"Lionel" wrote in message
...
Sander deWaal a écrit :

See if you can spot me ;-)

http://www.symfocity.demon.nl/IMG_0958Large.JPG

?????


Third tube from the right?



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Sander deWaal" wrote
ScottW" said:



http://www.symfocity.demon.nl/IMG_1031Large.JPG


Which one of the 2?


I don't know, but............


1. The guy on the left was thinking "... I hope Howard's wrecking ball
don't catch me savoring these awesome sounding tube amps."


2. The guy on the right was thinking, " ... Hmm, if I smash one of these
cute looking floorstanders atop Krooger's protuberant head,
... would it void their warranty?"

John Atkinson wrote:

Howard Ferstler wrote:
Read this tidbit from a recent Stereophile issue:
A Glorious Time: AR's Edgar Villchur and Roy Allison
David Lander, January, 2005 (From Stereophile).

snip

Mr. Ferstler, this is a copyrighted article from Stereophile.
You cannot, repeat, cannot post it in its entirety to
Usenet without permission and you do not have that permission.
Please delete the posting. If you wish to refer to this
article again, please quote the URL for the authorized reprint
at http://www.stereophile.com/interviews/105villchur/

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

How the hell do I delete the posting?

In any case, what harm did it do to post the thing? I
acknowledged where it came from. What does it matter if
people read it here or read it at your website. Or, does
your magazine get points every time someone accesses
material? Ah, yes!

Frankly, I find it odd that you allowed an article of that
kind to make it into your magazine in the first place, given
that both Villchur and Allison think that, notwithstanding
your own technical talents, Stereophile is junk journalism.

I find it interesting that you appear to scope all of my
posts on RAO. I suggest that you get a life, Mr. Atkinson.

Howard Ferstler

"George M. Middius" wrote:

Brother Horace the Thief said:

Trust me.

Have you apologized for attempting steal an article from Stereophile?

I never claimed that I wrote the article. Indeed, I left the
author information right at the top. They should have been
happy that I put it out there in full form.

Atkinson claims that I have the power to delete the thing
from RAO, but if that function is possible I have never
tried it and do not know how to do it.

Unlike you, I do not allow my world to revolve around my
computer.

Howard Ferstler

dave weil wrote:

On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 13:07:55 -0400, Howard Ferstler
wrote:

Fortunately, unlike you freaks my world does not revolve
around my audio systems. I can back out of the enterprise
and not give up a thing.

You of course being the guy who has built his home around them,
spending thousands of dollars on tweako-freako framing.

As a product reviewer and writer (of both commentary
articles and books on the subject), it is obviously
necessary for me to have a variety of audio components on
hand to set my standards. As for the room additions and
expansions, they were done not just to provide
audio-listening areas.

Regarding all of those systems, my wife has for years wanted
me to remove my living-room system from the living room, so
that she can make the area into the drawing-room-like
environment she desires. The system in there right now is my
"small" set up, and I use it as a reference standard when
reviewing smaller-scale components. Every time I look at it
I begin to realize that she is right about that room. The
whole place (all three systems) is just overkill.

To tell the truth, I have a number of reviewing jobs on the
horizon, but once they are done I will probably "retire"
from audio writing and even record reviewing. Given the
absolutely nitwit level so-called "serious" audio has sunk
to over the years, it just is not as interesting for me as
it once was. Every time I pick up an audio magazine
(including even the ones I write for) I roll my eyes and
wonder how it has all come to this.

I figure with guys like Atkinson handling the propaganda end
and guys like you working as consumers, it makes no sense
for anyone with intelligence, taste, or common sense to
participate on an active level.

Howard Ferstler

John Atkinson wrote:

Howard Ferstler wrote:
Read this tidbit from a recent Stereophile issue:
A Glorious Time: AR's Edgar Villchur and Roy Allison
David Lander, January, 2005 (From Stereophile).

snip

Mr. Ferstler, this is a copyrighted article from Stereophile.
You cannot, repeat, cannot post it in its entirety to
Usenet without permission and you do not have that permission.
Please delete the posting. If you wish to refer to this
article again, please quote the URL for the authorized reprint
at http://www.stereophile.com/interviews/105villchur/

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

Well, I used the "cancel message" function of my email and
the damned thing said the thing was indeed canceled. I am
not sure if that just means that it is canceled just for me
or if it was wiped from the face of the earth. In any case,
you got your wish as best I could attempt.

