scientific double blinded cable test

gdhal"I appreciate your contacting me via PM. I believe it fair to write that you and I are at an impasse. Your refusal to skype first and foremost and insistence that we publicize here on the forum what in my view is personal means that we have “irreconcilable differences”. I thank you for your interest."

I made it clear from the beginning that this challenge should be conducted in public and that includes the design, terms, conditions, methodology and location of the test. You then not only insisted on first conducting discussions privately via skype but you also sought to engage me in a  private discussion as to the other terms of the test rendering whatever we would have decided to be dubious in value because it would have lacked input from the interested parties here which is who you initially engaged when first you proposed this challenge. You have also shown previously in this thread as has been pointed out by others that you do not know how to conduct a proper, reliable, repeatable test, or a double-blinded test at all meaning that it would have been impossible for me to satisfy your terms and conditions so I must say that I do not think you're challenge was ever intended to be taken seriously but rather was another effort to raise again the "it all sounds the same and if you believe otherwise you have to conduct a double-blinded test the onus is on you to conduct that test" argument which is patent nonsense.

Before you go spend a kazillion dollars on new cables, just clean and re-do your current cable terminations.

gdhal
Someone said, “And yes, in years past I have participated in open (sighted) A/B testing of cables, and subsequent single blind and double blind tests of the same cables and found that differences were easily detected in open testing, yet vanished without a trace in both blinded tests.”

Thank you, @keithahughes

EDIT:

It also vanishes without a trace when dollars are involved.

>>>>Uh, hey, guys, the reason the differences don’t show up in blind tests is the same reason that Randi NEVER lost a Million Dollar bet. Ever. It’s the old double blind tests scam. Blind tests are generally too weird, too constraining, too much trouble, too much stress, especially when those involved aren’t used to them. Hel-loo! It certainly does not (rpt not) mean that sighted tests are any less reliable that blind tests, in any case. Or that there aren’t differences among the cables tested. If it doesn’t make sense it’s not true. Judge Judy. FWIW I get excellent results over the years with A/B/A tests, until a selection can be made, sometimes over the course of time. It depends on how obvious the differences are, as well as other factors. I have no idea why some people think tests are a slam dunk or easy to do right. Sighted tests AND blind tests are a pig in a poke. 🐖

@clearthink

Actually we (you and I) were doing fairly well in the very beginnings.

Only after I mentioned (privately) that my rationale for having to skype first is because seeing and hearing you lends additional credibility to the authenticity of your interest did things go awry. I went further to add that for all I know, and I’m not saying or implying you are, nevertheless it is a theoretical possibility, you could be a 14 year old school girl without the financial means and/or legal authority to enter into any agreement.

I’ll leave it for the court of public opinion to decide who means business, and speculate as to why you refuse to skype even after I posted my skype ID, and politely asked you to communicate.

gdhal"I’ll leave it for the court of public opinion to decide who means business"
Of course you will leave it to the court of public opinion that is exactly why I insisted from the beginning that all discussions regarding your "challenge" be conducted publically in this forum where you first proposed your "challenge" and not in secret except for those matters that are truly appropriate and proper to keep confidential such as account numbers and like matters. Anytime you want to resurrect your "challenge" please feel free to offer it again in public and I will accept provided that it remain in public which is what I insisted on from the beginning for reasons which I stated and if you do that I hope you will first research how a proper double-blinded test must be conducted so that we don't have to waste time resolving that issue first because as others have pointed out it is clear you do not understand proper double-blinded test protocols and methodologies.