|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
69.241.178.8
In Reply to: Funny you should mention this... posted by JTimothyA on March 15, 2007 at 20:08:44:
Who said I was a crusader? Any solution is going take much more than one website or print mag - and a great deal of Mojo on everyone's part.
Follow Ups:
First, let's be clear. I said 'crusading'. You said 'crusader'.To me, you effectively labeled yourself as such by appearing to take up a cause "for the sake of the press, the audio industry and the consumer - those poor pilgrims on their way to sonic mecca on whose behalf you believe "such practices be eliminated." I am not clear exactly what 'such practices' are, as nothing seems to have been established, nonetheless your words suggest the need for advocacy, which by uttering them you appear to be taking up.
Moreover, your comments suggest you think a 'solution' is needed - one that lies beyond the capacity of the direct participants to attain. Casting aside efforts to disguise rhetoric as such, I read your remarks as suggesting more 'debate' is needed here on this forum, and (more recently) on "more than one website or print mag" . I'm not sure that what is at hand is a 'debate'. Nonetheless, whatever it is apparently, you believe, takes a village.
You asked where do manufacturers and distributors go to expose such practices. I was suggesting that rather than have them come here, and since you seem to think something must be done, that you offer to succor their grievances. It becomes the perfect spot, the mojo spot, the nader spot, for having the 'debate' about extorting money in exchange for reviews. In effect a discussion about the business practices of enterprises that publish reviews and also display advertising, a veritable morality play about high-end audio. Since you claim your Web site involves no advertising revenues, surely you cannot be part of the problem, therefore you must be part of the ....
All of course "without taking sides".
Heh.
"First, let's be clear. I said 'crusading'. You said 'crusader'."
Hmm...that clears things up a lot...."To me, you effectively labeled yourself as such by appearing to take up a cause "for the sake of the press, the audio industry and the consumer - those poor pilgrims on their way to sonic mecca on whose behalf you believe "such practices be eliminated."
"Moreover, your comments suggest you think a 'solution' is needed - one that lies beyond the capacity of the direct participants to attain."
Apparently you believe they should not be eliminated and no solution is needed and that everyone associated with audio is a "poor pilgrim". I nave more respect for the people I work with than that.
"Since you claim your Web site involves no advertising revenues, surely you cannot be part of the problem, therefore you must be part of the ...."
Where did i claim that, please?
I hope your innacurate remarks and condescending tone are not representative of your publication. I will assume they are not.
Apparently you believe they should not be eliminated and no solution is needed and that everyone associated with audio is a "poor pilgrim".Neither. I see no demonstration of a problem. You claim to, you have the venue, so have at it. What good does it do you to have the power of the press if your Web site can't cash the check written by your mouth?
I think it is out of line for the publisher of an audio Web site to stick his nose into the business relationships of any audio publication on a public forum. Particularly if you take advertising - if so, you are a direct competitor. If you want to describe your own practices, that's fine by me. If you want to encourage 'debate' whether by name or not, debate about 'where someone goes to expose extortion', I think you are way out of line, given your position and do the industry no favor.
You note that other people and publications are regularly impuned here . Perhaps, but rarely if ever by the publisher or editor of another publication. Don't you see that by your very attempts to generate discussion on your topic you become one who is doing the impugning?
Do you see the publishers or editors of mainstream audio publications raising that type of issue here? I don't. Sure, there may be catfights now and then, but generally publishers and editors are examples of decorum and probity and are not inclined to start topics about the business practices of other publications - whether by name or not. Especially after the forum moderators have already weighed-in. The fact you bring the topic here rather than publish about it on your own Web site, appears more like you're looking for attention than you have true concern. You may disagree, but that's how it looks to me.
Does your Web site sell any products or services, including advertising?
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: