The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
25% Tariff On Chinese Goods Threatens U.S. Synth Manufacturers Modular Synthesizers
Old 7th July 2018
  #181
Lives for gear
 
Somebodyperson's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by T_R_S View Post
It not quite that simple
in 1979 I paid $30.00 for this clock radio - I remember I thought is was fortune but I needed it. That clock radio is $100.00 in 2018 dollars
My first Macintosh in 1985 cost me $3000.00 an extra 1 MB (not GB) was $1000.00
btw that computer you're typing on would cost $5,000.00 if is was made in the USA.
And now you can get those clocks at goodwill for 5 bucks...i know....i have a few....got one that was made to look like a Moog but I gave it to one of my customers lol
Old 7th July 2018
  #182
Lives for gear
 
Somebodyperson's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kja View Post
all you folks calling me a scrooge.. Remember why nobody buys music or plays guitar anymore.. Remember when synths like the lyra go away never to return.. When there is no more small guys or weird different stuff.. Remember then what your cheap synths that all sound the same and boring what they really costed you.. A lot more than the $300.. But then you will move on like guitars to the next cool underground thing untell it too becomes cheap crappified..

And I'm A scrooge and full of it? Whatever a fool and his money..
One word: Delusional




Take it from me, I am a crazy person.
Old 8th July 2018
  #183
Lives for gear
 
monomer's Avatar
 

Seriously tho, how much of a Moog's price is directly related to chinese components?
Anyone dare to speculate?
Old 8th July 2018
  #184
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by monomer View Post
Seriously tho, how much of a Moog's price is directly related to chinese components?
Anyone dare to speculate?
In the Minimoog ?
The famous "200$ in (electronic) parts" ?
Probably even less than that.
Old 8th July 2018
  #185
Lives for gear
 
monomer's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutantt View Post
In the Minimoog ?
The famous "200$ in (electronic) parts" ?
Probably even less than that.
Yeah, that's what i was thinking as well.
So this tariff thing, i would say that it will only apply to that $200 part.
Old 8th July 2018
  #186
Lives for gear
 
Somebodyperson's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by monomer View Post
Yeah, that's what i was thinking as well.
So this tariff thing, i would say that it will only apply to that $200 part.

So like a $50 increase....oh no, Moog is done for....pa leeze

ฯ.ฯ
Old 8th July 2018
  #187
f33
Gear Maniac
 

its funny when the 'dont tax me' crowd says, 'who cares about paying extra for unneeded taxes, its just a few dollars'.

but then not only that, its a tax levied to bring jobs back that arent coming back.

but ...
Old 8th July 2018
  #188
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by f33 View Post
its funny when the 'dont tax me' crowd says, 'who cares about paying extra for unneeded taxes, its just a few dollars'.

but then not only that, its a tax levied to bring jobs back that arent coming back.

but ...
Yes. Immediate emotional impulse, which is what a large percentage of this demographic operates under, has no underlying principal or consistency. Nor does it take into account basic action->reaction in achieving an objective, beyond "screaming this stuff over and over makes me feel good in a very dark kind of way right now."
Old 9th July 2018
  #189
It really is a bit of a Berlin Wall moment.
Old 9th July 2018
  #190
Quote:
Originally Posted by LDStudios View Post
It really is a bit of a Berlin Wall moment.
Sadly... building... not tearing down. =/
Old 10th July 2018
  #191
Lives for gear
 
NEXUS-6's Avatar
 



pist sex lols...
Old 10th July 2018
  #192
Quote:
Originally Posted by theblue1 View Post
Sadly... building... not tearing down. =/
Indeed. I think it was JFK who said the erection of the Berlin Wall was the greatest admission of failure for communism - an apparent workers utopian revolution that ultimately needed to stem the flow of people leaving it.

Here is a rant for you - It seems we are in a very similar place, just at the opposite end of the politico-economic spectrum. In a society so forcefully emerged in free market principles and globalisation, some of the the biggest purveyors of such ideals are now calling for a wall to be built. Both a literal and figurative wall. It surely is the greatest admission of failure? With that being said, it does seem like it was a self fulfilling prophesy from the very beginning. When presented with globalised, free market economics how could a steel worker in one of the world's richest countries ever make steal for as cheaply as a steel worker in a second world country like China?

While communism and capitalism may be polar opposites in idea, they have seem to become almost identical in implementation. It's really not surprising. Life and society and the struggles and problems that arise are far too complicated, and far too valuable to subscribed to any idea of a predetermined answer. That is what partisan politics does. It gives pre-determined answers, often before problems even exist.

