Given the enthusiastic reactions in 1994 of both your then-resident
subjectivest Jonathan Scull (in vol.19 no.2) and your avowed staff
sceptic Barry Willis
(in vol.19 no.4) to the "Shakti Electromagnetic Stabilizer" (aka,
Shakti Stone), I'm sure you must have felt the need to experience these
marvels for yourself in your personal music system. How could you not?

How many Shakti Stones did (do) you use? How did you place them? Any
insider tips on which components they are most effective on? Any other
info you would care to pass along?

TIA!

In article .com,
says...

Given the enthusiastic reactions in 1994 of both your then-resident
subjectivest Jonathan Scull (in vol.19 no.2) and your avowed staff
sceptic Barry Willis
(in vol.19 no.4) to the "Shakti Electromagnetic Stabilizer" (aka,
Shakti Stone), I'm sure you must have felt the need to experience these
marvels for yourself in your personal music system. How could you not?

How many Shakti Stones did (do) you use? How did you place them? Any
insider tips on which components they are most effective on? Any other
info you would care to pass along?

TIA!


Atkinson won't respond to this topic. He is a coward, as most dishonest people
are.

On Sat, 17 Sep 2005 00:45:56 GMT, (Chevdo) wrote:

In article .com,
says...

Given the enthusiastic reactions in 1994 of both your then-resident
subjectivest Jonathan Scull (in vol.19 no.2) and your avowed staff
sceptic Barry Willis
(in vol.19 no.4) to the "Shakti Electromagnetic Stabilizer" (aka,
Shakti Stone), I'm sure you must have felt the need to experience these
marvels for yourself in your personal music system. How could you not?

How many Shakti Stones did (do) you use? How did you place them? Any
insider tips on which components they are most effective on? Any other
info you would care to pass along?

TIA!


Atkinson won't respond to this topic. He is a coward, as most dishonest people
are.

Actually, he tends not to respond to the idiotic stuff.

So I doubt that he's going to respond to this.

Atkinson won't respond to this topic. He is a coward,
as most dishonest people are.

Actually, he tends not to respond to the idiotic stuff.
So I doubt that he's going to respond to this.

Actually, I would call the preceding (snipped) remarks sarcastic, not
idiotic.

In the time I knew John Atkinson, I found it impossible to have any kind of
intelligent discussion about anything with him. His points of view are
fixed, and he is unwilling to consider any other point of view.

Why? I don't know. It might be intellectual arrogance. It could also be the
fear (no doubt unconscious) that his ignorance will be "caught out" in a
serious discussion. (I was told by someone in the audio industry that his
claim to have a degree is physics is a lie. I can't confirm or deny this. Of
course, one need not have a degree in any particular subject to have a
useful understanding of it.)

But I can't read John's mind, I can only judge his behavior. And it's not
what you would expect from a thoughtful, well-educated, intellectually
curious person. I can have insightful conversations with most of my friends
and acquaintances, regardless of whether they agree or disagree with me on
any particular topic, social, political, or audiophilic. This is impossible
with John. Like Wallace Shawn's tyrannosaur, he simply avoids
confrontations.

I've never met anyone as intelligent as John Atkinson who uses his intellect
so poorly. * When he became Stereophile's editor, I looked forward to
learning a lot from him, as he had considerably more experience in many
areas than I did. I quickly discovered there was no way to learn anything
from John, unless you accepted what he already believed.

By the way... During the last Stereophile Writer's Conference I attended,
the question came up of why the Apogee Divas, which had gotten rave reviews
from Arnis Balgalvis, and which most of the rest of us thought very highly
of, had never appeared in Recommended Components. His reply? "I don't like
them."

Jesus H. Christ.

* The author has utterly wasted his life and talents, but that isn't quite
the same thing.

William Sommerwerck wrote:
Atkinson won't respond to this topic. He is a coward,
as most dishonest people are.

Actually, he tends not to respond to the idiotic stuff.
So I doubt that he's going to respond to this.

Actually, I would call the preceding (snipped) remarks sarcastic,
not idiotic.

Whereever these questions lie on the line between "idiotic" and
"sarcastic," I have already addressed the topic at length on r.a.o.
I fail to see why I have to repeat myself because someone is too
lazy to use the Google search engine.

In the time I knew John Atkinson, I found it impossible to have
any kind of intelligent discussion about anything with him. His
points of view are fixed, and he is unwilling to consider any
other point of view.

Why? I don't know. It might be intellectual arrogance.

