recstar24 Posted July 22, 2007 Report Posted July 22, 2007 What's wrong? Afraid of getting perm-banned from Head-fi? Oh no, what a tragic loss that would be, however will you live if that happened? Yup. Pretty much. I cannot live without my daily head-fi fix. Can you? ...oh wait...I forgot
bhd812 Posted July 22, 2007 Report Posted July 22, 2007 What's wrong? Afraid of getting perm-banned from Head-fi? Oh no, what a tragic loss that would be, however will you live if that happened? thats like picking a chic at a bipolar clinic..nothing good can happen..only gets worse..haha
philodox Posted July 22, 2007 Report Posted July 22, 2007 You didn't call Jude a fascist did you? I hear he doesn't like that much.
aerius Posted July 22, 2007 Report Posted July 22, 2007 thats like picking a chic at a bipolar clinic..nothing good can happen..only gets worse..haha Speaking from personal experience?
909 Posted July 22, 2007 Report Posted July 22, 2007 You didn't call Jude a fascist did you? I hear he doesn't like that much. I wonder why anyone would call him that... It's his own website. He can do whatever he wants.
bhd812 Posted July 22, 2007 Report Posted July 22, 2007 Speaking from personal experience? sadly yes.. \
philodox Posted July 22, 2007 Report Posted July 22, 2007 I wonder why anyone would call him that... It's his own website. He can do whatever he wants. Well, it is more of a community than a personal website, so I beg to differ. In any case, I was just making a semi inside joke there. I've got no problem with Jude any more.
Dusty Chalk Posted July 22, 2007 Report Posted July 22, 2007 I wonder why anyone would call him that... It's his own website. He can do whatever he wants. It stopped being completely his as soon as he started accepting money from sponsoring members and advertisers. Plus, he plays it like it's a public forum, so I beg to differ.
909 Posted July 23, 2007 Report Posted July 23, 2007 Well, it is more of a community than a personal website, so I beg to differ. In any case, I was just making a semi inside joke there. I've got no problem with Jude any more. Yes, without exception Head-Fi is an online community, yet it is also owned by one private individual. The community isn't the final decision maker regardless of whatever outside influences may or may not have sway over those handpicked to help run the place. It stopped being completely his as soon as he started accepting money from sponsoring members and advertisers. Plus, he plays it like it's a public forum, so I beg to differ. I differ too. He may accept advertising dollars, sponsor fees, and offer special privileges to yearly due paying members, which doesn't in anyway convey any ownership rights to those willing to pay to play. Nor does expressing it's a "public forum" necessarily make it so since no one has any so-called "rights" on Head-Fi. We're basically at best just guests some more welcomed than others and some not welcome at all. In this regard, I am being a realist and not an idealist.
Dusty Chalk Posted July 23, 2007 Report Posted July 23, 2007 You're also being wrong. What if it had started out as a co-op? What if, say, 17 individuals got together, pooled their resources, and bought a domain name, set up a forum, and so on? What if one of those individuals had a 50% share, and the other 16 had a 50% share -- who would be the "owner"? What if one of those individuals had invested 98% as much as everyone else combined (49/51 split kind of thing)? What if one of those individuals had invested 102% as much as everyone else combined (51/49 split)? What if someone initially invested 51%, but then, as expenses grew, that individual stopped paying as much, so that the total outlay became 49%? I disagree that it's as clear-cut as you would so idealistically like to describe it, Mr. paint-by-numbers.
qazwsx Posted July 23, 2007 Report Posted July 23, 2007 The owner would be the one who gets all the pie.
Chekhonte Posted July 23, 2007 Author Report Posted July 23, 2007 Of course jude is entitled to do what ever he wants with head-fi. what pisses me off is that he chooses to make it an over moderated crapbox. He's been working in an office for far too long in my opinion. He acts like if one person posts a picture of a pre-op, double amputee transexual the world will come apart. NSFW http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u46/aaroncort/JPW_MAdameX_600.jpg NSFW I really don't think that will happen.
909 Posted July 23, 2007 Report Posted July 23, 2007 You're also being wrong. What if it had started out as a co-op? What if, say, 17 individuals got together, pooled their resources, and bought a domain name, set up a forum, and so on? What if one of those individuals had a 50% share, and the other 16 had a 50% share -- who would be the "owner"? What if one of those individuals had invested 98% as much as everyone else combined (49/51 split kind of thing)? What if one of those individuals had invested 102% as much as everyone else combined (51/49 split)? What if someone initially invested 51%, but then, as expenses grew, that individual stopped paying as much, so that the total outlay became 49%? I disagree that it's as clear-cut as you would so idealistically like to describe it, Mr. paint-by-numbers. you've got a lot of what-ifs & are you just what-if-ing or is there any acutal and factual applicability in your post cause I don't see it nor know about it. What are you suggesting? Jude doesn't legally own Head-Fi? Then how many people should have been included in this "co-op" and who are they? what did they do? who getz final say? I see this just as more idealism. I am a member of a co-op, but I've got no power or say. over moderated--just go to stevehoffman's website makes Head-Fi's moderation seem passive
hungrych Posted July 23, 2007 Report Posted July 23, 2007 Dude... seriously. I didn't need to see that. Put a warning or something.
Chekhonte Posted July 23, 2007 Author Report Posted July 23, 2007 don't post NSFW images inline, please. I didn't think of that. sorry and thanks for the heads up
909 Posted July 23, 2007 Report Posted July 23, 2007 other than some eyebleach for hungry and 909, it's ok rather the pic than the eyebleach--thank you very much.
Dusty Chalk Posted July 23, 2007 Report Posted July 23, 2007 you've got a lot of what-ifs & are you just what-if-ing or is there any acutal and factual applicability in your post cause I don't see it nor know about it. What are you suggesting? Jude doesn't legally own Head-Fi? Then how many people should have been included in this "co-op" and who are they? what did they do? who getz final say? I see this just as more idealism.You say that like it's a bad thing. Those are all hypothetical what-if statements. They're there to make you think.
grawk Posted July 23, 2007 Report Posted July 23, 2007 You say that like it's a bad thing. Those are all hypothetical what-if statements. They're there to make you think. Ok, on some hypothetical commune forum, jude doesn't have ownership. On headfi, he does. C'est la vie. Now we have a place where we exchange the danger of accidentally seeing pics of chekhonte for a higher signal to noise ratio. And jude gets to make a profit after helping grow the hobby to the point where there are a lot more options. Everybody wins. Except newbies, and who cares about newbies?
Dusty Chalk Posted July 23, 2007 Report Posted July 23, 2007 And jude gets to make a profit after helping grow the hobby to the point where there are a lot more options. Everybody wins. Except newbies, and who cares about newbies?I don't see it that way -- as everybody winning. Yes, there are a lot more options, but some of them are crappy. You get enough newbies burned (and some of those "newbies" write for stereophile), and the whole hobby leaves a bad taste in their mouth. So that cancels the growth that he "helped" (he didn't do it by himself, he just gave a place for people to go when headwize was frequently down due to bandwidth restrictions). That still doesn't take care of the profit, nor of the burned newbies. Some of my best friends are newbies. L, I was a newbie once, and still am when it comes to DIY and understanding design. So what you're saying is, who cares about me? Well fuck you very much.
909 Posted July 23, 2007 Report Posted July 23, 2007 You say that like it's a bad thing. Those are all hypothetical what-if statements. They're there to make you think. Understandable, and by no means had I wished to imply "it's a bad thing." But wanted to know if it had been fact based.
Chekhonte Posted July 25, 2007 Author Report Posted July 25, 2007 So if we're all ip unnbanned from head-fi it stands to reason that all the con artist's IP have also been unbanned. I wonder if any of them will return.
hirsch Posted July 26, 2007 Report Posted July 26, 2007 You say that like it's a bad thing. Those are all hypothetical what-if statements. They're there to make you think. If you make a contribution to the Red Cross, do you get a say in how the Red Cross is run? Nope. It's a gift. Your only options are to give or not. Different situation with the sponsors. They are paying for a service. Jude has obligations to them. However, contributing members get nothing but the knowledge that they have helped line Jude's pockets (and I think that we can bury the idea that Head-Fi is running a deficit these days).
grawk Posted July 26, 2007 Report Posted July 26, 2007 If you make a contribution to the Red Cross, do you get a say in how the Red Cross is run? Nope. It's a gift. Your only options are to give or not. Different situation with the sponsors. They are paying for a service. Jude has obligations to them. However, contributing members get nothing but the knowledge that they have helped line Jude's pockets (and I think that we can bury the idea that Head-Fi is running a deficit these days). Ignoring the non-profit status of the red cross, of course.
Recommended Posts