Re: Death to ABXers! Read Testament Here!

On May 5, 8:20=A0am, Jenn <jennconductsREMOVET...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> In article
> <f24d8cfe-940e-41bc-876c-1304766e8...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
>
>
>
>
>
> =A0ScottW <Scott...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > On May 4, 2:18=A0pm, Jenn <jennconductsREMOVET...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > > In article
> > > <86b2fbfb-8baa-4ed4-bca0-060f014af...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
>
> > > =A0ScottW <Scott...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > > > On May 4, 1:25=A0pm, Jenn <jennconductsREMOVET...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > > > > In article
> > > > >
<d2e1879a-f457-4e31-9159-877006388...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>=
,
>
> > > > > =A0ScottW <Scott...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > > > > >My beef with reviewers is simple. =A0Their bias extends well
> > > > > > beyond sighted influence to advertising dollar influence.
>
> > > > > Evidence?
>
> > > > Green pens, power cables, pingo discs, stardust etc etc etc.
>
> > > So those are some reviews with which you disagree. =A0Where is the
> > > evidence that it was money that influenced them?
>
> > Process of elimination. =A0This is the most likely
>
> Why?

   You remind me of my grandkids at times.

>
> > and the least
> > damning of all possible causes.
>
> Doesn't mean that it's the correct one.

I'm cutting 'em slack.  The alternatives to corruption
are worse IMO.   Go ahead and think worse than corruption
if you choose, I'd be curious to hear your evidence.

>
>
>
> > > > Money is the ultimate bias. When it's involved corruption follows.
> > > > No one is immune.
>
> > > I see. =A0So you are against all reviews in all areas, i.e. food,
wine=
,
> > > concerts, movies, books, etc?
>
> > =A0Not at all. Wine, movies and concerts are all obviously
> > subjective areas.
>
> All of them listed are subjective.
>
> > =A0And they are often critical.
> > But you make a good point.
> > The wine industry is full of pompous fools who
> > can't tell apple juice from goat urine.
> > The beer fools are even worse. How does Miller
> > Lite get those awards?
> > When was the last audio review you read that said this
> > amp sounds just like about 40,000 other amps of similar
> > design?
>
> I agree that there are not enough negative reviews. =A0Absolute Sounds
> probably leads that category. =A0By the way, did you read their reviews
> during the time that they didn't accept any advertising? =A0Or Audio
> Critic?

  No, but I was reading Stereo Review many years ago when it
was subscription funded.   I don't recall promotion of ridiculous
products.

>
>
>
> > > > For example...when you submitted your resume to Mira Costa
> > > > you likely included some significant accomplishments.
> > > > Did you also highlight your weaknesses, your failures,
> > > > your ****ups?
>
> > > > No? Where's the evidence?
>
> > > Just about the biggest apples vs. oranges I've yet seen. =A0I mean
> > > really...
>
> > Hey... you want the job. They want the adds.
>
> Still apples and oranges.

 And all fruit.

>=A0It's a one's job with a job application to
> promote oneself.

 It's one piece of equipement provided at no expense to
promote one product.

>
> > And showing a willingness to be critical isn't going
> > to create the stampede of equipment providers to
> > the rags doors now is it?
>
> So again, you are pretty much against all reviews are aren't strictly a
> telling of objective data?

 Nope. I'm against reviews where the $$money$$ bias in play
is so obvious you can almost see it.

ScottW