I guess you are never going to forgive me for firing you as a
Stereophile reviewer, are you Bill?

It could also be the fear (no doubt unconscious) that his
ignorance will be "caught out" in a serious discussion. (I was
told by someone in the audio industry that his claim to have a
degree is physics is a lie. I can't confirm or deny this.

B.Sc, 2nd-class honors (lower division) in chemistry and physics,
University of London, 1972. Post-graduate qualification in the
teaching of science with Merit (one rung below the highest grade),
University of London, 1974.

During the last Stereophile Writer's Conference I attended, the
question came up of why the Apogee Divas, which had gotten rave
reviews from Arnis Balgalvis, and which most of the rest of us
thought very highly of, had never appeared in Recommended
Components. His reply? "I don't like them."

That would be a damning indictment if it were true, Bill. Except
that it's _not_ true. Following its review in August 1988 by Arnie,
the Diva _was_ featured in "Recommended Components." See, for example,
the April 1989 issue of Stereophile, Vol.12 No.4, p.99, where it
heads the list of Class A loudspeakers.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

In the time I knew John Atkinson, I found it impossible to have
any kind of intelligent discussion about anything with him. His
points of view are fixed, and he is unwilling to consider any
other point of view.

Why? I don't know. It might be intellectual arrogance.

I guess you are never going to forgive me for firing you as a
Stereophile reviewer, are you Bill?

Liar, liar, liar.

I quit, for a number of reasons. (My disappointment with JA as editor was
one of them, but not the most-significant.) Then, after the fracas over
reviewing ethics, * you removed me from the Contributing Editors list (where
I would otherwise have remained indefinitely, even after I stopped
contributing). You did not fire me (unless you consider the removal a
"firing"), however much you would like to think you did.

You still refuse to address the issue of why you refuse to have serious
conversations with people.

* In attempting to be honest with the readers, I publically broke a rule
that John Atkinson privately encouraged all the reviewers to break, and
which is still commonly broken. I'll supply details, if anyone is
interested.


During the last Stereophile Writer's Conference I attended, the
question came up of why the Apogee Divas, which had gotten rave
reviews from Arnis Balgalvis, and which most of the rest of us
thought very highly of, had never appeared in Recommended
Components. His reply? "I don't like them."

That would be a damning indictment if it were true, Bill. Except
that it's _not_ true. Following its review in August 1988 by Arnie,
the Diva _was_ featured in "Recommended Components." See,
for example, the April 1989 issue of Stereophile, Vol.12 No.4, p.99,
where it heads the list of Class A loudspeakers.

Then why I do remember it so well? (Yes, yes, yes...) Any other Stereophile
reviewers out there who were at the meeting?

By the way, an audio tape was made of the meeting. Does it still exist?

On Sat, 17 Sep 2005 06:30:50 -0700, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:

In the time I knew John Atkinson, I found it impossible to have
any kind of intelligent discussion about anything with him. His
points of view are fixed, and he is unwilling to consider any
other point of view.

Why? I don't know. It might be intellectual arrogance.

I guess you are never going to forgive me for firing you as a
Stereophile reviewer, are you Bill?

Liar, liar, liar.

I quit, for a number of reasons. (My disappointment with JA as editor was
one of them, but not the most-significant.) Then, after the fracas over
reviewing ethics, * you removed me from the Contributing Editors list (where
I would otherwise have remained indefinitely, even after I stopped
contributing). You did not fire me (unless you consider the removal a
"firing"), however much you would like to think you did.

Sounds like a firing to me. Because, if you had "quit", wouldn't you
have demanded that your name be removed at that time?

You still refuse to address the issue of why you refuse to have serious
conversations with people.

Hmmm, sounds like there are a bunch of issues that you have with the
man. Nothing wrong with holding a grudge I guess, but thiis is a weak
sort of indictment, since it *sounds* like a factual charge, but
really, when you look closely, it's just somebody who doesn't like
somebody else saying something pretty subjective about that somebody.

* In attempting to be honest with the readers, I publically broke a rule
that John Atkinson privately encouraged all the reviewers to break, and
which is still commonly broken. I'll supply details, if anyone is
interested.

I, for one, am not.

During the last Stereophile Writer's Conference I attended, the
question came up of why the Apogee Divas, which had gotten rave
reviews from Arnis Balgalvis, and which most of the rest of us
thought very highly of, had never appeared in Recommended
Components. His reply? "I don't like them."

