"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
In article , Keith G
wrote:


Given that this group is not entirely made up from 'industry pros' (real
or imagined) or 'audio/electronics engineers' (?), there will be
instances where people cannot easily argue their case with *tangibles*
and/or supply meaningful research data. It is up to the 'technical
types' here to find out what point such a person is making without
expecting said 'tangibles', if they wish to take issue with such points
without the frustration you mention.

The problem is that if someone makes a claim but provides no assessable
evidence or details, then may be impossible to assess what they say.
This isn't a matter of how technically capable anyone may be, but of
having
no assessable information.


Yes I understand that, but what I'm concerned about is that if the
requirements are forever too exacting they will stifle comment from many
quarters. I know from offlist conversations in the past that a number of
posters gave up here because they didn't feel free to comment on anything
much without being 'put right' all the time or being pulled up for the
wording &c. of their posts.

The point of these groups is debate and the exchange of information - much
of the information/comment offered here will be incorrect or exaggerated,
either way it's up to the skill of the debaters to keep communications open,
otherwise that point is lost. Topics in this group are 'cyclic' - perhaps it
isn't always possible or even necessary to get a clear understanding by all
parties, first time round...??



Of course, it is up to the person making the claims if they are willing to
give any evidence/details when asked. Just as it is up to others to decide
if the claim is worth taking seriously or not.


Quite. Some will be, other will not be - goes with the territory...