Some of the Worst Offenders in Bad Audio Forum Behavior Are Not Regular Forum Members


I've noticed first hand a disturbing trend over at Stereophile for the past couple of years that whenever someone knowledgeable challenges the mantra put forth by some of their editors, the Chief Editor, Mr. Atkinson, demands that the poster put forth personal information about themselves and any possible affiliations they may have with regard to employment that Mr. Atkinson might consider some kind of conflict of interest. Most notably, this occurred recently with a user named Archimago - a popular member of Computer Audiophile who extensively examined MQA, it's claims, and the claims made for it by Stereophile staff. Mr. Atkinson repeatedly challenged the author for his identity and professional affiliations - without which, he would disregard the message conveyed by said forum member. Mr. Atkinson has gone even further in other instances of which I personally witnessed first hand. He insists on banning from Stereophile's forum anyone whom he believes has a duty to publicly identify themselves without specifying the criteria behind the demand - other than that an industry affiliation might exist. I would encourage readers here to visit Computer Audiophile and search for Archimago /MQA discussions to see what I'm on about first hand.

The point of raising this is not necessarily to drag Mr. Atkinson through the mud but to highlight a key aspect of hypocrisy with respect to Mr. Atkinson's "policy" and how that relates to ALL online forums. Time and again, we're reminded in various forums when ideas are presented and challenged in a heated atmosphere - "FOCUS ON THE SUBJECT MATTER - NOT THE CREDENTIALS OR PERCEIVED FAILINGS OF THE INDIVIDUAL MAKING HIS OR HER POINT". This in my view has always been good advice. When we "play the ball" and not  "the man", it is much easier to maintain a civil exchange of ideas/experiences.  So where does Mr. Atkinson's insistence on identifying qualifications of the person fit in to this concept? It seems that every time he or a staff member is personally challenged for facts, he resorts to this "policy" as a form of censorship.  So basically what I"m saying here is that there's plenty of evidence that in some circles, the very people who should be encouraging us all to focus on the merits of the message - letting it stand or fall on its own without involving the supposed "credentials" of the messenger, - these people are in fact the worst offenders among us. Instead of setting a good example and sticking to it, they are doing the opposite while on occasion imploring the rest of us "regular members" to "do as I say - not as I do". I no longer participate in Stereophile forums because of this obvious cute form of censorship that has been employed. I hope that kind of thing never happens here on Audiogon. My guess, however, is that since Agon moderators aren't in the business of promoting/reviewing certain products that come along, that issue is not likely to present itself.
In any case, how do you feel about the privacy rights of other forum members? Should everyone be required to put forth their real name and potential industry affiliation or should that only apply to people who appear to be trying to sell something other than knowledge in the course of posting?
cj1965

There's a few interesting threads going on, on the Agon forum that are touching on some important topics and also showing the human side of this hobby and the current state of HEA and what people think about the decline of HEA. I'm traveling today, but during some of the stops I'm reading up as much as I can. Why? Because some of this (even though at times on the edge of trolling) is getting into some truths that need to be explored. I want to get into it more but for quickies.

HEA is in decline, but it's not due to portable technologies. HEA is it's own tiny club within the much larger audiophile world. I've been doing HEA shows since the 80's and it's easy to see why the decline has happened and continues to. So, trying to look at HEA as being subject to anything but itself doesn't really work. HEA is in decline because of it's performance, prices and attitude. HEA will continue to decline until it becomes archived or makes some important design changes. That's fact, and time will continue to be the proof in the pudding.

I understand that those deep into the investment are going to defend HEA till their last breath, or accept the next chapter or get out altogether. It's happening in real time, so the writing on the wall has been written a while back and we're seeing the end or recreation as it is taking place. I'm not sure the HEA forums are going to be able to grab onto this before it comes to light, but it's moving at a faster pace each day.

I hope people reading this don't take me as being negative, because I'm actually quite excited and the changes have made my business prosper, and there's nothing wrong with that. I also did want to say this before needed to board. Some of the things being said on this thread won't even be a factor a couple of years from now, so hopefully the calm on these threads can over come the heated debate type of Vibe.

Michael Green

www.michaelgreenaudio.net

I liked your hair in the old ads.  It was very cool. Kind of like the audio messiah. Then again, now that mine is thinning as fast as it is graying perhaps I’m just jealous.

Much of your observations should be obvious to those of us that have been in the hobby for a few decades. Not that they don’t bear repeating.
@michaelgreenaudio- 

"performance, prices, and attitude"

Succinct and spot on.  Consumers used to look to trade magazines to assist in assessing performance virtues and offering guidance as to what represented value in the marketplace. Somewhere along the line, probably when test measurements were thrown out the window and things like $3000 cables, $5000 "power conditioners", and $50,000 amplifiers became "the norm", trade magazines like Stereophile began to lose credibility.And even with the blatant censorship demonstrated by the magazine's chief editor against a knowledgeable, independent voice of fact and reason surrounding the latest promotional product (MQA), for a good percentage of audiophiles, it's too painful to acknowledge they've been duped by a trade magazine that has been more interested in representing their financial interests than representing the interests of consumers. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions. No one is entitled to their own facts. Stereophile and their paying advertisers haven't figured that out apparently. They seem to think they can make up the facts as they go along, censure dissenting voices, and no one will notice. Good luck with that.
Let’s give credit where credit is due. Stereophile was completely subjective and had no testing program whatsoever when John Atkinson took over as editor.

He hired recording engineer Robert Harley to develop a testing regimen which was instituted at the magazine in 1989, and has been refined over the subsequent decades by Mr. Atkinson himself.

To prattle on about the loss of objective testing in audio magazines is simply incorrect as Stereophile has been printing objective measurements for the last few decades. Long before $5K power conditioners were a gleam in the marketers eyes.

And BTW Stereophile is a consumer magazine, not a trade magazine. As you said, no one is entitled to their own facts.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_magazine