That would be a damning indictment if it were true, Bill. Except
that it's _not_ true. Following its review in August 1988 by Arnie,
the Diva _was_ featured in "Recommended Components." See,
for example, the April 1989 issue of Stereophile, Vol.12 No.4, p.99,
where it heads the list of Class A loudspeakers.

Then why I do remember it so well? (Yes, yes, yes...) Any other Stereophile
reviewers out there who were at the meeting?

It's not true BECAUSE the speakers actually made the list. I can see
someone making a sarcastic comment like that though - and someone who
already had a axe to grind taking it as a literal statement though.

By the way, an audio tape was made of the meeting. Does it still exist?

Who cares? The speaker was promptly put on the list, so the behavior
that you claim was either a joke *or* irrelevant.

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 17 Sep 2005 00:45:56 GMT, (Chevdo) wrote:

In article .com,
says...

Given the enthusiastic reactions in 1994 of both your then-resident
subjectivest Jonathan Scull (in vol.19 no.2) and your avowed staff
sceptic Barry Willis
(in vol.19 no.4) to the "Shakti Electromagnetic Stabilizer" (aka,
Shakti Stone), I'm sure you must have felt the need to experience these
marvels for yourself in your personal music system. How could you not?

How many Shakti Stones did (do) you use? How did you place them? Any
insider tips on which components they are most effective on? Any other
info you would care to pass along?

TIA!


Atkinson won't respond to this topic. He is a coward, as most dishonest
people
are.

Actually, he tends not to respond to the idiotic stuff.

So I doubt that he's going to respond to this.

Right, he just includes and endorses idiotic fraudulent stuff in his magazine.

On 9/17/05 10:35 AM, in article ,
"dave weil" wrote:

Who cares?

Dave.. 'who cares" is truly the pojnt... I know you have a clue about this
sort of thing so could you please do The Right Thing (like several others)
and just drop the crosspost on this
newly-resplattered-by-elevator-fart-impressed-dork-fostered mess so that
remaining "what? Who cares?" news groups can have this crap vanish and let
it be left only where it wants to be (RAO being my guess) but it's
impossible to tell... Everybody just trim all of the crosspost addresses off
except your fav... thanks

Chevdo said:

Right, he just includes and endorses idiotic fraudulent stuff in his magazine.

Ooh! I'll bet that makes you so darned mad!

On Sat, 17 Sep 2005 15:27:53 GMT, (Chevdo) wrote:

Actually, he tends not to respond to the idiotic stuff.

So I doubt that he's going to respond to this.

Right, he just includes and endorses idiotic fraudulent stuff in his magazine.

And apparently all you do is sit in your easy chair and bitch and moan
in a fairly idiotic fashion. He looks better and better by comparison
with every one of your posts.

On Sat, 17 Sep 2005 16:01:58 GMT, SSJVCmag
wrote:

On 9/17/05 10:35 AM, in article ,
"dave weil" wrote:

Who cares?

Dave.. 'who cares" is truly the pojnt... I know you have a clue about this
sort of thing so could you please do The Right Thing (like several others)
and just drop the crosspost on this
newly-resplattered-by-elevator-fart-impressed-dork-fostered mess so that
remaining "what? Who cares?" news groups can have this crap vanish and let
it be left only where it wants to be (RAO being my guess) but it's
impossible to tell... Everybody just trim all of the crosspost addresses off
except your fav... thanks

Maybe when you take your own advice...

SSJVCmag said:

snip

Dude, you're only making things worse.
No one is complaining about crossposting but you.
No one is sending the same message hundreds of times, while
deceptively snipping the group from where he's posting but you.

PS. I added your precious little NG so as to get this message through
to you and your buddies, who are probably unaware of the fact that
you're polluting other NGs with your stupid drivel.

As some usenet icon (Lord Valve) uses to say: "No likee, no clickee!"

Think about it, it's a refreshing thought.

--

"Audio as a serious hobby is going down the tubes."
- Howard Ferstler, 25/4/2005

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 17 Sep 2005 15:27:53 GMT, (Chevdo) wrote:

Actually, he tends not to respond to the idiotic stuff.

So I doubt that he's going to respond to this.

Right, he just includes and endorses idiotic fraudulent stuff in his
magazine.

And apparently all you do is sit in your easy chair and bitch and moan
in a fairly idiotic fashion. He looks better and better by comparison
with every one of your posts.

hey if making money off fraudulent ads is so important to Atkinson, why doesn't
he pick up the $1million offered by Randi for demonstrating the shakti stones?
Bitch and moan? No, I'm pointing, sneering, and ridiculing a fool, and
apparently also his lickspittle side-kick fraud-facillitator 'dave', too.

