"George Middius" wrote in message
...



The Bug Eater pleads for protection from the big, bad Snake Oil
Establishment.

Following Stereophile's coverage of
the Tice Clock, Tice canceled all of its advertising and has
had nothing to do with the magazine since. Regarding the Shakti
Stone, I had it reviewed by two people, one a high-end true
believer, the other a skeptic. Both reported similar impressions,
which I admit I found surprising. You can find the entirety of
Stereophile's coverage of these products in the magazine's free
on-line archives at www.stereophile.com, BTW..
[This] is quite definitely the publishing of opinion.

You allowed to be printed,[sic] priase[sic] for a device for which you
have
(allegedly) the capability to measure the effects of[sic], but did not do
so.
The fact that it's[sic] efficacy was never verified is at the very least
stupid and sloppy, and at worst an endorsement of snake oil,[sic] not that
that's anything new.

Mickey, your ranting raises more than a few questions about your mental
competency. On the one hand, you claim these devices are "snake oil" (an
American idiom that means "worthless or fraudulent goods"). On the other
hand,
you bleat about Stereophile not telling you they are "snake oil". Just one
question for you before you go back to banging your head on the sidewalk:
If you
already know what you know, why do you need Stereophile to tell you
anyway?


.
As a sign of integrity from a magazine supposedly helpful to audiophiles.
Believe it or not there are people who might actually think a Shakti stone
might acutally do something for their stereo, just like there are people who
think that damping factor is an important specification for amplifiers.