Good luck with your debate with Arny. You'll need it.

PS: just kidding about that "good luck" comment.

Howard Ferstler

John Atkinson wrote:

Howard Ferstler wrote:
Sander deWaal wrote:
at least Arny has the balls to actually venture out of his
house and fight the E.H.E.E., impersonated by John Atkinson,
while all Howard does is standing aside yapping "Hit him,
Arny! Below the belt is a good spot!".

I have no desire to go to NYC and confront people who would
insult me enough for me to put them in the hospital.

Phew! Am _I_ glad I invited Arny Krueger rather than you to
debate me, Mr. Ferstler.

Smart move. I get edgy when I am around people I do not
like.

I have a large deductible on my
health insurance and I had not realized you were such a
fearless street fighter.

Just a timid little ex-motorcyclist, actually. I gave that
up when my bifocals caused me to skid on a sandy section of
the road and crash one morning.

Arny will not have to hit John "below the belt" to show him
up for what he is.

Phew. I am dodging bullets here without even knowing they had
been fired.

Ignorance, in this case, will not be bliss, John. Remember,
however, that they will be magic bullets and not real ones.

Yes, the tweakos will be cheering for their boy, but the
bottom line is that John will lose integrity points with all
of those audio engineers he wants so badly to take him
seriously.

But I had thought from what you wrote in our recent exchange on
loudspeaker dispersion, Mr. Ferstler, that I had already lost
the respect of all "intelligent audio engineers." Do you
mean there's still _hope_ for me?

Not really. There is more to winning the respect of the
audio intelligentsia than scoring intellectual points. You
are still full of it when it comes to the behavior of
multiple wide-dispersion drivers mounted on 90 degree
panels.

That will be more than enough of a reward for me.

Glad to be of service, Mr. Ferstler.

No you aren't.

Howard Ferstler

"George M. Middius" wrote:

Brother Horace the Timorous whined:

We each have our approach.

Yes, that's true. Krooger is a compulsive liar and slander, and you are a
coward and a thief. Quite distinct, the two of you are, aside from the
traits you share -- rabid religiosity, compulsion to call people names,
and undergo rituals of masochism in public.

Given how often you join him when dealing with posts by me
and Arny, you appear to be Atkinson's sidekick or even pet.
Are you looking for a job with his magazine? Perhaps you
already have such a job.

Howard Ferstler

"Clyde Slick" said:

http://www.symfocity.demon.nl/IMG_0958Large.JPG


Third tube from the right?


;-)

That's a 6BX7.

--

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

"ScottW" said:

How come the tubes aren't glowing?


A bad camera?

--

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

Sander deWaal wrote:

Lionel said:

Perhaps Howard is pathetic but he is an institutional...
while the self-professed RAO's intelligentsia is rather
grotesque in this role.

John Atkinson is also an "institutional".
And I wouldn't dare calling Paul Bamborough, Glenn Zelniker, Jim
Johnston, Dick Pierce, David Wareing et al , "self-professed RAO
intelligentsia" .
All of which have had their arguments with both Arny and/or Howard at
some point.

Sure. However, I think some of those people you noted (not
all, but some) agree to some extent on what really matters
when it comes to things like amp sound, wire sound, CD
player sound, and audio gimmicks. Where we often disagree
involves the realm of acoustics, which is kind of a
wide-open area that in my opinion also involves taste. Yep,
I cut you "preference" freaks quite a bit of slack when it
comes to acoustics, surround-sound embellishments, and
room/speaker interactions. It is when you harp about amp, CD
player, and wire "sound" that I roll my eyes and wonder just
what makes some of you tick.

Howard is entitled to his opinion, but basing one's credentials on the
amount of words written, or the amount of books published looks a bit
weak to me, to say the least.

It does, your opinion notwithstanding, at least show a
considerably amount of dedication to the task.

meanwhile, I continue to struggle through life, doing my own things my
own way and be a happy person ;-)

Ignorance remains bliss - for some.

Howard Ferstler

John Atkinson wrote:

John Atkinson wrote:
Sander deWaal wrote:
"Audio as a serious hobby is going down the tubes."
- Howard Ferstler, 25/4/2005

No.1 in a collection of great sayings of the
philosopher/street fighter.