In article ,
cmndr[underscore]george[at]comcast[dot]net says...



Chevdo said:

Right, he just includes and endorses idiotic fraudulent stuff in his
magazine.

Ooh! I'll bet that makes you so darned mad!



You wish. It makes me laugh at losers like you who obviously still buy the
rag. You probably even have a subscription because being a 'stereophile' is
part of your 'interesting personality'.

Chevdoborg whined:

Right, he just includes and endorses idiotic fraudulent stuff in his magazine.

Ooh! I'll bet that makes you so darned mad!

You wish.

I know.

It makes me laugh

You're not laughing, 'borg. You're screeching in pain. I can tell by the
purple color of your pimply face.

"SSJVCmag" wrote..

Dave.. 'who cares" is truly the pojnt... I know you have a clue about this
sort of thing so could you please do The Right Thing (like several others)
and just drop the crosspost on this
newly-resplattered-by-elevator-fart-impressed-dork-fostered mess so that
remaining "what? Who cares?" news groups can have this crap vanish and let
it be left only where it wants to be (RAO being my guess) but it's
impossible to tell... Everybody just trim all of the crosspost addresses
off
except your fav... thanks


ooops.... SSjcv - you forgot to remove your group!

SSJVCmag wrote:
On 9/17/05 7:53 AM, in article , "William
Sommerwerck" wrote:

Atkinson won't respond to this topic. He is a coward,
as most dishonest people are.

Actually, he tends not to respond to the idiotic stuff.
So I doubt that he's going to respond to this.

Actually, I would call the preceding (snipped) remarks sarcastic, not
idiotic.

Bill, I know you have a clue about this sort of thing so could you please do
The Right Thing (like several others) and just drop the crosspost on this
newly-resplattered-by-elevator-fart-impressed-dork-fostered mess so that
remaining "what? Who cares?" news groups can have this crap vanish and let
it be left only where it wants to be (RAO being my guess) but it's
impossible to tell... Everybody just trim all of the crosspost addresses off
except your fav... thanks

SSJVCmag wrote:
On 9/17/05 9:03 AM, in article
, "John Atkinson"
wrote:


Whereever these questions lie on the line between "idiotic" and
"sarcastic,"

John, sarcastic, idiotic, whatever, it's a waste of time outside of it's
singular NG home and I know you have a clue about this sort of thing so
could you please do The Right Thing (like several others) and just drop the
crosspost on this
newly-resplattered-by-elevator-fart-impressed-dork-fostered mess so that
remaining "what? Who cares?" news groups can have this crap vanish and let
it be left only where it wants to be (RAO being my guess) but it's
impossible to tell... Everybody just trim all of the crosspost addresses off
except your fav... Thanks

SSJVCmag wrote:
On 9/17/05 10:35 AM, in article ,
"dave weil" wrote:

Who cares?

Dave.. 'who cares" is truly the pojnt... I know you have a clue about this
sort of thing so could you please do The Right Thing (like several others)
and just drop the crosspost on this
newly-resplattered-by-elevator-fart-impressed-dork-fostered mess so that
remaining "what? Who cares?" news groups can have this crap vanish and let
it be left only where it wants to be (RAO being my guess) but it's
impossible to tell... Everybody just trim all of the crosspost addresses off
except your fav... thanks

SSJVCmag wrote:
On 9/17/05 11:27 AM, in article ZBWWe.255002$tt5.90321@edtnps90, "Chevdo"
wrote:

Right, he just includes and endorses idiotic fraudulent stuff

Chevdo, fraudulent and idiotic pretty much fit this sort of crosspost
nonsense... I know you have a clue about this sort of thing so could you
please do The Right Thing (like several others) and just drop the crosspost
on this newly-resplattered-by-elevator-fart-impressed-dork-fostered mess so
that remaining "what? Who cares?" news groups can have this crap vanish and
let it be left only where it wants to be (RAO being my guess) but it's
impossible to tell... Everybody just trim all of the crosspost addresses off
except your fav... Thanks

SSJVCmag wrote:
On 9/17/05 3:12 PM, in article ,
"Sander deWaal" wrote:

SSJVCmag said:

snip

Dude, you're only making things worse.
No one is complaining about crossposting but you.
No one is sending the same message hundreds of times, while
deceptively snipping the group from where he's posting but you.

