polks terrible website

gimpod

KenCustomerService wrote: »

I can note that to our other moderators here.

Who are these people? the only one I know of that's still here is @KennethSwauger and
I don't think he's full time any more.

KenCustomerService wrote: »

Individual/isolated contacts to HQ is the most effective way to get a point across and to share information.

Who are these people and how does one contact them. Is tere a list some were?

KenCustomerService wrote: »

Your comments and concerns will be addressed with the designers.

And who are theses people, Polk's IT guys or do you have to go through Vanilla's techs to get things done. I know you haven't even been here even 2 years yet but go check this out and look around some, This is what the forum looked liked before Vanilla.

www.polkaudio.com/forums/index.php

I like other's have been complaining about this site ever since it was switched over to Vanilla (and very poorly done so at that, so many good threads and links were lost it's not funny),

The problem with this site is not the technology used (It's the same as the old one pre 2014, php, css, mysql, xhtml, java script, etc...) the problem is (besides stuff not working right) it really looks like whoever designed this was a 13 year old girl, this whole site and forum look's like it should be dripping in bubble gum and gummy bears (NO offense to girls intended).

There is no need for this site and forum to look and work as bad as it does. Unless Polk does not own and/or have direct access to the whole site which I think is the case. What did Vanilla do give Polk some basic site and forum templates to use as long as Polk didn't break the base layout and then Polk has to send any changes to Vanilla for approval and then if okayed by Vanilla it gets uploaded. If this is the case than this is a sad state of affairs. I went through this same thing with IGN and that's what killed
all of the Planet sites. We got tired of not being able to even get the simplest thing fixed. It got so bad we ended up just walking away.

I think I know what I speak of having been a "Content Manger" for 3 different gaming sites at the same time "PlanetDoom, PlanetQuake and PlanetWolfenstein" (IGN gave up on them in 2012, there still online but not being updated). Being responsible for the Content formatting and posting plus any site repair/fixing that IGN would allow. I know what's involved here and it ain't easy.

In the end I really don't see thing getting better around here until there's a full team in place.

Who and where is/are the Web Master, Administrators and Forum Moderators (more than 1 or 2 part timers) and how do we contact them there should be an easy to find link and also one for the rules of conduct. (I finely found them here a link Club Polk Rules of Engagement

Peace, Love and Rock 'n Roll

P.S. As much as I complain about this forum software I still like coming here to converse with most of you nut jobs.

lightman1

$36

pitdogg2

lightman1 wrote: »

$36

Get outa here buckethead
37.50 and a # of gummybears

nooshinjohn

P.S. As much as I complain about this forum software I still like coming here to converse with most of you nut jobs.:p]


This is exactly the kind of name calling that give the forum a bad name...<SARCASM OFF>

F1nut

Oh, how I miss that format and easy on the eyes too.

https://web.archive.org/web/20100109102633/http://www.polkaudio.com/forums/index.php

lightman1

Ivan called me a bucket head...

It's a water pail! BIG difference....

Reported!

txcoastal1

lightman1 wrote: »

Ivan called me a bucket head...

It's a water pail! BIG difference....

Reported!

With holes

mhardy6647

https://youtu.be/ElLpKewnxp4

Erik Tracy

lightman1 wrote: »

Ivan called me a bucket head...

It's a water pail! BIG difference....

Reported!

That was me, in an attempt to keep the thread on topic instead of spinning off into silly cr@p.

So much for that.

I'm out and gone from PF.

txcoastal1

Erik Tracy wrote: »

lightman1 wrote: »

Ivan called me a bucket head...

It's a water pail! BIG difference....

Reported!

That was me, in an attempt to keep the thread on topic instead of spinning off into silly cr@p.

So much for that.

I'm out and gone from PF.

What about the BBQ

F1nut

Erik Tracy wrote: »

lightman1 wrote: »

Ivan called me a bucket head...

