 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
In Reply to: Re: "I make no demands on DBTs or on anyone." posted by Phil Tower on April 07, 2003 at 09:36:39:
My point is: If someone has the academic background (even self-taught) and experience to give a paper at the AES or IEEE, they achieve credibility in my book. Knowing the politics of the AES, it is possible that an interesting paper will NOT make it into the 'Journal of the AES', but this is not important.
It is the effort to put together a paper, with measurements, listening trials, etc that says to me that this person has ACTUALLY DONE SOMETHING in the pursuit of audio quality.
Anyone can criticize from an armchair, and many do so on this website and others, without doing anything to back up their criticisms.
Regarding talking about the war: I see you and others much like a general who demands that the area be taken and secure, without having to do it himself. Sometimes the price is too great, and you just have to live with what is practical or even possible at any given time. I know that some of our military personal have this problem, even in this war, from outside commentators criticizing specific conditions without being there.
Follow Ups:
My point is: If someone has the academic background (even self-taught) and experience to give a paper at the AES or IEEE, they achieve credibility in my book. Knowing the politics of the AES, it is possible that an interesting paper will NOT make it into the 'Journal of the AES', but this is not important.
It is the effort to put together a paper, with measurements, listening trials, etc that says to me that this person has ACTUALLY DONE SOMETHING in the pursuit of audio quality.I have no disagreement with any of that. Unfortunately, it has virtually nothing to do with my issue with Clark, which involves simple common respect and courtesy.
I see you and others much like a general who demands that the area be taken and secure, without having to do it himself. Sometimes the price is too great, and you just have to live with what is practical or even possible at any given time. I know that some of our military personal have this problem, even in this war, from outside commentators criticizing specific conditions without being there.Please tell me exactly what comment I have made about the war that would cause you to say that about me. I have expressed no view publicly regarding the conduct of the war. Perhaps you overheard me telling my wife that, in my opinion, Iraqi Freedom is the single most impressive military campaign I have ever witnessed, and perhaps you feel I'm not entitled to such an opinion.
I also understand as a veteran I swore an oath to defend and protect the constitution, which includes the First Amendment guaranteeing freedom of speech. I have little respect for those who want to silence people simply because they are judged as unworthy of having an opinion. I do respect those who, when confronted with an opinion with which they disagree, address the content of that opinion and argue on the merits, as opposed to attempting to discredit and belittle the person with whom they disagree.
As it relates to my discussion with Clark, please show me where I criticized anything he has done professionally. I stated my opinion and he told me that my opinion didn't matter. I asked questions and I was accused of demanding. It is his arrogant and rude behavior as directed at me that I have an issue with.
Phil, you take everyone to task for 'rude' behavior toward you, but some of your attacks on Jon Risch, and even me are worth framing, for their intensity. I think that it is rude to attempt to discredit a preson over the difference between Joules' or Ohm's law. They are the same equation with ( I ) added as a multiplier to both sides. That is all that separates them. This is not enough difference to criticize Jon Risch for inadvertently using Joules' law instead of Ohm's law.
This is not a courtroom, where 'formal civility' is required, yet the attorney can attack his adversaries with anything that he (she) can think of, to discredit them . In some ways, it is opposite here, where we can get very informal with each other, but we should hold discussion of the subject up to a high level of integrity. Still, we can do without a great deal of intellectual nit-picking, where it is only used to discredit the contributor.
I won't argue with you. I don't apologize for pointing out the error I saw in Jon's post, but I do apologize for the comments I made about what the error may or may not have meant as to Jon's competency. The error was in a collateral matter, but it was an error. I would have thought more of Jon if he had simply acknowledged it and moved on. I make far more than my share of mistakes, but usually when I become aware of those mistakes I try to admit those mistakes, learn what I can from the mistake, and move on.But I repeat. The comments I made regarding Jon's competency were wholly inappropriate and I do apologize to him, you and all who may have read them.
Good for you, Phil. I hope to do the same. It is pointless for us to keep 'bickering'.
nt
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]