PS. I added your precious little NG so as to get this message through
to you and your buddies, who are probably unaware of the fact that
you're polluting other NGs with your stupid drivel.

As some usenet icon (Lord Valve) uses to say: "No likee, no clickee!"

Think about it, it's a refreshing thought.

Refreshing is the thought: what's so hard about the folks that ORIGINATED
the crosspost mess FIXING it?
A simple polite request fosters THIS sort of crap... Says much.
Get over it kids. The chip on the little shoulder there just hasn;t been
trendy since like you were 6...

Just fix the crossposts (BTW, just to help you keep it straight, that means
REMOVE some, not ADD some), a polution as you like to call it that came from
somewhere out your way in the first place, and things are peachy! Dump your
vitriol on the wizard that STARTED this, not me...
It's really -Not- rocket science kids!

And because I KNOW you're totally hung up on it: here it is:
Your turn for the last word...

And thanks, as always!

So is there any way to kill ALL the threads discussing Mr.
Atkinson, all at once? Dunno how anyone could have enough
interest to even *read* all this stuff, much less add to it!

"SSJVCmag" wrote in message
and posted to 3 other groups

...
On 9/17/05 7:53 AM, in article ,
"William
Sommerwerck" wrote:

Atkinson won't respond to this topic. He is a coward,
as most dishonest people are.

Actually, he tends not to respond to the idiotic stuff.
So I doubt that he's going to respond to this.

Actually, I would call the preceding (snipped) remarks sarcastic, not
idiotic.

Bill, I know you have a clue about this sort of thing so could you please
do
The Right Thing (like several others) and just drop the crosspost on this
newly-resplattered-by-elevator-fart-impressed-dork-fostered mess so that
remaining "what? Who cares?" news groups can have this crap vanish and let
it be left only where it wants to be (RAO being my guess) but it's
impossible to tell... Everybody just trim all of the crosspost addresses
off
except your fav... thanks


Yes, Do the right thing, you asshole moron.
Stop YOUR crossposting to groups that have
ABSOLUTELY NO INTEREST IN YOU.

"SSJVCmag" wrote in message
...
On 9/17/05 9:03 AM, in article
, "John Atkinson"
wrote:


Whereever these questions lie on the line between "idiotic" and
"sarcastic,"

John, sarcastic, idiotic, whatever, it's a waste of time outside of it's
singular NG home and I know you have a clue about this sort of thing so
could you please do The Right Thing (like several others) and just drop
the
crosspost on this
newly-resplattered-by-elevator-fart-impressed-dork-fostered mess so that
remaining "what? Who cares?" news groups can have this crap vanish and let
it be left only where it wants to be (RAO being my guess) but it's
impossible to tell... Everybody just trim all of the crosspost addresses
off
except your fav... Thanks


Stop crossposting yourself, asshole

"SSJVCmag" wrote in message
...
On 9/17/05 10:35 AM, in article
,
"dave weil" wrote:

Who cares?

Dave.. 'who cares" is truly the pojnt... I know you have a clue about this
sort of thing so could you please do The Right Thing (like several others)
and just drop the crosspost on this
newly-resplattered-by-elevator-fart-impressed-dork-fostered mess so that
remaining "what? Who cares?" news groups can have this crap vanish and let
it be left only where it wants to be (RAO being my guess) but it's
impossible to tell... Everybody just trim all of the crosspost addresses
off
except your fav... thanks


Stop it yourself, ASSHOLE

"SSJVCmag" wrote in message
...
On 9/17/05 11:27 AM, in article ZBWWe.255002$tt5.90321@edtnps90, "Chevdo"
wrote:

Right, he just includes and endorses idiotic fraudulent stuff

Chevdo, fraudulent and idiotic pretty much fit this sort of crosspost
nonsense... I know you have a clue about this sort of thing so could you
please do The Right Thing (like several others) and just drop the
crosspost
on this newly-resplattered-by-elevator-fart-impressed-dork-fostered mess
so
that remaining "what? Who cares?" news groups can have this crap vanish
and
let it be left only where it wants to be (RAO being my guess) but it's
impossible to tell... Everybody just trim all of the crosspost addresses
off
except your fav... Thanks


MOMMY, MOMMY, HE CROSSPOSTED,,bwaahhhhh!

"SSJVCmag" wrote in message
...
On 9/17/05 12:53 PM, in article
,
"dave weil" wrote:

On Sat, 17 Sep 2005 16:01:58 GMT, SSJVCmag
wrote:

On 9/17/05 10:35 AM, in article
,
"dave weil" wrote:

Who cares?