Perplexing.
Old 10th July 2018
  #193
Lives for gear
 
Muser's Avatar
I thought it was all about every man for himself. in which case I wouldn't worry too much because all potus family businesses were given exemptions from the Tariffs.
Old 10th July 2018
  #194
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by LDStudios View Post
Here is a rant for you - It seems we are in a very similar place, just at the opposite end of the politico-economic spectrum. In a society so forcefully emerged in free market principles and globalisation, some of the the biggest purveyors of such ideals are now calling for a wall to be built. Both a literal and figurative wall. It surely is the greatest admission of failure?
Well. . . one wall was to keep people in, the other is meant to keep people out. A rather significant difference from the "admission of failure" angle.

Thing is, illegal immigration has been at an equilibrium point for over a decade. . these are concerns from decades long gone. IE there's no point in the wall at all, it serves as a rhetorical advice for riling up the hate in a certain emotionally-fueled voting demographic. The fact that the wall is absolutely NOT necessary anymore is more a sign that things aren't looking as bright in the US as they once did.

I'm not for walls of any kind, but even as bad as the nationalistic fools in the US are its nothing at all like Soviet era Russia. Perspective is important.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LDStudios View Post
With that being said, it does seem like it was a self fulfilling prophesy from the very beginning. When presented with globalised, free market economics how could a steel worker in one of the world's richest countries ever make steal for as cheaply as a steel worker in a second world country like China?
Remeber when the 1% used to spend their own money to try to STOP this stuff? Back when it wasn't even the 1%, the distribution was more 90/10.

Giant sucking sound - Wikipedia

The thing is, globalization is inevitable as the human race continues to progress, the riddle to solve is how to maximize its benefits for everyone the most.
Old 10th July 2018
  #195
Quote:
Originally Posted by LDStudios View Post
Indeed. I think it was JFK who said the erection of the Berlin Wall was the greatest admission of failure for communism - an apparent workers utopian revolution that ultimately needed to stem the flow of people leaving it.

Here is a rant for you - It seems we are in a very similar place, just at the opposite end of the politico-economic spectrum. In a society so forcefully emerged in free market principles and globalisation, some of the the biggest purveyors of such ideals are now calling for a wall to be built. Both a literal and figurative wall. It surely is the greatest admission of failure? With that being said, it does seem like it was a self fulfilling prophesy from the very beginning. When presented with globalised, free market economics how could a steel worker in one of the world's richest countries ever make steal for as cheaply as a steel worker in a second world country like China?

While communism and capitalism may be polar opposites in idea, they have seem to become almost identical in implementation. It's really not surprising. Life and society and the struggles and problems that arise are far too complicated, and far too valuable to subscribed to any idea of a predetermined answer. That is what partisan politics does. It gives pre-determined answers, often before problems even exist.

Perplexing.
The dream of global free markets is predicated in part on the thinking that free market processes would raise the living standards of those in the developing world, eventually resulting in a more even distribution of economic resources.

Sadly, of course, the problem with political and economic systems of every stripe is that they are comprised of people and, sadly, about one third of any given population will, given free rein, try to improve their own situation with little or no regard to the rights (let alone needs) of others, in essence taking anything they can get. Another third of a given population tends to hold more positive, communitarian goals and the 'middle' tends to flux one way or another in the current of national and global events. (I immodestly named this rather generalized, obvious principle as Tom Major's Rule of Thirds back in the 1980s.)


Free markets, on the large scale, can be the most efficient way of funding and marketing the creation of goods and services and can be dynamic hosts for human-employing enterprises -- but without adequate policing, just as with communistic systems, a sizable number of the humans who comprise them will, driven by unenlightened self-interest, work to corrupt them in order to gain economic advantage out of proportion to their legitimate effort.
Old 11th July 2018
  #196
Quote:
Originally Posted by newguy1 View Post
Well. . . one wall was to keep people in, the other is meant to keep people out. A rather significant difference from the "admission of failure" angle.
It really is though, given what a free market actually means. The direction of the flow of people is superficial - it is the justifications for curbing that flow, which in both cases are directly contrary to the very economic principles being spruiked. Tariffs, walls, slashing immigration, removing a whole nation from a continent wide economic union. They are all anti-capitalistic and reminiscent of left wing politics from 40+ years ago, but they are being adopted so vehemently by parties and political figures and supporters on the right.

