Forums

I like lost causes.

Lol. Seriously, why are you still in a place filled with people you contempt? Your existance and behavior contradict with each other. Just shoo away and let everyone be happy.

Well, High Rollers. You can’t debate an angry person, waste of time.

I appreciate the lengthy reply, but it masterfully exposes your intent to evade the core issue. So I will ask again, because no one has dared to answer it: Can a design with objectively flawless data be dismissed as 'crap' based on an outdated topological label? You're trying to muddy the waters with a 'measurements vs. subjectivism' debate, but that's a red herring. No one is denying subjective experience, but we are discussing engineering merit. Your 'fine wine vs. cheap plonk' analogy is particularly revealing. A true connoisseur appreciates a wine for its quality, regardless of prejudices about its region or grape variety. You, however, are acting like a snob who only recognizes expensive labels. When a world-class wine made with modern techniques is placed before you, you dismiss it as 'plonk' simply because it doesn't come from a 'noble' origin you're familiar with. Your problem isn't your palate; it's your prejudice. You're not defending a type of sound; you're defending an obsolete and exclusionary hierarchy. This kind of judgment, based on origin rather than quality, proves that your entire framework of knowledge has failed to keep up with the times. 'I see no personal attacks here'? Your selective blindness is truly a sight to behold. Let me refresh your memory: Who started this by calling a product they hadn't measured 'crap'? Who, after failing to debate, issued a threat: 'This is your only warning'? Who just used the term 'cheap plonk' in a passive-aggressive insult against other people's choices? Are those not personal attacks and insults? My harsh words are a direct reaction to your group's sustained campaign of arrogance, threats, and condescension. And you're right, I love that saying: 'the first one to resort to insults in a debate admits they are wrong.' The problem is, the first one wasn't me. It was you lot, right from Gilmore's 'crap' comment. You already lost. Your attempt to play the innocent victim now is not 'debate'; it's gaslighting. I would suggest you take a long look in the mirror before you have the audacity to tell me to be 'self-reflective'. You say, "We're obviously happy as we are," and I believe you. Life must be blissfully simple when you don't have to think for yourself and can just live as a parasite, feeding on the opinions of a host. You ask, "What is the point you want to make?" The point was to see what a creature with no independent thoughts does when its dogma is challenged, other than screeching "gtfo". Apparently, the answer is nothing. You say, "We're obviously happy as we are," and I believe you. Life must be blissfully simple when you don't have to think for yourself and can just live as a parasite, feeding on the opinions of a host. You ask, "What is the point you want to make?" The point was to see what a creature with no independent thoughts does when its dogma is challenged, other than screeching "gtfo". Apparently, the answer is nothing.

Even you think you don't belong here. You, yourself, point out you don't like how things work here. Yet you're still here. Why? Another point: What makes you think you can come here and try to change the mindset of this community? We're obviously happy as we are. This forum and it's regulars are like this for a loooong time. Why are you here? Do you truly want to change the mindset or just want to attack with your "pointing the fallacies" approach? What is the point you want to make? Let me show you an easy solution of your appearent problem: gtfo.