Dave.. 'who cares" is truly the pojnt... I know you have a clue about
this
sort of thing so could you please do The Right Thing (like several
others)
and just drop the crosspost on this
newly-resplattered-by-elevator-fart-impressed-dork-fostered mess so that
remaining "what? Who cares?" news groups can have this crap vanish and
let
it be left only where it wants to be (RAO being my guess) but it's
impossible to tell... Everybody just trim all of the crosspost addresses
off
except your fav... thanks

Maybe when you take your own advice...

Ahhh Dave, so smart, so hip, so... Well, It takes a tough man to actually
ADD crossposts when politely asked to cut 'em down. You really rock,
dude...
Just can't tell ya how much. Get yourself a life and maybe you can get
past
this stuff in your head. Farting in elevators wasn't even funny for most
of
us WHEN we were 10, we hardly KEPT it as a Personality Choice, but try...
Really, keep trying, you CAN get past this.
Just don't give up. We're pullin' for ya.

My own advice was that we can all help cut down on this crosspost
dunderheadedness but It'd be ALMOST as rude as the original prank to just
wipe em all off, not knowing which NG actually might WANT this thread, so
asking all to just speak up and/or remove their own does it quick, polite
and considerately. For folks like you that's not really Job One so I guess
the rest of you, just look to this poor guy as a reverse role model.
There's
a lesson to be learned from everyone.

Thanks.


When will YOU learn the lesson.
You can't get us to stop crossposting
when you yourself are crossposting.
YOU ARE AN IDIOT

"SSJVCmag" wrote in message
...
On 9/17/05 3:12 PM, in article ,
"Sander deWaal" wrote:

SSJVCmag said:

snip

Dude, you're only making things worse.
No one is complaining about crossposting but you.
No one is sending the same message hundreds of times, while
deceptively snipping the group from where he's posting but you.

PS. I added your precious little NG so as to get this message through
to you and your buddies, who are probably unaware of the fact that
you're polluting other NGs with your stupid drivel.

As some usenet icon (Lord Valve) uses to say: "No likee, no clickee!"

Think about it, it's a refreshing thought.

Refreshing is the thought: what's so hard about the folks that ORIGINATED
the crosspost mess FIXING it?
A simple polite request fosters THIS sort of crap... Says much.
Get over it kids. The chip on the little shoulder there just hasn;t been
trendy since like you were 6...

Just fix the crossposts (BTW, just to help you keep it straight, that
means
REMOVE some, not ADD some), a polution as you like to call it that came
from
somewhere out your way in the first place, and things are peachy! Dump
your
vitriol on the wizard that STARTED this, not me...
It's really -Not- rocket science kids!

And because I KNOW you're totally hung up on it: here it is:
Your turn for the last word...

And thanks, as always!


You are a stupid, ARROGANT asshole

"SSJVCmag" wrote in message
...
On 9/17/05 6:49 PM, in article , "surf"
wrote:

"SSJVCmag" wrote..

Dave.. 'who cares" is truly the pojnt... I know you have a clue about
this
sort of thing so could you please do The Right Thing (like several
others)
and just drop the crosspost on this
newly-resplattered-by-elevator-fart-impressed-dork-fostered mess so that
remaining "what? Who cares?" news groups can have this crap vanish and
let
it be left only where it wants to be (RAO being my guess) but it's
impossible to tell... Everybody just trim all of the crosspost addresses
off
except your fav... thanks


ooops.... SSjcv - you forgot to remove your group!

Thanks!
You guys are GREAT!


**** YOU, SSJVC

"SSJVCmag" wrote in message
...
On 9/17/05 11:01 PM, in article , "Clyde
Slick" wrote:
Stop crossposting yourself, asshole

Ok Slick. If this is where you hang, deal with it.
If not, the folks here can handle this internally by smiling and ignoring
and thus KILLING the problem.
Polite requests to stifle someone-else's pudding-brained forced initial
crosspost are best met with simply CHECKING (to see that you're not
inadvertantly allowing them to use you as a crosspost-continuer,
splattering
your single-NG interest responses all over hell and back where indeed
nobody
cares) and then ERASING any further annoyance beyond your immediate NG.
Most
folks get it. They look, smile, erase all the extra crosspostings and move
on. Some though, like you, -ADD- crossposts where none are. Enjoy. Just
don't be surprised down the road.
Enjoy... All the rest of you Nicer folks- sorry abut the hoseheads.


