Closing the Buyer's Guide megathread 👍👎

[Rmarci]

As I've said, this was not an attempt in any way to stop critical messages. Think about it guys, if that were the goal, it would be super easy... DELETE the whole thread, ban @Rmarci and a couple of others, and remove any other critical messages.

But locking the thread will practically have the same effect as deleting it, without making it look like censorship. The fact that Cinelife isn’t the one closing it is also another indication of that agenda since he's been repeating since day 1 how the thread wasnt important and didnt matter.

Once locked, the thread will simply get buried in the forum, and unless someone specifically searches for it, it will effectively disappear. That means more than a year’s worth of data and evidence documenting how Kscape keeps repeating the same mistakes will essentially be hidden from view.

I also said twice that I wasn’t responding to anyone in the thread and that I would simply continue posting my analyses, with objective explanations of the comparisons based on years of experience comparing releases from different sources. Despite that, you still went ahead and locked it.

I’m not interested in creating a new thread for every movie, that would be way too much work. I check 5+ movies per week, and the only way I would continue posting these comparisons is in the existing thread. Otherwise, this is goodbye.

 

[josh]

Being one of the people that is frequently targeted in the attacks, I can say that it was not limited to that thread and continues despite the closure. It does seem like it has stopped Rmarci from posting new image comparisons. He mentioned previously he wouldn't be doing a post per movie.

as i've said, nothing stops him or you or anyone else from just making a new fresh megathread. While I encouraged the concept of a thread per movie, it was never required nor is it now. Was just hoping a new thread might reset the tone and get back to technical discussions of encodes or hardware without the negativity and disrepect shown by some users towards others. It may not work. it may make things worse, it may have unintended effects... I'm trying something i think is a light touch. no deletions. no bans. nothing changed in rules...

I’m not interested in creating a new thread for every movie, that would be way too much work.

this was offered and suggested, but never required.

 

[Rmarci]

as i've said, nothing stops him or you or anyone else from just making a new fresh megathread.

I don’t see the point. There’s already one thread with tons of useful information and objective data. Why would the arguing and bickering in a new thread be any different? If people want to argue or go off topic, they can do that in any thread. Creating a new one isn’t going to change that.

 

[josh]

I don’t see the point. There’s already one thread with tons of useful information and objective data. Why would the arguing and bickering in a new thread be any different? If people want to argue or go off topic, they can do that in any thread. Creating a new one isn’t going to change that.

you may be right. it was an attempt. you aren't seeing the volume of complaints i get about the tone in that thread, the people saying the nastiness (not the comments, not the analyses, not criticisms of Kaleidescape) has severely and negatively impacted their desire to be here.

 

[cal87]

Either open a new thread, or maybe re-open the old thread after a period of cooling off.
In either case, it would be a see how it goes type of thing.

 

[Htjinus]

While still waiting for Cinelife’s comment on the earlier questions, have three additional questions for Josh and Cinelife regarding forum independence and governance.

@josh

1. Following the closure of a thread containing extensive independent technical findings critical of a Kaleidescape product, what concrete steps will the forum take to preserve that analysis and ensure critical findings receive the same protection and visibility as favorable commentary?

@cinelife

2. When a moderation issue involves criticism that could potentially affect Kaleidescape purchasing decisions, do you participate in that decision, or do you recuse yourself given your role as an Authorized Kaleidescape Dealer?

3. If a forum member has a commercial relationship with you — including purchases, discounts, movie credits or other dealer benefits — is there a policy requiring that relationship to be disclosed when either you or that member participates in discussions about Kaleidescape products?

 

[OUTATIME]

you may be right. it was an attempt. you aren't seeing the volume of complaints i get about the tone in that thread, the people saying the nastiness (not the comments, not the analyses, not criticisms of Kaleidescape) has severely and negatively impacted their desire to be here.

Can the old thread be reopened but only allow Rmarci or Kaleidescape staff to make new posts in that thread? Then moving forward we just have the analytical posts without having to wade through 5 pages of comments/bickering/etc after each post.

 

[Rmarci]

you may be right. it was an attempt. you aren't seeing the volume of complaints i get about the tone in that thread, the people saying the nastiness (not the comments, not the analyses, not criticisms of Kaleidescape) has severely and negatively impacted their desire to be here.

Maybe just clean up the comments you find unnecessary or offensive, even if that includes some of my posts, I dont care.