Quote:
Thing is, illegal immigration has been at an equilibrium point for over a decade. . these are concerns from decades long gone. IE there's no point in the wall at all, it serves as a rhetorical advice for riling up the hate in a certain emotionally-fueled voting demographic. The fact that the wall is absolutely NOT necessary anymore is more a sign that things aren't looking as bright in the US as they once did.
But to whom is the US not looking as bright? It is hard to imagine people strolling into Silicon Valley every day for work are living it particularly tough? Free market private enterprise seems to really have delivered in the USA in that way - innovation has made a lot of people wealthy. GNI per capita has only increased over the last 60 or 70 years. For all intents and purposes, the US economy is a very advanced economy. It seems there is a weird juxtaposition of people angry about lacking or losing work to people who can do it cheaper, which at first sight does seem like free market principles in action?

Quote:
I'm not for walls of any kind, but even as bad as the nationalistic fools in the US are its nothing at all like Soviet era Russia. Perspective is important.
That is true. GDR's wall was a truly horrific thing, and the US is very far from it. Excuse the crassness, but I do think there is a lot to be said about drawing the line at being an a$$hole. Being a bigger a$$hole doesn't make someone else less of an a$$hole. You are simply either an a$$hole, or your not. And a wall, whether literal, figurative or as a threat, puts people on the wrong side of that line. And by people, I mean Ronald McDonald and his clan of nutty biscuits.

Quote:
Remeber when the 1% used to spend their own money to try to STOP this stuff? Back when it wasn't even the 1%, the distribution was more 90/10.

Giant sucking sound - Wikipedia

The thing is, globalization is inevitable as the human race continues to progress, the riddle to solve is how to maximize its benefits for everyone the most.

Quote:
Originally Posted by theblue1 View Post
The dream of global free markets is predicated in part on the thinking that free market processes would raise the living standards of those in the developing world, eventually resulting in a more even distribution of economic resources.

Sadly, of course, the problem with political and economic systems of every stripe is that they are comprised of people and, sadly, about one third of any given population will, given free rein, try to improve their own situation with little or no regard to the rights (let alone needs) of others, in essence taking anything they can get. Another third of a given population tends to hold more positive, communitarian goals and the 'middle' tends to flux one way or another in the current of national and global events. (I immodestly named this rather generalized, obvious principle as Tom Major's Rule of Thirds back in the 1980s.)


Free markets, on the large scale, can be the most efficient way of funding and marketing the creation of goods and services and can be dynamic hosts for human-employing enterprises -- but without adequate policing, just as with communistic systems, a sizable number of the humans who comprise them will, driven by unenlightened self-interest, work to corrupt them in order to gain economic advantage out of proportion to their legitimate effort.
I apologise for how long-winded this will be...

That does seem a bit contrary though, Mr Blue? A free market economy by it's very definition has no policing. It adheres to market forces beyond all else. Perhaps the GFC, Chase and Lehman Bros is the perfect example of your rule of thirds? To many it was a tragedy effecting many hard working people, with the Chase bail out being completely justified and the Lehman Bros bankruptcy a missed opportunity to provide extra aid. To others, it is the complete opposite. Investment is nothing more than hedging your bets, crossing your fingers and hoping for the best, the cream rises, and the crap sinks, the free market is based on merit, and Chase and Lehman Bros got what they deserved, and the government overstepped by bailing Chase out. It is a completely opposite interpretation of the same situation. Arguably, the latter is a more accurate description of what free market economics is in principle, and the former is the corruption of it. The whole basis of free market economics is merit and self-interest, after all?

Adam Smith himself spruiked the very notion that self-interest has the unintended consequence of promoting society as a whole. To be led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention. You be selfish, and it will inadvertently benefit the whole of society. The trickle down theory. The same notions pushed by Reaganomics, or Thatcherism. Even over the last week or so the Treasurer of the Australia Government has said ad nauseum that we "need to grow the pie bigger. That way everyone gets a bigger slice". We have been pursuing these same policies for the last three or four decades and inequity has rapidly increased.

Don't get me wrong, I do definitely think free market economics has upsides. I even think some bits of it can be overhauled to be even more competitive (patents for example). But I feel as though the path we are currently set on began long ago. Maybe as far back as the outbreak of war in 1930s or earlier when it became very 'us or them' - You either fully support free market economics, or you're a communist. Particularly over the last four decades, a lot of good ideas, supported by evidence have gone down the drain just because it doesn't align with some idealistic notion that the 'team' have chosen. Universal healthcare for example, is something I would never want to give up.