Here's No.2:

"What hands-on-only types very often forget is the power of
the intellect, the value of observations delivered by an
'outsider,' and the genuine value of bookish research."
- Howard Ferstler, March 24 1999

I marvel at how you guys manage to pull up so many of my
past comments. Nice to know I am taken so seriously.
Frankly, I do not remember posting that item that far back,
but I suppose what you have there is in line with my stand
on audio.

Howard Ferstler

On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 10:38:04 -0400, Howard Ferstler
wrote:

dave weil wrote:

On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 13:07:55 -0400, Howard Ferstler
wrote:

Fortunately, unlike you freaks my world does not revolve
around my audio systems. I can back out of the enterprise
and not give up a thing.

You of course being the guy who has built his home around them,
spending thousands of dollars on tweako-freako framing.

As a product reviewer and writer (of both commentary
articles and books on the subject), it is obviously
necessary for me to have a variety of audio components on
hand to set my standards.

How does this jibe with "Fortunately, unlike you freaks my world does
not revolve around my audio systems. I can back out of the enterprise
and not give up a thing."?

As for the room additions and
expansions, they were done not just to provide
audio-listening areas.

However, you claimed the full cost of them as part of your "stereo
system". You bragged obout the extra scores of thosands of dollars
that you spent on bracing and the like.

Regarding all of those systems, my wife has for years wanted
me to remove my living-room system from the living room, so
that she can make the area into the drawing-room-like
environment she desires.

Hopefully, you built her a nice petticoat closet as well.

The system in there right now is my
"small" set up, and I use it as a reference standard when
reviewing smaller-scale components. Every time I look at it
I begin to realize that she is right about that room. The
whole place (all three systems) is just overkill.

There ya go. So why is *your* "overkill" any better than some rich
software develper's overkill $20,000 amp and marble foyer? You've
probably spent far more of a percentage of your disposable income on
your audio/video that one of those guys or gals.

To tell the truth, I have a number of reviewing jobs on the
horizon, but once they are done I will probably "retire"
from audio writing and even record reviewing.

So, does this mean that you are going to "give up" your overkill
systems? Still, even if you do, which I don't think for a minute that
you would, you're going to be stuck with an overbuilt home. I, on the
other hand, can sell everything tomorrow and I truly wouldnt be giving
up *anything* other than some gear. I've done it once before in my
life when I joined the Army. Sold my 3,000 LPs and all of my stereo
gear in 1983. Of course, now, I've got another 3,500 LPs and a bunch
of gear. I bet it would be far easier for me to jettison *my* gear
than it wuld be for you to pry your clammy hands from away from your
vaunted Allisons. Afterall, the Cornwalls went bye bye about a year
ago without so much as a tear. Hated to see them go, but, oh well, I
had better use for the profit that I made on them.

Given the
absolutely nitwit level so-called "serious" audio has sunk
to over the years, it just is not as interesting for me as
it once was. Every time I pick up an audio magazine
(including even the ones I write for) I roll my eyes and
wonder how it has all come to this.

Here's a hint. Do what *I* do - don't pick up an audio magazine unless
necessary.

I figure with guys like Atkinson handling the propaganda end
and guys like you working as consumers, it makes no sense
for anyone with intelligence, taste, or common sense to
participate on an active level.

Hey, whatever floats yer boat, pal. Personally, what others do or
believe don't affect my listening habits *or* audio interests ONE
WHIT. It's interesting to hear about opinions occasionally, or be
amused by purchasing patterns, but it doesn't ruin the hobby for me,
especially since it's just a hobby for me and not something to keep a
little gas in my car, or use as an ego prop as it is for you.

On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 11:55:59 -0400, Howard Ferstler
wrote:

"What hands-on-only types very often forget is the power of
the intellect, the value of observations delivered by an
'outsider,' and the genuine value of bookish research."
- Howard Ferstler, March 24 1999

I marvel at how you guys manage to pull up so many of my
past comments.

"Goggle is you're friend" - AK.

Howard Ferstler wrote:
John Atkinson wrote:
Mr. Ferstler, this is a copyrighted article from
Stereophile. You cannot, repeat, cannot post it in
its entirety to Usenet without permission and you do
not have that permission. Please delete the posting.
If you wish to refer to this article again, please
quote the URL for the authorized reprint
at http://www.stereophile.com/interviews/105villchur/

How the hell do I delete the posting?