If the posts are really that nasty, though, why keep them up at all? Just delete them... Locking the thread is the most illogical option IMO, unless the intent was to bury the issues as i said.

I know that I, and others, can be pretty harsh on Kscape, and I’ve certainly mocked them as well as a few users who clearly misunderstood the analysis or just mocked me or tried to discredit me. But considering how much money we’ve paid for their products, the issues we’ve uncovered, and the insane amount of time it took to get some of them fixed, I think we have every right to be critical of them when there are clear rrecurring quality-control problems.

 

[Furnace Inferno]

I wasn’t going to post in here but reading this thread it’s clear that certain people will never change how they behave or even have any outward understanding that it’s their repeated actions that have caused the thread to be closed.

It’s a real shame it did because I found the comparisons interesting even if I never saw any of the macroblocking issues myself which made sense after Rmarci said it was much harder to see on low nit displays (projectors) and I didn’t actively look for it.

There’s essentially only 2 scenarios where history doesn’t repeat itself, a thread only Rmarci and KScape employs can post in or a thread entirely for objective results and technical discussions around them.

To be clear the latter would mean only posting the objective data and pointing out the technical differences, whether that be softness, more/less grain etc. As soon as anyone (and I include Rmarci in that) starts saying things like, “it’s way worse”, “they’re incompetent” etc. those are subjective opinions which then opens up the floor to other people’s subjective opinions. It’s a fact that those technical issues are there but the severity of those and whether they are visible to someone is an opinion and thus subjective. So if only objective, technical information is wanted in that thread then all opinions need to be left at the door by everyone.

Realistically that’s never going to happen so really the only option is option one and based on what Rmarci has said before about the thread primarily being for his findings and not opinions, I don’t really understand why he doesn’t want that?!

 

[Rmarci]

“it’s way worse”, “they’re incompetent” etc. those are subjective opinions

No. Every single time I said an encode was worse or horrible, I wasn’t expressing an opinion, it was based on something objectively demonstrated in the captures. Whether you have the knowledge or experience to properly interpret what the captures are showing is what determines whether you see it as subjective or not.

A lossless comparison can objectively show that one encode is worse, better, or essentially equal to another. Those are not matters of opinion when the differences are clearly visible and measurable in the captures. This is exactly what drove nuts all the newbies on this forum, because they fail to understand that and also why i decided to stop replying to any question.

 

[josh]

I wasn’t going to post in here but reading this thread it’s clear that certain people will never change how they behave or even have any outward understanding that it’s their repeated actions that have caused the thread to be closed.

It’s a real shame it did because I found the comparisons interesting even if I never saw any of the macroblocking issues myself which made sense after Rmarci said it was much harder to see on low nit displays (projectors) and I didn’t actively look for it.

There’s essentially only 2 scenarios where history doesn’t repeat itself, a thread only Rmarci and KScape employs can post in or a thread entirely for objective results and technical discussions around them.

To be clear the latter would mean only posting the objective data and pointing out the technical differences, whether that be softness, more/less grain etc. As soon as anyone (and I include Rmarci in that) starts saying things like, “it’s way worse”, “they’re incompetent” etc. those are subjective opinions which then opens up the floor to other people’s subjective opinions. It’s a fact that those technical issues are there but the severity of those and whether they are visible to someone is an opinion and thus subjective. So if only objective, technical information is wanted in that thread then all opinions need to be left at the door by everyone.

Realistically that’s never going to happen so really the only option is option one and based on what Rmarci has said before about the thread primarily being for his findings and not opinions, I don’t really understand why he doesn’t want that?!

if @Rmarci wants a thread or forum area that only he can post in, i'll see if i can do that. Honestly, it then becomes more of a blog than a forum, and there are plenty of good examples of followups, questions, even technical disagreements that proved interesting in the old thread... so not having that could be an issue for him or for others.

I've explained why i did what i did and what i hoped might come of it. The hope was a new thread would quickly emerge and it would have the same depth of technical knowledge and even debate/discussion, without the nastiness that started being pervasive on the old thread. the old thread would still have the history/archives of all the good content that was there.

@Rmarci has said that the old content would just soon roll off into buried pages of that forum area. Wasn't the intent. And that's solvable if it's really the main issue... the old thread can be pinned to the very top of that forum area so it NEVER rolls off and in fact remains posted ABOVE even the newest content that gets added if people want it done that way.