Regardless of whether it is communism or capitalism, it is all idealistic. Theories on paper. A US news reporter asked Stalin why his communist empire didn't resemble Karl Marx's description of a communist society, and he remarked something along the lines of "who is Marx? He is a theorist. I am a practitioner. Things change when you move from theory into practice". Could that not also be an apt description of capitalism as we are witnessing it? Maybe it does concentrate wealth towards the top, without the benefits for the rest of society for extended periods of time? Perhaps free market economics just ultimately favours those third of people who prioritise self interest above all else?

I guess what I am getting at is, if the rule of thirds exist then any pre-described fringe economic theory was never going to work, and is never going to work. It isn't so much sad as it probably was always inevitable. Further policing of the free markets via regulations, etc is a step back towards the centre for a right wing society. It definitely isn't a bad thing, particularly for the distribution of wealth... but if the free market was providing as theory promised, it also wouldn't be necessary.

There is actually an interesting study about political orientation, society and happiness that was performed over a 30 odd year period in Europe. It basically rates people's perceived happiness, while comparing their political orientation to that of the society they live in. The conclusion was that the most unhappy people are some right wing conservatives in right wing societies. It all boils down to psychology and way we evaluated our own self-worth, but basically it suggests that conservative individual who has fallen on hard times in a conservative society has a much harder time cognitively joining the dots about their situation. If that same individual went through the same situation in a central or further to the left society where strong social nets are in place, then they don't fall as far. Second place was just left wing people, because social justice is a pursuit with no end - there will always be injustices of some kind. http://faculty.virginia.edu/haidtlab...social-cog.pdf

Give it a read if you fancy. Answers to a lot of problems are what we need, but it sure doesn't paint the problems as being any simpler to solve!
Old 11th July 2018
  #197
Gear Addict
Quote:
Originally Posted by LDStudios View Post
But to whom is the US not looking as bright? It is hard to imagine people strolling into Silicon Valley every day for work are living it particularly tough?
The people working in the computer industry in Silicon Valley (of which I am one) are the top 10%, or I should say the 9% after the top 1%. They’re not the bottom 90%.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LDStudios View Post
Free market private enterprise seems to really have delivered in the USA in that way - innovation has made a lot of people wealthy. GNI per capita has only increased over the last 60 or 70 years. For all intents and purposes, the US economy is a very advanced economy. It seems there is a weird juxtaposition of people angry about lacking or losing work to people who can do it cheaper, which at first sight does seem like free market principles in action?
The people making the most money are not the innovators. Jeff Bezos did not invent the Internet or computers or any of the computer languages used to power Amazon. How rich are the people who invented those things?

You cannot look at GNI per capita as an average because the top 1% are getting exponentially richer while the real wages of the bottom have not increased in 40 years. The problem, or one of the problems, is extreme inequality of income and wealth.

Yes, people are angry about losing jobs. But there are Americans losing jobs and income, then there are Americans like the Waltons and the top %1 getting fabulously wealthy by moving the jobs to other parts of the world where labor is cheaper. They are taking advantage of technology they didn’t invent to siphon money from the reaction that happens when economies of two different levels are combined.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LDStudios View Post
Adam Smith himself spruiked the very notion that self-interest has the unintended consequence of promoting society as a whole. To be led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention. You be selfish, and it will inadvertently benefit the whole of society. The trickle down theory. The same notions pushed by Reaganomics, or Thatcherism. Even over the last week or so the Treasurer of the Australia Government has said ad nauseum that we "need to grow the pie bigger. That way everyone gets a bigger slice". We have been pursuing these same policies for the last three or four decades and inequity has rapidly increased.
No doubt Adam Smith was a smart guy, but this idea there’s some “invisible hand” is just not a good one. As Marx points out, capitalism exploits workers. As products are created and sold, the owners make a profit above what it takes to create the product. So the more creating and selling, and the faster the velocity of money, the more profit for the owners. So of course the rich owners want to grow the pie bigger because that means more profit for them because that’s the way capitalism works. The working class only gets a bigger slice of that if there are external countering forces like labor unions and regulations, which have been and which are being decimated in the US as we speak. Unchecked, market capitalism naturally leads to inequality. And that’s what’s been happening in the US since Reagan.

