What do the members think about.......

[Martian]

I propose a different strategy:

When someone addresses a Snake Radios gaffe or a Fine Tune fallacy in a post the counter argument must address the gaffe or fallacy.

An example would be:
"look at this video of snake radios replacing a perfectly good voltage regulator"
When the followers come in to offer rebuttal an off-topic answer would be
"But I am happy with him and your just a hater and trying to deny him a living"

This does not add to the discussion. customer loyalty was not questioned so it should not be raised, nor was his level of income, and someone was called a name.

Another example would be:
"Look at Fine Tune's latest video where he claims that only he knows the formula for the speed of light! He is dead wrong!" then posts relevant documentation to show the worlds currently adopted and agreed upon standards as to the speed of light.

The followers come in with these answers:
"But all those other shops are defying the laws of physics and they are ALL wrong!" and then adds some conspiracy theories, jabs at someones' manhood or other weasel words.

A perfectly on-topic answer would be:
"Fine Tune has a HYPOTHESIS. Here is the research he has done into why he asserts the speed of light to be [whatever number]" and links research papers, test results, citations, and other data to back up the claim.

Another off-topic answer would be "But XYZ shop did it last week!"
Or "XYZ shop can't do what ABC does!"
Or "ACME CB Shop is just COPYING!"
Or "Your just mad because you/your favorite shop can't do it"

 

[kopcicle]

I propose a different strategy:

When someone addresses a Snake Radios gaffe or a Fine Tune fallacy in a post the counter argument must address the gaffe or fallacy.

An example would be:
"look at this video of snake radios replacing a perfectly good voltage regulator"
When the followers come in to offer rebuttal an off-topic answer would be
"But I am happy with him and your just a hater and trying to deny him a living"

This does not add to the discussion. customer loyalty was not questioned so it should not be raised, nor was his level of income, and someone was called a name.

Another example would be:
"Look at Fine Tune's latest video where he claims that only he knows the formula for the speed of light! He is dead wrong!" then posts relevant documentation to show the worlds currently adopted and agreed upon standards as to the speed of light.

The followers come in with these answers:
"But all those other shops are defying the laws of physics and they are ALL wrong!" and then adds some conspiracy theories, jabs at someones' manhood or other weasel words.

A perfectly on-topic answer would be:
"Fine Tune has a HYPOTHESIS. Here is the research he has done into why he asserts the speed of light to be [whatever number]" and links research papers, test results, citations, and other data to back up the claim.

Another off-topic answer would be "But XYZ shop did it last week!"
Or "XYZ shop can't do what ABC does!"
Or "ACME CB Shop is just COPYING!"
Or "Your just mad because you/your favorite shop can't do it"

This classic comes to mind.

Caedite eos. Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius
~Arnoldus Amalricus

Martian I appreciate the observation, sentiment, and suggestion. What it results in is far too much work for a Mod/admin. It's a curious few forum communities where the keys to the asylum can be handed to to the inmates and they protect, defend and maintain the forum. I am fortunate enough to belong to two of these communities. Unfortunately this is not one of them. I can't say that I am immune as CK has clipped me fair a couple of times. I don't suppose it will happen again any time soon.

What it really comes down to is not individual conscience but a collective conscience that will not tolerate "who is right" debate. As long as one, ONE, user rises to the bait it's a lost cause. I'f no one would so much as respond to such blatant baiting it would soon wither and die. If the individual (myself included) here would exhibit just some personal accountability CK would never have created this thread.

So how many took the time to translate the quote?
"Kill them all; let God sort them out."

 

[Martian]

I get the dilemma.
Just looking for solutions to the problem instead of the one that I feel is coming soon.

At the end of the day I am just a guest here. It's not my sandbox.

 

[Handy Andy]

Actually both are good answers...

Just not sure of Killing them All is the measure you need...

I tend to side with Martian moreso on the aggrandizement of one shop over another.

We really should be careful on what we consider acceptable promotion versus haughty SPAM, one promotes an idea all can benefit from thru verifiable proof anyone can test versus the free advertising someone gets for their campaign - either for or against someone else - which can be based more upon opinion of ones' self versus being proven by others in separate tests.

So the debate continues.

:+> Andy <+:

 

[Dmans]

My personal solution to the never ending off-handed comments by one certain individual to incite argument, I just used the "IGNORE" button on this particular guest.

I feel happy already!