It's a water pail! BIG difference....

Reported!

That was me, in an attempt to keep the thread on topic instead of spinning off into silly cr@p.

So much for that.

I'm out and gone from PF.

Huh?

pitdogg2

Sorry Erik

mrbigbluelight

Planet Fitness ?

Nightfall

Guys, check your micro aggressions.

pitdogg2

F1nut wrote: »

Oh, how I miss that format and easy on the eyes too.

https://web.archive.org/web/20100109102633/http://www.polkaudio.com/forums/index.php

Agree and it had other attributes Vanilla I don't think will ever have.

FTGV

I must say I much preferred the old format also.

txcoastal1

But in all seriousness look at Def-Tech
https://www.definitivetechnology.com/

Look at Marantz
http://www.us.marantz.com/us/pages/home.aspx

Much better layouts

F1nut

I recognize some of those guys in the Def-Tech video......Hi Eric.

The Marantz site is exactly how it should be done. Clear, concise and loaded with information. I love perusing there.

F1nut

He'll be back.

andrew82

@concealer404 @Nightfall I use ctrl+left click to open in new tabs. Not as easy as an auto-new tab, but I find it easier than right-clicking. Hope it helps.

[Deleted User]

@gimpod Ken Swauger is the moderator and I am his side moderator.

As a note, I have been with Sound United/Polk Audio for 5 years. The last time the forum changed formats was in October of 2014 when we switched the website.

The design is in-house in Vista, CA. Where I reside.

I am the go to person for anything Polk/DT related that needs to be checked or changed.

There will not be a full time team in place for the Forum. The Polk consumer website takes priority over the Forum. Ken and myself will be tag teaming the Forum. I will run ideas by the IT and design team to make it a better user experience on the Forum. But for the time-being there will not be 3-5 people dedicated to the Forum. Only 2. Those two, Ken and myself have been working for Polk Audio in some capacity for the better part of 2 decades. You are in good hands here. I see the issues that need to be addressed and that will happen. It won't be immediate that any changes will take place but more a process.

Yes, those were the rules of conduct. I have taken pieces from that to enforce harsher punishments to weed out those who don't show others respect.

1st offense - 30 day ban
2nd offense - Lifetime ban

I know these sound harsh but if everyone treats everyone else with respect then it won't have to come to a ban at all.

Thanks everyone!

Nightfall

@KenCustomerService @KennethSwauger A rule at the Steve Hoffman forum is nobody being allowed to bring up or discuss double blind testing which curbs a lot of the reoccurring cable, high res, and all equipment sounds the same arguments that come around all the time. How would you feel about this?

http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/a-note-about-abx-dbt-blind-testing-and-the-sh-forums.278682/#post-7471063

2/6/03: This is now a Subjectivist vs. Objectivist DBT Debate Free Forum!

---

Holy Zoo writes:

"The debate about:

Double Blind Testing

ABX Testing

Objectivity vs. Subjectivity

These are all basically the same time-honored audiophile topic (really: argument). We (Robert and Jeff) have participated on many an audio email list / forum / newsgroup over the years watching and participating in this debate.

Indeed, we come from opposite sides of the argument - Robert tends to be a subjectivist, I lean towards the objectivist camp. Robert believes in tweaking, I'm very doubtful that anyone can hear tweaks and are imagining things (I mean, come on, *especially* Robert! )

Yet we still agree on the following: We've both watched folks who would normally get along great - who share a lot of common musical tastes and opinions - people who even agreed about political and religious topics(!!) - shred each other to little bitty pieces over the Objectivist/Subjectivist Double Blind Testing debate. It can go on and on for hundreds of posts, and the only thing it all accomplishes is to annoy and alienate the people who are not at the polar extremes, while reinforcing the opinions of those who are at the polar extremes.

And here in lies the the problem. It absolutely kills any discussion that it crops up in between regular folk.