I have no idea what news client you use, Mr. Ferstler,
so cannot advise you. In any case, surely that is
something you should have thought about before posting
the article to Usenet.

In any case, what harm did it do to post the thing?

It's called copyright infringement, Mr. Ferstler and
I work, for better or for worse, for a company that
aggressively protects its copyright. I note also
that you have been posting copyrighted material
on-line from the enclyopedia to which you recently
contributed. I assume you requested the publisher's
permission to do so, in which case I fail to
undertsand why you didn't pay Stsreophile the
same courtesy.

I acknowledged where it came from.

Not a valid legal defense, I am afraid.

What does it matter if people read it here or read it
at your website.

Trust me, it matters, Mr. Ferstler. If you wanted to
post this article you should have requested my
permission. You do not have a "fair use" right to
quote _any_ copyrighted work in its entirety, even
if you are not doing so for financial gain. It would
be worth your while looking up the law on this
point.

Or, does your magazine get points every time someone
accesses material? Ah, yes!

Yes, Stereophile is a publishing business, Mr. Ferstler.
But as I informed you in private email, Stereophile does
not have the legal burden of proving financial
damage in a case of infringement of its copyright,
only proving that the infringement took place. Hence my
request to you to delete your original posting.

Frankly, I find it odd that you allowed an article of
that kind to make it into your magazine in the first
place, given that both Villchur and Allison think that,
notwithstanding your own technical talents, Stereophile
is junk journalism.

That is not what they told my writer, Mr. Ferstler. And
I was pleased to be able to recognize these men's
achievements. I was puzzled by the fact that no other audio
magazine, including the ones for which you write, Mr.
Ferstler, felt it approppriate to acknowledge the 50th
anniversary of Acoutsic Research.

I find it interesting that you appear to scope all of
my posts on RAO. I suggest that you get a life, Mr.
Atkinson.

Thank you for the advice, Mr. Ferstler. The ball's in
your court.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

Howard Ferstler wrote:
Well, I used the "cancel message" function of my email and
the damned thing said the thing was indeed canceled. I am
not sure if that just means that it is canceled just for me
or if it was wiped from the face of the earth.

It is still retrievable in the Google archive, Mr. Ferstler.
you will need to delete it using the Google software.

Thanks in advance for doing so.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

ScottW a écrit :

In a gentle soothing way albeit slightly distanced, my flat things are
capable of replicating delicate textures of instruments and a sense of
realism to voice unknown to me in dynamic systems. No, they don't
reach out and punch you, none the less.... far more satisfying for the
individual personal listening experience IMO.

I'm sure you are right.
I was just kindly teasing Sander.

"Howard Ferstler" wrote

Howard Ferstler wrote:
Read this tidbit from a recent Stereophile issue:
A Glorious Time: AR's Edgar Villchur and Roy Allison
David Lander, January, 2005 (From Stereophile).

snip

Mr. Ferstler, this is a copyrighted article from Stereophile.
You cannot, repeat, cannot post it in its entirety to
Usenet without permission and you do not have that permission.
Please delete the posting. If you wish to refer to this
article again, please quote the URL for the authorized reprint
at http://www.stereophile.com/interviews/105villchur/

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

How the hell do I delete the posting?

Kudos, nice strategy. I don't think giving you notice
via USEnet is enforceable anyhow.


In any case, what harm did it do to post the thing? I
acknowledged where it came from. What does it matter if
people read it here or read it at your website. Or, does
your magazine get points every time someone accesses
material? Ah, yes!

Hard to break old authoring habits, Howard ?


Frankly, I find it odd that you allowed an article of that
kind to make it into your magazine in the first place, given
that both Villchur and Allison think that, notwithstanding
your own technical talents, Stereophile is junk journalism.

Most audiophiles have never seen a copy of Sensible
Sound. And as you don't invest in the self-educational
portion of your profession (audio subscriptions), exactly
how would you know ("junk journalism"), mr. Living-in-
a-vacuum?


I find it interesting that you appear to scope all of my
posts on RAO. I suggest that you get a life, Mr. Atkinson.

Howard Ferstler

If he really become obsessive he might invite
you too on a paid audio junket, Howard .

John Atkinson wrote:

Howard Ferstler wrote:

What does it matter if people read it here or read it
at your website.

Trust me, it matters, Mr. Ferstler. If you wanted to
post this article you should have requested my
permission.