73's
David

 

[sunbulls]

Right vs. wrong leaves little or no room for discussing problems that so often have multiple correct solutions. It seems we don’t have enough female problem solvers in the mix to help squelch some of that testosterone. Right or wrong, at least they’re usually held at higher level of respect. A pissing contest? No, that won’t work…. Woman’s scorn? Possibly….

 

[338_MtRushmore]

Unfortunately I don't have a good solution. The best I could come up with is to move a problem thread to a different section where it could be isolated and much harder for people to stumble upon. I'm pretty sure that we are all here for the knowledge base, and to avoid all the ridiculous bs that you find on other forums.

I am torn on this issue because free speech and ideas are very important to me. With that said, babbling bs nonsense is not what this community is about. At the end of the day, I say that dirty laundry should not be aired.

 

[Riverman]

IBM's Watson says: Problem Unsolvable. Human sample sizes of thirteen have a .0000001% chance all subjects will acquiesce due to conflicting personality traits. (As a result, juries are limited to twelve members.) WWDX, meanwhile, has thousands of members.

Dmans, the Ignore Button is great for strong-willed individuals but for the rest of us, it's a pack of Marlboros and a Bic lighter a week into quitting after a lifetime of smoking.

sunbulls, maybe we could get a few of our wives to problem-solve for us.
Or not.

I think Martian is on the right track with his proposal while Kopcicle and Handy Andy are . . . well . . . Kopcicle and Handy Andy.

 

[Martian]

After the things that were pointed out my solution isn't ideal either but perhaps it will inspire a better one.

What my thought logic was regarding that:
I approach things with the assumption that I am dealing with rational human beings.
What I am seeing for myself now is that these two camps contain anything but rational people.
It seems more like instead of agreeing that water is wet, these people, particularly the Fine Tune variants, would rather argue if it is water to start with.
They would argue about how much deuterium might have been in that water to make it heavy or light water if it suited the narrative.

It's more like blind devotion covered up by semantics, weasel words, and hair splitting.

As to "free speech" - as far as I see it my "free speech" only goes as far as what the site administration determines it should be.

What I still hope for is rational discussion.

 

[543_Dallas]

How about an experiment? Can we have section of the forum that is not accessible to the general public where fine tune cb topics, snake radio and rpc propaganda can be posted? Members would have to ask for access so the guys that truly don't want to see the BS don't have to.

Since there will be less people to feed the fire these threads will fizzle out quickly. This won't work if everyone asks for admission so they can have something to piss and moan about when nothing is happening on 7200 or one of the other slums.

 

[Riverman]

How about an experiment? Can we have section of the forum that is not accessible to the general public where fine tune cb topics, snake radio and rpc propaganda can be posted? Members would have to ask for access so the guys that truly don't want to see the BS don't have to.

Since there will be less people to feed the fire these threads will fizzle out quickly. This won't work if everyone asks for admission so they can have something to piss and moan about when nothing is happening on 7200 or one of the other slums.

Great idea, 543!
Out of sight, out of mind.
Perfect for those two threads but I don't think individual members should be confined there.

Once a new thread begins to go downhill, Captain can issue a warning it is about to be whisked away to the barrens if things don't improve.

 

[338_MtRushmore]

Great idea, 543!
Out of sight, out of mind.
Perfect for those two threads but I don't think individual members should be confined there.

Once a new thread begins to go downhill, Captain can issue a warning it is about to be whisked away to the barrens if things don't improve.

Glad he thought of that and posted it first

 

[Shadetree Mechanic]

If the threads that become a problem get moved then the value of the good part of it will get lost. It will no longer be in the topic section and randomly jumbled up with any other topic. Restricting access to non members will keep it out of view, but all members would need to have equal access. I think normal threads that go off the deep end should get locked down and if people want to bitch and moan about something then they can post in the members section.

 

[543_Dallas]

Glad he thought of that and posted it first

I didn't read your post but my idea doesn't involve moving threads. That makes more work for moderators. Have a section for cb shop threads and you tube tech discussion that you don't even see unless you ask to be a part of the group.

The members that say they don't want to see the BS won't see it. These shops won't be getting free advertisement. I called it an experiment because I think most of the people that complain will ask for access and nothing will really change. However, since it is a private group it can be set up where those posts do not show up on a Google search. No free advertisement.

 

[Martian]

I understand the free advertisement thing.
But that won't help the community air it's dirty laundry.

My only argument about doing it that way is that they control the narrative.
They can say whatever they want and cherry pick, because nobody will see it unless they jump thru hoops to verify it.