As for the suggestion that I just go back and delete all the nasty comments... and keep doing that every day into the future, it's a huge job i don't want to do, and keep doing... and it puts me into a role of subjective editor that I don't wish to be. And it's just ridiculous that I'd have to take on this role when people can't just stop themselves from posting clearly negative personal attacks and insults directed at other members.

 

[Htjinus]

I wasn’t going to post in here but reading this thread it’s clear that certain people will never change how they behave or even have any outward understanding that it’s their repeated actions that have caused the thread to be closed.

It’s a real shame it did because I found the comparisons interesting even if I never saw any of the macroblocking issues myself which made sense after Rmarci said it was much harder to see on low nit displays (projectors) and I didn’t actively look for it.

There’s essentially only 2 scenarios where history doesn’t repeat itself, a thread only Rmarci and KScape employs can post in or a thread entirely for objective results and technical discussions around them.

To be clear the latter would mean only posting the objective data and pointing out the technical differences, whether that be softness, more/less grain etc. As soon as anyone (and I include Rmarci in that) starts saying things like, “it’s way worse”, “they’re incompetent” etc. those are subjective opinions which then opens up the floor to other people’s subjective opinions. It’s a fact that those technical issues are there but the severity of those and whether they are visible to someone is an opinion and thus subjective. So if only objective, technical information is wanted in that thread then all opinions need to be left at the door by everyone.

Realistically that’s never going to happen so really the only option is option one and based on what Rmarci has said before about the thread primarily being for his findings and not opinions, I don’t really understand why he doesn’t want that?!

Genuine question: would you apply that same standard in the other direction?

We’ve had 4KC described as having “3D pop,” “more depth,” “more dimensionality,” “better colors,” “better blacks,” and as essentially the definitive way to watch a movie — even reports of improved sound.

Those are subjective opinions too.

So if Rmarci saying a measured difference looks “way worse” crosses the line into subjective opinion, shouldn’t “3D pop” and “definitive improvement” cross exactly the same line?

And I’m even more puzzled by option one. Why should the solution be a thread where Rmarci publishes technical findings but ordinary owners aren’t allowed to comment on them? We don’t put positive 4KC impressions into read-only threads where only Kaleidescape employees can respond, do we??

Why should independent critical analysis require that restriction?

“Way worse” = subjective.
“3D pop / definitive improvement” = subjective.

If we’re going to separate objective analysis from opinion, fine — apply the same rule in both directions, and allow the same opportunity for discussion in both directions.

Otherwise we’re not separating objective from subjective. We’re treating negative and positive commentary differently.

 

[thrawn997]

It's the broken window theory. If you let people attack other members then it becomes a norm and it gets worse and worse. It shouldn't be the case that we have many instances of attacks on members regardless of which thread it is in. The topic continues here or there, but the difference is there we also got the technical analysis. Here we lost that.

 

[thrawn997]

And I’m even more puzzled by option one. Why should the solution be a thread where Rmarci publishes technical findings but ordinary owners aren’t allowed to comment on them? We don’t put positive 4KC impressions into read-only threads where only Kaleidescape employees can respond, do we??

I think it's because the people who are posting about the flaws kept it contained to the thread about the flaws, they didn't reply to every post in every thread that was saying positive things to tell them that they were wrong. So the problem only exists in one direction. The thread providing critical analysis was the one disrupted. The ones providing glowing reviews were not. Interesting, right?

 

[by96]

“Way worse” = subjective.
“3D pop / definitive improvement” = subjective

Absolutely correct. There is no disputing that the "pro-Cinematic" camp has had its share of subjective aggrandizing opinions.

And I wish those opinions had been correct. I was a very early adopter of the K and love the idea of large file sizes but generally have not been overwhelmed by the differences. Still, no regrets, as I believe the future for Cinematic is bright, thanks in no small part to Rmarci's work.

 

[Rmarci]

As for the suggestion that I just go back and delete all the nasty comments... and keep doing that every day into the future, it's a huge job i don't want to do, and keep doing...

Well then, it’s a lost cause, because I’m certainly going to find more Kscape content that is objectively worse encoded on a old or new thread, and I’ll inevitably offend people who have just subjectively said, that it looked great on their setup. Then the comments claiming that I’m crazy or that I don’t know how to interpret my own caps will continue, and this will never end. Just look at what furnace just said.