When you stop sending us your garbage, I'll
consider watching what we send to your group..
But when you continually violate your own precepts,
I am not going to accede to any of your requests.

Since you are so TOTALLY clueless, I will finally
let you in the your proper response to people, if you
want to effectively stop the crossposting..
That would be a polite private email, rather than
placing yet another useless crosspost, compalining
about the person who previously crossposted.

(Since I don't give a **** about crossposting, if anything,
I am in favor of it, I am keeping this public rather than going
private with you.)



Now, consider this. When we are responding
to a crossposted item, we may actually
WANT to have our response be available in all the crossposted
groups. We don't know who is, and
is not, reading the threads and following the conversation.
Just 'cause YOU aren't interested does not
mean that someone else is not.

Throughout this affair, I find that your
extreme arrogance is just appalling.

"SSJVCmag" wrote in message
...
Separate messages crossposted at
11:00
11:01
11:02
11:03
11:06
11:09
11:10

Such effort and trouble to force words where they're not wanted.
Somebody PLEASE tell Clyde he really doesn't have to email 4 newsgroups
every 60 sec or so, it's easier to just make sure he's only sending
responses to the one newsgroup that the thread started in.
With any luck this will ease it out of existance.

The rest of you: thanks for trimming the crossposts!


Are you being effective yet?
Are your activities increasimg or decreasing
the amount of crossposts?

"SSJVCmag" wrote in message
...
With sympathy for what's apparently normal...

On 9/17/05 11:28 PM,
"Clyde Slick" took a message in this NG (only!)
and force-crossposted it back to others that aren;t involved:

When you stop sending us your garbage, I'll
consider watching what we send to your group..

No Slick, I sent ONE message to ask nicely that folks just take a look at
a
suddenly-multi-group forced message thread. Probably done by someone very
much like you to foment just thos sprt of attention-opportunity for ya.


You sent only one message.
Ok, I'll play that game too.
I only responded to one message.



But when you continually violate your own precepts,
I am not going to accede to any of your requests.

Oddly, my initial; request was EXACTLY what you demand of me below, for
the
EXACT same reason you mention. Sensible too...


No, you hypocritically crossposted your
request to have others eliminate crossposting responses.

... if you
want to effectively stop the crossposting..
That would be a polite private email, rather than
placing yet another useless crosspost, compalining
about the person who previously crossposted.

(Since I don't give a **** about crossposting, if anything,
I am in favor of it, I am keeping this public rather than going
private with you.)

Consistancy is indeed the sign of a mature mind.

As I mentioned above, your comment below is EXACTLY why I simply sent a
nice, single message that asked folks to note that a previously-single-NG
thread had been suddenly expanded to a bunch of uninterested groups and,
since it's really easy to not notice just what your reply gets sent to,
habit assumes it's going to just the group the thread started in, a light
point to the occurance of some dunderhead taking advantage of that is
hardly
grounds for a whipping. Most folks just fixed it and moved on.
Methinks you protest too much...


What can I say, I like to pick on morons


Now, consider this. When we are responding
to a crossposted item, we may actually
WANT to have our response be available in all the crossposted
groups. We don't know who is, and
is not, reading the threads and following the conversation.
Just 'cause YOU aren't interested does not
mean that someone else is not.

Throughout this affair, I find that your
extreme arrogance is just appalling.

'arrogance'...
Fascinating.


Considering that a number of people asked you to stop
your silliness, yes, your arrogance is amazing.

On 9/17/05 11:56 PM, in article , "Clyde Slick"
wrote:

What can I say, I like to pick on morons

John... It's RAOtown, John..
Come-on, let it go..
Let's go home John...
Come on.. It's RAOtown...

(camera back and up as crowd wanders off the rain-soaked street...)

"SSJVCmag" wrote in message
The rest of you: thanks for trimming the crossposts!


On 9/17/05 11:50 PM, in article , "Clyde
Slick" wrote:
Are you being effective yet?
Are your activities increasimg or decreasing
the amount of crossposts?

I dare not say,
I really wouldn't want you to feel you're out there all alone.

"SSJVCmag" wrote in message
...
On 9/17/05 11:56 PM, "Clyde Slick"
Continuing to add newgroups to single NG threads:

"SSJVCmag" wrote
I sent ONE message to ask nicely that folks just take a look at
a suddenly-multi-group forced message thread. Probably done by someone
very
much like you to foment just thos sprt of attention-opportunity for ya.


You sent only one message.
Ok, I'll play that game too.
I only responded to one message.