And on a side note, this ignores the realization that growing the economy means using up more of the Earth's resources with no consideration given to long term sustainability. On TV you'll hear economists discussing or arguing about what will stimulate more growth, but never talk about whether growth is a good thing or not. But burning through more and more resources and ignoring ecological ramifications means more profit for the 0.1%.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LDStudios View Post
Don't get me wrong, I do definitely think free market economics has upsides. I even think some bits of it can be overhauled to be even more competitive (patents for example).
But that is the wrong direction. Cooperation is better than competition. Imagine all the waste in the current system as companies making competing products redundantly do the same research and the same work. Then they hire marketing people whose job is to convince consumers that their company’s product is different. Instead imagine a world with no patents where anyone is free to learn from each other and make improvements, the benefits of which are shared by everyone. (Perhaps like the Linux operating system.) You may question that people then have no motivation for working. But even today, when people have to work many hours a week to survive, there is a lot of unpaid charity work done. Imagine how much more there would be if people had to work less because we got rid of all the redundant work and became more efficient, if we took maximum advantage of automation to reduce tedious and repetitive work, if we got rid of the connection between work and income.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LDStudios View Post
But I feel as though the path we are currently set on began long ago. Maybe as far back as the outbreak of war in 1930s or earlier when it became very 'us or them' - You either fully support free market economics, or you're a communist. Particularly over the last four decades, a lot of good ideas, supported by evidence have gone down the drain just because it doesn't align with some idealistic notion that the 'team' have chosen. Universal healthcare for example, is something I would never want to give up.
In the US, a lot of this is deeply rooted as a result of it being a more recent pioneer country. There is a sense of “rugged individualism” so that people are supposed to work hard and look out for themselves. Today people do not want to see their hard-earned money being given to others. That’s one of the reasons we have trouble implementing universal health care. It’s a longer subject, though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LDStudios View Post
Further policing of the free markets via regulations, etc is a step back towards the centre for a right wing society. It definitely isn't a bad thing, particularly for the distribution of wealth... but if the free market was providing as theory promised, it also wouldn't be necessary.
I agree that free markets need to be regulated for them to work at all. (So we have never really had free markets) At this point it’s not a good idea, as some leftists might advocate, to just go back to the policies of the post-Depression and FDR. For one thing, we have already seen those policies get undone which eventually led to the crash of 2008. There’s nothing to stop that from happening again. Furthermore, we’re not in the same place as we were due to technology and automation. These have made many jobs unnecessary and so the idea that one needs to work to get income to survive needs to be re-evaluated. And values need to change.

While democracy means one person = one vote, free markets mean one dollar = one vote. US politics are now controlled by the rich corporations. But isn’t this really just the free market working as intended? Why call this corruption? It’s not crony capitalism; it is capitalism.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LDStudios View Post
There is actually an interesting study about political orientation, society and happiness that was performed over a 30 odd year period in Europe.
And I believe there are studies showing happiness correlates with less inequality of wealth and income. While more inequality correlates with many bad outcomes, such as more crime, worse health outcomes, poor education, and many more.
Old 11th July 2018
  #198
Lives for gear
 
Swurveman's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by djwaxxy View Post
the world needs a slow down and reset button the whole globalist thing and exploitation of cheap labour has gone on too long if tarriffs bring back jobs and respect of your own country and what it can make and produce to me thats a good thing and should be celebrated not feared.
I think it is more likely that corporations will build overseas plants to supply foreign markets to go along with their US plants. They aren't gonna tell their shareholders to be patriotic and only manufacture in the US, they are going to use their capital to do what they've always done-try to maximize profits. In the short term all these tariffs are going to do is increase inflation, which will mean higher prices and increased interest rates.
Old 11th July 2018
  #199
Lives for gear
 
DrJustice's Avatar
 

Enjoying a few precious summer days to come back and find this thread... I'm entertained and appalled in equal measures

Kindly let me remind some of you that

this:



is not the same as this:




Attached Thumbnails
25% Tariff On Chinese Goods Threatens U.S. Synth Manufacturers-x.jpg   25% Tariff On Chinese Goods Threatens U.S. Synth Manufacturers-y.jpg  
Old 24th August 2018
  #200
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maffez View Post
would it make sense for GS to implement a politics section with some legal disclaimer stuff that deflects forum owners' liability to the posters? Many threads on such topics here recently indicate the need for such discussions. Yet frequent lapses into tribalism (maybe less fervent as on specific facebook groups, yet still...) make this also a little tedious, so dunno (not the most active member here anyways) if adjusting the rules might be a thing?
As Reptil says, been there done that got the T-shirt. (don't forget this place has been running for over 15 years now....)