Like you requested permission to post the "edited" version
of my The Audiophile Voice article some time ago? Actually,
that really did not bother me at all. I am not all that
touchy about people messing with my material.

In any case, you apologized for that as I recall and I here
apologize for posting the copyrighted Villchur/Allison
article material from your magazine.

You do not have a "fair use" right to
quote _any_ copyrighted work in its entirety, even
if you are not doing so for financial gain. It would
be worth your while looking up the law on this
point.

Too much trouble. Far easier to delete the article (which I
am hoping worked when I used the article "delete" function
on my AT&T email) and be done with it. As you requested, I
am apologizing for my infraction.

Or, does your magazine get points every time someone
accesses material? Ah, yes!

Yes, Stereophile is a publishing business, Mr. Ferstler.
But as I informed you in private email, Stereophile does
not have the legal burden of proving financial
damage in a case of infringement of its copyright,
only proving that the infringement took place. Hence my
request to you to delete your original posting.

And hopefully I managed to do that. Let me know if it
worked.

Frankly, I find it odd that you allowed an article of
that kind to make it into your magazine in the first
place, given that both Villchur and Allison think that,
notwithstanding your own technical talents, Stereophile
is junk journalism.

That is not what they told my writer, Mr. Ferstler. And
I was pleased to be able to recognize these men's
achievements. I was puzzled by the fact that no other audio
magazine, including the ones for which you write, Mr.
Ferstler, felt it approppriate to acknowledge the 50th
anniversary of Acoutsic Research.

I lose track of dates easily.

I find it interesting that you appear to scope all of
my posts on RAO. I suggest that you get a life, Mr.
Atkinson.

Thank you for the advice, Mr. Ferstler. The ball's in
your court.

And hopefully my new actions will prove satisfactory to you.

Howard Ferstler

John Atkinson wrote:

Howard Ferstler wrote:
Well, I used the "cancel message" function of my email and
the damned thing said the thing was indeed canceled. I am
not sure if that just means that it is canceled just for me
or if it was wiped from the face of the earth.

It is still retrievable in the Google archive, Mr. Ferstler.
you will need to delete it using the Google software.

Thanks in advance for doing so.

But has it at least disappeared from the usenet listing that
is readily accessible? I have no way of telling, because it
has at least disappeared when I pull up the thread.

I am going to have to get guru help to do this Google work.
Hell, I can hardly access my own email sometimes, and have
never even been into the Google archive. Cut me some slack
and let me work on the procedure after I contact an expert
or two.

Howard Ferstler

Lionel said:

I was just kindly teasing Sander.


Huh? What??? Where????

;-)

--

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

Howard Ferstler said:

I am going to have to get guru help to do this Google work.
Hell, I can hardly access my own email sometimes, and have
never even been into the Google archive. Cut me some slack
and let me work on the procedure after I contact an expert
or two.


Arnold, can't you help this poor soul? ;-)

--

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

John Atkinson wrote:

Howard Ferstler wrote:
Well, I used the "cancel message" function of my email and
the damned thing said the thing was indeed canceled. I am
not sure if that just means that it is canceled just for me
or if it was wiped from the face of the earth.

It is still retrievable in the Google archive, Mr. Ferstler.
you will need to delete it using the Google software.

Thanks in advance for doing so.

While I am still trying to figure out how to delete the
material from the archive, I did access the article via the
advanced Google function, reported it as an "abuse" to the
Google people, and asked them to remove it. I explained that
it was copied from your web site without your permission.

By the way, I probably should ask you to also contact Google
and remove the edited version of my The Audiophile Voice
article from their archives that you accidentally allowed to
be posted on RAO some time ago. Yeah, I believe that it was
not your fault, and to be truthful I really do not care that
much - so we can leave it there for all to read forever.

Howard Ferstler

In article ,
says...

But has it at least disappeared from the usenet listing that
is readily accessible? I have no way of telling, because it
has at least disappeared when I pull up the thread.

I am going to have to get guru help to do this Google work.
Hell, I can hardly access my own email sometimes, and have
never even been into the Google archive. Cut me some slack
and let me work on the procedure after I contact an expert
or two.

Howard,

try this link for info on deleting archives:
http://www.google.ca/googlegroups/help.html#9

hope that helps,

Bill

Sander deWaal wrote:

Howard Ferstler said:

I am going to have to get guru help to do this Google work.
Hell, I can hardly access my own email sometimes, and have
never even been into the Google archive. Cut me some slack
and let me work on the procedure after I contact an expert
or two.