Ahh but there's that crosspost thing you're still doing and nobody else
is... At least I've narrowed it down to RAO where it seems to have
started.



Right now, I'm crossing it to rec.audio.pro
for a specific purpose. I am talking to you,
and that is where I believe you reside.

You removed two other groups from the headers,
and I left those off.

Hey, when you leave RAO off the header, I'll stop responding altogether.
But you have been too stupid, for too long,
to have figured that out.




What can I say, I like to pick on morons

Your choice of adversary is revealing.


Considering that a number of people asked you to stop
your silliness, yes, your arrogance is amazing.

I've never been amazing... Nice of you to say so though.
It's past my bedtime. Have fun.


tomorrow, or, hopefully, NOT.

"SSJVCmag" wrote in message
...
"SSJVCmag" wrote in message
The rest of you: thanks for trimming the crossposts!


On 9/17/05 11:50 PM, in article , "Clyde
Slick" wrote:
Are you being effective yet?
Are your activities increasimg or decreasing
the amount of crossposts?

I dare not say,
I really wouldn't want you to feel you're out there all alone.


Are your posting complaints resulting in reducing the amount
of crossposting or increasing the anmount of crossposting?
They are increasing them!!!

The one thing YOU did right, eliminating two of the three
crosspost groups (from your perspective) reduced the number of
crosspsotings. Now, if you will only
eliminate RAO from the headers, you will have won!!!

"SSJVCmag" wrote in message
...
On 9/18/05 12:25 AM, in article , "Clyde
Slick" wrote:

Right now, I'm crossing it to rec.audio.pro
for a specific purpose. I am talking to you,
and that is where I believe you reside.

Well, no, the thread's singularly and appropriately back on RAO where you
it started. That's fine. That's how things work.
If you have some deep-seated need to keep crossposting to people elsewhere
(who as we've mentioned, never had, and still don't have, any interest in
this thread) then that's telling.



you don't speak for anyone but yourself.
At any rate, I cross to RAP, cause I beleive that is where you read and post
from.
I'm talking to YOU
If you want to stop, its ok with me.
Just write off RAO

(Chevododo) wrote:



hey if making money off fraudulent ads is so important to Atkinson, why
doesn't
he pick up the $1million offered by Randi for demonstrating the shakti
stones?
Bitch and moan? No, I'm pointing, sneering, and ridiculing a fool, and
apparently also his lickspittle side-kick fraud-facillitator 'dave', too.



Just what in the world is your gripe Chevedovoododo? If someone tried
the Shakti Stone tweak, found it to work in their system and decide to
pay for it, what is it to you?

How does someone defraud someone of that, Chevodingdong ?

SSJVCmag said:

On 9/17/05 3:12 PM, in article ,
"Sander deWaal" wrote:

SSJVCmag said:

snip

Dude, you're only making things worse.
No one is complaining about crossposting but you.
No one is sending the same message hundreds of times, while
deceptively snipping the group from where he's posting but you.

PS. I added your precious little NG so as to get this message through
to you and your buddies, who are probably unaware of the fact that
you're polluting other NGs with your stupid drivel.

As some usenet icon (Lord Valve) uses to say: "No likee, no clickee!"

Think about it, it's a refreshing thought.

Refreshing is the thought: what's so hard about the folks that ORIGINATED
the crosspost mess FIXING it?
A simple polite request fosters THIS sort of crap... Says much.
Get over it kids. The chip on the little shoulder there just hasn;t been
trendy since like you were 6...

Just fix the crossposts (BTW, just to help you keep it straight, that means
REMOVE some, not ADD some), a polution as you like to call it that came from
somewhere out your way in the first place, and things are peachy! Dump your
vitriol on the wizard that STARTED this, not me...
It's really -Not- rocket science kids!

And because I KNOW you're totally hung up on it: here it is:
Your turn for the last word...

And thanks, as always!

Dude, you're only making things worse.
No one is complaining about crossposting but you.
No one is sending the same message hundreds of times, while
deceptively snipping the group from where he's posting but you.

PS. I added your precious little NG so as to get this message through
to you and your buddies, who are probably unaware of the fact that
you're polluting other NGs with your stupid drivel.

As some usenet icon (Lord Valve) uses to say: "No likee, no clickee!"

When you stop, the crossposting will stop. Simple, really.

Think about it, it's a refreshing thought.

--

"Audio as a serious hobby is going down the tubes."
- Howard Ferstler, 25/4/2005