As the forum owner here is my simplistic view on what happened with the GS "Politics, Religion and Serious Social Issues" sub forum.

Participants -

Musicians studio biz types- (a lot of liberals, socialistically minded)
and
???? - (right wing, "hawks' haters (hatred of blacks, muslims, non whites, people not from their country)

I thought that a 'liberal majority' (music biz peeps, artists etc) would keep a 'cool balance". The right wingers would post their "hate" and the articulate and intelligent liberal music biz types would reply back tell them where they were ignorant to hate and keep a balance.

But what, happened was the right wing haters had more stamina - they kept on posting hate and the liberal music biz folks - mostly gave up, got sick of dealing with the haters "stink" and bad vibes and stopped posting.

This just left the haters participating...

So we had a political sub forum full of links to jihadi beheading videos and white supremacist propaganda...

it was like a KKK sub forum..!

As the forum owner I made a decision that I could not stand behind a sub forum full of hate content and that there was no place for it on my hobby community turned industry resource.

So that's why its closed.

BTW - a no politics rule is quite common for online communities (for all the reasons I mention above - IT QUICKLY TURNS TO SH1T )
Old 24th August 2018
  #201
Gear Maniac
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jules View Post
As Reptil says, been there done that got the T-shirt. (don't forget this place has been running for over 15 years now....)

As the forum owner here is my simplistic view on what happened with the GS "Politics, Religion and Serious Social Issues" sub forum.

Participants -

Musicians studio biz types- (a lot of liberals, socialistically minded)
and
???? - (right wing, "hawks' haters (hatred of blacks, muslims, non whites, people not from their country)

I thought that a 'liberal majority' (music biz peeps, artists etc) would keep a 'cool balance". The right wingers would post their "hate" and the articulate and intelligent liberal music biz types would reply back tell them where they were ignorant to hate and keep a balance.

But what, happened was the right wing haters had more stamina - they kept on posting hate and the liberal music biz folks - mostly gave up, got sick of dealing with the haters "stink" and bad vibes and stopped posting.

This just left the haters participating...

So we had a political sub forum full of links to jihadi beheading videos and white supremacist propaganda...

it was like a KKK sub forum..!

As the forum owner I made a decision that I could not stand behind a sub forum full of hate content and that there was no place for it on my hobby community turned industry resource.

So that's why its closed.

BTW - a no politics rule is quite common for online communities (for all the reasons I mention above - IT QUICKLY TURNS TO SH1T )
Hey Jules,

thanks for this detailed explanation. Fully understand your decision on account of what happened in that section. This was before my time in fora, and part of me naively wishes for some polite convo in public spheres, but in the brief meantime I've seen enough stuff hitting the fan to be happy to just talk tech and leave politics to my consumption behaviour.

GS has been a great resource for me in terms of learning about gear, so shutting down nasty parts to keep the original intent going makes absolute sense.
Old 25th August 2018
  #202
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jules View Post
As Reptil says, been there done that got the T-shirt. (don't forget this place has been running for over 15 years now....)

As the forum owner here is my simplistic view on what happened with the GS "Politics, Religion and Serious Social Issues" sub forum.

Participants -

Musicians studio biz types- (a lot of liberals, socialistically minded)
and
???? - (right wing, "hawks' haters (hatred of blacks, muslims, non whites, people not from their country)

I thought that a 'liberal majority' (music biz peeps, artists etc) would keep a 'cool balance". The right wingers would post their "hate" and the articulate and intelligent liberal music biz types would reply back tell them where they were ignorant to hate and keep a balance.

But what, happened was the right wing haters had more stamina - they kept on posting hate and the liberal music biz folks - mostly gave up, got sick of dealing with the haters "stink" and bad vibes and stopped posting.

This just left the haters participating...

So we had a political sub forum full of links to jihadi beheading videos and white supremacist propaganda...

it was like a KKK sub forum..!

As the forum owner I made a decision that I could not stand behind a sub forum full of hate content and that there was no place for it on my hobby community turned industry resource.

So that's why its closed.

BTW - a no politics rule is quite common for online communities (for all the reasons I mention above - IT QUICKLY TURNS TO SH1T )
I stand by your decision. no need to make this anything but a music/gear forum. thanks for chiming in.
Old 3rd September 2018
  #203
Lives for gear
Looks like the Moogerfoogers will cease being manufactured. Coincidence? I think not.
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump