In article .com,
wrote:

Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , Keith G
wrote:



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.


Actually that is *your* problem not *the* problem. The person making the
claim has no problem here.

The claimant has a problem if they want readers to take what they say
seriously, but they do not due to the lack of evidence.

Anyone who wants to take a claim seriously may have a problem if they want
to base their assessment on evidence/details that the claimant won't
provide.

Of course, anyone who does not care if an assertion has any basis in
evidence may not feel there is a problem. That is their choice.



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.


Yes, and since most audiophiles are busy enjoying their systems rather
than gathering evidence those who demand evidence to support claims are
SOL.

No idea what 'SOL' means, I'm afraid.

I have no expectation that "most audiophiles" would provide any evidence
or details at all. Most of them do not appear in magazines or on usenet,
making assertions which others may then want to read and consider.

The curio is that some people *do* make assertions, but then won't provide
evidence/details which allow what they say to be judged as anything more
that an assertion.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html