For example, lets say that Bradley starts a thread about which amp sounds better - Marantz or Creek, and people are chiming in with their opinions. But then someone will bring up the old "there's never been a scientific study showing that you can tell the difference between the Marantz and the Creek - everyone here is just speculating". This will often divert the entire thread into dozens of posts about the DBT/OS debate. To the extremist, the thread is very much on topic, even more than ever before in his or her mind.

Meanwhile, for the guy who started the thread, who wanted to know the opinions of the folks here on the forum who've actually listened to the Marantz and the Creek -- the answer may never be known. To this poor guy, his thread has been hijacked: technical jargon is thrown around from both sides along with dizzying displays of snide comments and half-hidden digs. The combatants dance the edge of what the moderators find tolerable (well, most of the time anyway) while looking to create the utmost damage to the other side, unaware that many people tune out fairly quickly and to them it all looks like bickering, even if they find themselves sort of agreeing with one side or the other. Pages and pages of posts are created, and like a dog chasing it's own tail, there is no end until both sides tire for the evening or the thread gets closed. The web is filled and filled with such stuff.

If you feel you must debate the issue, there are a myriad of music hardware forums out there waiting. Or if you must, you can even PM a person here about it, if you know they're inclined to want to debate.

But we won't be continuing such scenarios here. To some people, the "Subjectivism vs. Objectivism" debate is almost a religion, and you know where we stand on that. Some people may find our lack of interest to continue what can easily be found elsewhere boring, but we find having amicable discussions refreshing, and the real reason that we were drawn to Steve's site in the first place.

We hope you understand why we've made this decision. If you'd like to discuss it with us in private, our PM-Boxes are always open. What we do not wish to have is a debate about this right here, right now. We are very certain that we've made the best choice for the forum, and as such we ask you to respect this new rule, and to move forward, sharing and discussing the enjoyment of audio and music.

Peace.

Robert & Jeff

We'd like to add a couple of very important clarifications:

1) It is the objectivist/subjectivist debate that is banned, not the notion of reporting the results of DBT's, or taking scientific measurements (for instance, calculating the RMS db level of a recording) and reporting them here.

So, for example, if you and your friends get together and do a double blind test comparing different Beatles albums, you are more than welcome to post the results.

2) In a similiar manner, just as you may not post DBT thread-craps, the inverse is also prohibited: for example, saying "enough of the scientific clap-trap - just trust your ears!".

rooftop59

I agree with @Nightfall's suggestion about DBT. That seems to be at the heart of the worst debates.

As long as folks can still say "hey I think some good cables like xyz will take your system to the next level" and then another person can say "I disagree with that suggestion because I do not think cables make an audible difference" then I think that it is a good rule. They both have to be able to make suggestions about what gear they think will help improve the OP's system, and disagree, they just can't DEBATE it based on DBT...

mantis

Did I miss something is the RTIA line gone?

motorhead43026

^^still on the website.

K_M

Nightfall wrote: »

@KenCustomerService @KennethSwauger A rule at the Steve Hoffman forum is nobody being allowed to bring up or discuss double blind testing which curbs a lot of the reoccurring cable, high res, and all equipment sounds the same arguments that come around all the time. How would you feel about this?

http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/a-note-about-abx-dbt-blind-testing-and-the-sh-forums.278682/#post-7471063

2/6/03: This is now a Subjectivist vs. Objectivist DBT Debate Free Forum!

---

Holy Zoo writes:

"The debate about:

Double Blind Testing

ABX Testing

Objectivity vs. Subjectivity

These are all basically the same time-honored audiophile topic (really: argument). We (Robert and Jeff) have participated on many an audio email list / forum / newsgroup over the years watching and participating in this debate.

