If we want to keep generous collectors (like Bob, among others) active on QZ, we have to obey their rules. It's as easy as that.
I obbey Sir Bob's rules, because i want to keep the lossless files as lossless, and obviously he's the best in that.
But the thing is... I'm not making any rules. Technology is making the rules. Richard, who runs this forum, is the one who makes the rules. I'm just a single person doing what he can to circulate decent recordings. Because it's possible to preserve quality, I choose to do it, and I encourage others to do the same. It's really as simple as that. I feel we have made a lot of progress here in the past 6 months.
Anyone who disagrees can try to explain why, but as of now, I still haven't yet heard an argument to suggest how spreading several versions of one recording is going to help anything. I always encourage people to give me constructive criticism of anything I do, and I'm always happy to update any stance I have on any issue, as long as there is a decent reason to. But all we've got here is a couple people attacking the person, and not the problem.
For some reason, he cannot adapt to mp3 sharing, and chooses to try to beat mp3 sharers into submission.
Not at all. I have no problem with people converting FLAC to mp3 for their own use. I have said that countless times (in fact, I currently have 8 recordings that are still in mp3, but only because there are no upgrades yet... like Portland 74 and Dortmund 79). Of course, mp3 is better than nothing, as long as there is no alternative. But you use the words "adapt to mp3 sharing" as if it is a requirement in all cases. That would be like criticizing a scientist because he isn't open to adapting to those who still practice alchemy.
I don't think bashing a member for their computer speakers is a very good way to do things either, Bob.
I didn't bash him. I stated a fact. At that time, he was arguing that mp3 files sound as good as FLAC files, yet he said he listens to them on small computer speakers. How can one possibly notice the difference in sound quality on 3" speakers? He could easily insert headphones into his sound card to listen to the files, but instead, he's making excuse after excuse to avoid admitting he's wrong.
Btw, why are you hiding behind an alias? What are you afraid of?
Where exactly did I throw out a personal insult? All I have done is state facts. Just because one disagrees with facts doesn't make the facts "insults". In the past, Mike has indicated that he doesn't even understand the difference a generation of tape can make, never mind lossless vs lossy. This isn't a personal attack. It's a fact.
All I want is a reason... somebody, please tell me, why should mp3s be acceptable? "Because some people want them to exist" is not an answer. That's about as good as a parent telling a child "because I said so" (not to imply for a second that pro-mp3 people are somehow the "parent" in this situation). If I'm going to spend any more time having this discussion, there needs to be constructive arguments on both sides. I've got mine, so what's yours?