

I have done nothing whatever to either insult or defend DUP in any way and whilst I still live in a democratic part of the world, I will continue to ask questions. And one other thing you can be very sure about is that I do not shirk the consequences of truth. Whatever the outcome was ever to be, I would have copied DUP on the thread and given him the chance to tear me apart.

I had no idea what this would lead to...and I still do not...but whatever it might be...either get it stopped now because that is what you and Cheapskate want, or let it run a natural and democratic course?

ohfourohnine
ohfourohnine's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Sep 1 2005 - 7:41pm
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?

Dormston, I've certainly not questioned your right to whatever opinion you hold, nor your right to post your opinion for others to react to. I've only tried to suggest that insofar as there might be a fruitful democratic endeavor of any sort, it would benefit from individual participants being mindful of their personal responsibilities. I think that both here in the US and there in the UK there are some kinds of behavior that are increasingly prevalent and somewhat disquieting - among them:

1- Tabloid scandals and so-called "reality television" are exceedingly popular and,

2- People, in general, are far more concerned with their rights than they are with their responsibilities.

As for this thread shutting down as a result of my voicing my opinion, don't hold your breath. Just as I believe opinions on the banning are of no value, I'm absolutely sure that most people don't give a damn what I think about the discussion of it - nor do I have any right to expect them to. That, as you may recall has been the essence of my point from the outset.

Carry on as you see fit with my best wishes. We all live with ourselves.

dormston
dormston's picture
Offline
Last seen: 9 years 10 months ago
Joined: Jun 1 2007 - 12:05pm
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?

Cheapskate (Clay) that last reply was, in my opinion, very good indeed. Pause for thought, and thank you.

I apologise unresevedly if I over-reacted to your past replies - Jeff is of some consequence to me, especially on this topic and probably some others on this forum. I could see that little diversion getting way out of control and felt I just had to dip back into the fray.

One observation I and probably dozens / hundreds of others will have made is that the banning of DUP is headline news as item one at the top of the page when anyone in the world clicks onto 'Forums'.

Stephen / John could very easy have banned anyone and simply not said a word - highlighting the decision in that way puts the matter very firmly into the 'public' domain and I for one joined this site to (as Elk with the antlers so concisely put it) to become part of a community of some kind, with common aims and interests. The decision could have been tucked away anywhere and even now all that Stephen has to do is post another one liner of some kind to remove the topic from 'the front page'...maybe one of my motives for raising the question was to fast track into some brownie points for supporting the decision...maybe it was to gain sufficient air time to 'enable' those who felt intimidated by DUP to tell him to take a hike if ever he went OTT on any of their postings...maybe I wanted front page stardom also...

This posting will, however it develops, be buried at the end of the month, or sooner. Will things be any better or worse because of it or despite it...time will tell, no doubt.

dormston
dormston's picture
Offline
Last seen: 9 years 10 months ago
Joined: Jun 1 2007 - 12:05pm
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?

Dear diary, this forum thread / postings, having been headline news, is already in danger of slipping into oblivion. Maybe it needs a wee refresh...alas I am insufficiently erudite to make up a tune, so I will resort to plagiarised, mangledandbastardisedverse in the name of art from Jeff Beck and Michael Jackson with the greatest of respect for the original writers

DUP is becoming a noun, an adjective, a verb, pronoun, suffix and even prefix...those with concerns that this would lead to anything untoward without the right to defend can rest assured this particular title is the very least of anyone's worries on that score...DUP is everywhere

...and nowhere baby...that's where it's at...
rollin' down the bumpy hillside...when your tyres are flat
...and its...caused by a broken bottle top
And a one man's soul
They follow each other on
The wind ya know
'Cause they got nowhere to go
That's why I want you to know

I'm starting with the man in the mirror

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?


Quote:
DUP is everywhere

Except here.

tomjtx
tomjtx's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 years 5 months ago
Joined: Nov 12 2006 - 2:53pm
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?

yo yall I be DUP.
be here teh say , YO,wassup
why the ban, so unfair
just to keep me outta your hair?

you kick me out just cause yur able
all because o de snake oil cable
I dont want teh vinyl LP
just give me one more modern CD

I be dumped by Steroephile
cause I think cables are a pile.

I know you miss me, why dontcha admit it
doing bad ? I aint the one that did it
AVA is teh best in teh world
if tat hurts your feelings your being a girl

smejias
smejias's picture
Offline
Last seen: 11 years 7 months ago
Joined: Aug 25 2005 - 10:29am
Re: DUP ban? Caviar or tasteless fish eggs?

I think this thread has run its course. I'm closing it now.

  • X