Indeed, we come from opposite sides of the argument - Robert tends to be a subjectivist, I lean towards the objectivist camp. Robert believes in tweaking, I'm very doubtful that anyone can hear tweaks and are imagining things (I mean, come on, *especially* Robert! )

Yet we still agree on the following: We've both watched folks who would normally get along great - who share a lot of common musical tastes and opinions - people who even agreed about political and religious topics(!!) - shred each other to little bitty pieces over the Objectivist/Subjectivist Double Blind Testing debate. It can go on and on for hundreds of posts, and the only thing it all accomplishes is to annoy and alienate the people who are not at the polar extremes, while reinforcing the opinions of those who are at the polar extremes.

And here in lies the the problem. It absolutely kills any discussion that it crops up in between regular folk.

For example, lets say that Bradley starts a thread about which amp sounds better - Marantz or Creek, and people are chiming in with their opinions. But then someone will bring up the old "there's never been a scientific study showing that you can tell the difference between the Marantz and the Creek - everyone here is just speculating". This will often divert the entire thread into dozens of posts about the DBT/OS debate. To the extremist, the thread is very much on topic, even more than ever before in his or her mind.

Meanwhile, for the guy who started the thread, who wanted to know the opinions of the folks here on the forum who've actually listened to the Marantz and the Creek -- the answer may never be known. To this poor guy, his thread has been hijacked: technical jargon is thrown around from both sides along with dizzying displays of snide comments and half-hidden digs. The combatants dance the edge of what the moderators find tolerable (well, most of the time anyway) while looking to create the utmost damage to the other side, unaware that many people tune out fairly quickly and to them it all looks like bickering, even if they find themselves sort of agreeing with one side or the other. Pages and pages of posts are created, and like a dog chasing it's own tail, there is no end until both sides tire for the evening or the thread gets closed. The web is filled and filled with such stuff.

If you feel you must debate the issue, there are a myriad of music hardware forums out there waiting. Or if you must, you can even PM a person here about it, if you know they're inclined to want to debate.

But we won't be continuing such scenarios here. To some people, the "Subjectivism vs. Objectivism" debate is almost a religion, and you know where we stand on that. Some people may find our lack of interest to continue what can easily be found elsewhere boring, but we find having amicable discussions refreshing, and the real reason that we were drawn to Steve's site in the first place.

We hope you understand why we've made this decision. If you'd like to discuss it with us in private, our PM-Boxes are always open. What we do not wish to have is a debate about this right here, right now. We are very certain that we've made the best choice for the forum, and as such we ask you to respect this new rule, and to move forward, sharing and discussing the enjoyment of audio and music.

Peace.

Robert & Jeff

We'd like to add a couple of very important clarifications:

1) It is the objectivist/subjectivist debate that is banned, not the notion of reporting the results of DBT's, or taking scientific measurements (for instance, calculating the RMS db level of a recording) and reporting them here.

So, for example, if you and your friends get together and do a double blind test comparing different Beatles albums, you are more than welcome to post the results.

2) In a similiar manner, just as you may not post DBT thread-craps, the inverse is also prohibited: for example, saying "enough of the scientific clap-trap - just trust your ears!".

You missed 2 key points though.....

"It is the objectivist/subjectivist debate that is banned"


"2) In a similiar manner, just as you may not post DBT thread-craps, the inverse is also prohibited: for example, saying "enough of the scientific clap-trap - just trust your ears!"
But they still have bickering over there anyways, so not sure it truly matters.
People bicker cause they think they highly subjective Opinions are factual.

txcoastal1

But the rule in writing sets guide line

K_M

txcoastal1 wrote: »

But the rule in writing sets guide line

Why not ban discussions of cables all together then?

In the end, they serve no real pupose to anyone but the person posting.

motorhead43026

Why not ban K_M, who btw never has anything to offer.

txcoastal1

Because you don't discuss your "experience" with cables, you discuss DBT, and try to tell people how they should spend their money, and figuratively tell people that their "experience" is BS.


Now you still would have the choice to communicate with the OP or anyone else via PM's to state whatever you would like about DBT, roger russell etc