Allowing only one post per day in MQA topic

Why in the world is the MQA topic limited to one post per day for an individual? I know it’s stated that it’s to promote more meaningful discussion. But it really stifles more meaningful discussion by destroying continuity of a dialog. When people have discussions in the real world, they make multiple comments in a short time, while allowing time for others to make their comments. By limiting only one comment to be made a day, the train of though is destroyed. It’s next to impossible to remember tomorrow what we want to say today, and this policy, imho, devalues the thread, and makes the discussion far less meaningful. Please, Roon, this limit needs to be abolished for the betterment of the discussion.

  • if this is the case, it was most likely not that important :slight_smile:

Given the whole MQA/PCM discussion is pointless and never-ending, allowing folk one post per day gives them the chance to sleep on it so they may come up with something meaningful rather than the puerile ping-pong going on at the moment.


I totally disagree. That is not how real world conversations work. Far more meaningful comments will be lost that this restriction will ever produce.


It’s the moderation teams effort to limit Tit for Tat responses. The MQA threads are polarized.

It’s a good thread to avoid IMO. Enjoy the music instead.


It slows down the website and really is a waste of time as people aren’t listening, just re posting their entrenched positions over which they have dug too deep. [Moderated]

1 Like

It gives members a chance to research a graph from some obscure site and post it with a caption that sells it as true and their own as far as I can see.


If it’s an obscure site you have to find, then the faith in the validity is virtually zero. Only sites that have proven themselves as reliable should be trusted. 99.9% of needed research can be done in under 5 minutes.

My tongue was in my cheek as I was typing Neil.

1 Like

Avoid? No. That thread is awfully funny.


The MQA threads are like the political ones. No one is apt to change their mind, or see deficiencies in their perspective.


So that MQA arguments can start up in other threads…

1 Like

Perhaps I can sell my ONE to the highest bidder , I am unlikely to use it :smiling_imp:

1 Like

too late…you just did… :rofl:

My perception is that the limit on the thread is working well. The number of flags has substantially reduced and Mods are no longer trying to hit a moving target. The alternative to slowing the thread was closing it. We’ve found that people will start flogging their MQA dead horses in some other thread if they don’t have an outlet, so we prefer to keep it localised.

This slowing of the thread is very deliberately not a natural conversation. Allowing people to repeatedly respond to each other in real time has not worked.

Before posting in the thread people should ask themselves whether they are actually saying something interesting which has not been said before and usefully adds to the debate. My view is that very few posts have met that test in the last three years.


We’ve reduced the time between posts to 4 hours to see if that is enough to avoid people posting with a rush of blood to the head.


Mods have closed the subject thread. Following the relaxation of the time limit multiple flags were raised on nearly all subsequent posts. All the flags were right.

The thread has degenerated into off topic restatements of prior entrenched positions, otherwise known as axe grinding.

@moderators, may one ask how this post was abusive, and in which way you intend to discourage abuse of the flagging system ?


Abusive is not the sole criterion for moderation. In this case the flag was agreed because the post was off-topic (not about a comparison of MQA and PCM), provocative as it was directed towards people who listen to MQA, and did not contribute to the discussion but merely continued rehearsing a point of view that has been expressed multiple times in the past.

Flags do not automatically hide posts unless the flagger has a high trust level (the System compares total flags, agreed flags and rejected flags to generate this). If multiple users flag a post it may be hidden before review. When a Mod reviews the post they can choose to hide or keep hidden or keep the post and edit it.

Agreed flags are not an abuse of the flagging system, almost by definition.

Where a user generates disproportionate rejected flags we have contacted them and suggest they cut down their frequency of flagging and only flag clear cases as they are not seeing things like the Mods do. That has been successful in cutting down rejected flags.


Well now, that’s going to be interesting moving forward.


Tbh this MQA debate becomes a bit repetitive and it seems very unlikely tribe con will win over tribe pro or vice versa.

In Germany we use a nice quote by Karl Valentin, meaning ‘Everything has already been said, but not yet by everybody.’