The only real solution is for people who disagree with what I’m doing to simply ignore me or the thread. Yet even that seems impossible to accomplish, they'd rather repeatedly complain to the mods than simply use the ignore function.

 

[Imakeller]

I wasn’t going to post in here but reading this thread it’s clear that certain people will never change how they behave or even have any outward understanding that it’s their repeated actions that have caused the thread to be closed.

It’s a real shame that the lock didn’t seem to generate any self-reflection or anyone holding themselves accountable. There were no issues with @Rmarci ’s data and findings. Some folks new to the thread had some questions about his methodology, but that was minor. Unfortunately, his findings kept getting buried by a ceaseless barrage of nasty, argumentative, hyperbolic, condescending, non-value-added posts. It was an embarrassing disaster and @josh did the right thing.

 

[thrawn997]

There's a whole lotta this energy going on here lol

 

[Imakeller]

Ummm …

 

[Furnace Inferno]

No. Every single time I said an encode was worse or horrible, I wasn’t expressing an opinion, it was based on something objectively demonstrated in the captures. Whether you have the knowledge or experience to properly interpret what the captures are showing is what determines whether you see it as subjective or not.

A lossless comparison can objectively show that one encode is worse, better, or essentially equal to another. Those are not matters of opinion when the differences are clearly visible and measurable in the captures. This is exactly what drove nuts all the newbies on this forum, because they fail to understand that and also why i decided to stop replying to any question.

I understand what you are saying but how things are worded is actually relevant and super important. Saying something is worse in a specific metric is absolutely fine, but the moment you put “way” in front then it completely changes to context because you are now attributing your own personal scale which is subjective. Apologies if I’m sounding patronising but language is nuanced but it’s important because of how it’s interpreted and I’ll be honest I’m not even that good at it myself, my wife is always telling me off for how I’m wording things!

if @Rmarci wants a thread or forum area that only he can post in, i'll see if i can do that. Honestly, it then becomes more of a blog than a forum, and there are plenty of good examples of followups, questions, even technical disagreements that proved interesting in the old thread... so not having that could be an issue for him or for others.

I've explained why i did what i did and what i hoped might come of it. The hope was a new thread would quickly emerge and it would have the same depth of technical knowledge and even debate/discussion, without the nastiness that started being pervasive on the old thread. the old thread would still have the history/archives of all the good content that was there.

@Rmarci has said that the old content would just soon roll off into buried pages of that forum area. Wasn't the intent. And that's solvable if it's really the main issue... the old thread can be pinned to the very top of that forum area so it NEVER rolls off and in fact remains posted ABOVE even the newest content that gets added if people want it done that way.

As for the suggestion that I just go back and delete all the nasty comments... and keep doing that every day into the future, it's a huge job i don't want to do, and keep doing... and it puts me into a role of subjective editor that I don't wish to be. And it's just ridiculous that I'd have to take on this role when people can't just stop themselves from posting clearly negative personal attacks and insults directed at other members.

Perhaps two threads one separate one which is just a Q&A for technical talk about any specific issues?

Genuine question: would you apply that same standard in the other direction?

We’ve had 4KC described as having “3D pop,” “more depth,” “more dimensionality,” “better colors,” “better blacks,” and as essentially the definitive way to watch a movie — even reports of improved sound.

Those are subjective opinions too.

So if Rmarci saying a measured difference looks “way worse” crosses the line into subjective opinion, shouldn’t “3D pop” and “definitive improvement” cross exactly the same line?

And I’m even more puzzled by option one. Why should the solution be a thread where Rmarci publishes technical findings but ordinary owners aren’t allowed to comment on them? We don’t put positive 4KC impressions into read-only threads where only Kaleidescape employees can respond, do we??

Why should independent critical analysis require that restriction?

“Way worse” = subjective.
“3D pop / definitive improvement” = subjective.

If we’re going to separate objective analysis from opinion, fine — apply the same rule in both directions, and allow the same opportunity for discussion in both directions.

Otherwise we’re not separating objective from subjective. We’re treating negative and positive commentary differently.

As I said in my option two it would go both ways.

Notice too that I’ve said I don’t believe those subjective opinions, half the reason I got a K was to see for myself. There are very few people that I trust their opinions or more specifically that their experiences will match my own. I learnt long ago that small differences get talked up as massive differences but that goes both ways too.