Arnold, can't you help this poor soul? ;-)

Yeah, I really would like to get this over with.

Incidentally, quite some time ago, John allowed an edited
version of a "The Audiophile Voice" article that I published
to be posted on RAO. He did not post it directly, but he did
send a copy to someone who did not have scruples (he claimed
that they said they would not post it) and they posted it.

Several people said I should have sued, but I am really not
that kind of person.

In any case, I have at least managed to get it deleted from
the standard thread links, and I have asked the people at
Google to delete it. I am not sure if this will do the
trick, but hopefully it will.

As for The Audiophile Voice article, well, I have no
problems with it being in the archives forever, in spite of
its being originally edited to make me look like a poor
writer.

Howard Ferstler

dave weil wrote:

On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 10:38:04 -0400, Howard Ferstler
wrote:

The system in there right now is my
"small" set up, and I use it as a reference standard when
reviewing smaller-scale components. Every time I look at it
I begin to realize that she is right about that room. The
whole place (all three systems) is just overkill.

There ya go. So why is *your* "overkill" any better than some rich
software develper's overkill $20,000 amp and marble foyer?

Because his expenditure, at least for that amp, has gained
him nothing. On the other hand, my expenditures deliver
concrete performance benefits and also allow me to get a bit
of variety out of listening to three different systems.

You've
probably spent far more of a percentage of your disposable income on
your audio/video that one of those guys or gals.

Hey, I am an audio buff. One of those "guys or gals" is
probably just a money-spending showoff.

To tell the truth, I have a number of reviewing jobs on the
horizon, but once they are done I will probably "retire"
from audio writing and even record reviewing.

So, does this mean that you are going to "give up" your overkill
systems?

No. And none of them are overkill. They are just right for
me. Overkill would be spending twenty grand (or even two
grand) on a stereo power amp, or spending hundreds (or even
thousands) on wires.

Still, even if you do, which I don't think for a minute that
you would, you're going to be stuck with an overbuilt home.

Trust me. It would take a pretty fabulous place, indeed, for
me to consider it overbuilt.

Given the
absolutely nitwit level so-called "serious" audio has sunk
to over the years, it just is not as interesting for me as
it once was. Every time I pick up an audio magazine
(including even the ones I write for) I roll my eyes and
wonder how it has all come to this.

Here's a hint. Do what *I* do - don't pick up an audio magazine unless
necessary.

I scope some of them on the newsstands (although most of the
time I scope woodworking magazines or car and motorcycle
mags), and probably will not resubscribe to any that come my
way now. Not really all that interesting anymore.

Howard Ferstler

Briel wrote:

In article ,
says...

But has it at least disappeared from the usenet listing that
is readily accessible? I have no way of telling, because it
has at least disappeared when I pull up the thread.

I am going to have to get guru help to do this Google work.
Hell, I can hardly access my own email sometimes, and have
never even been into the Google archive. Cut me some slack
and let me work on the procedure after I contact an expert
or two.

Howard,

try this link for info on deleting archives:
http://www.google.ca/googlegroups/help.html#9

hope that helps,

Bill

Thanks, Bill.

Incidentally, quite a while back Mr. Atkinson had one of his
copy editors work over an article I had written for The
Audiophile Voice. (The article lampooned most of the nitwits
here, although it did not mention names.) Apparently, the
editor's job was to highlight my literary inadequacies. John
asked me for permission to post the "rewrite" on RAO, as a
way (I suppose) to make me look bad. I denied him
permission, but he eventually sent it to someone else to
look over and somehow it ended up being posted, anyway.

Now, all of you legal eagles out there, do I have as much
leverage against John as he appears to have against me?
After all, I copied and posted an article that lauded two
people that I admire quite a bit, and acknowledged the
source. I made no changes to the article.

On the other hand, the "edited" TAV article was apparently
posted as a way to make me look bad. Malice was intended.

Note that I still intend to delete (or at least will try to
delete) the material that Mr. Atkinson objects to. I have no
intention of calling a lawyer regarding the posting of my
TAV article. I do not work that way.

Howard Ferstler

Briel wrote:

In article ,
says...

But has it at least disappeared from the usenet listing that
is readily accessible? I have no way of telling, because it
has at least disappeared when I pull up the thread.

I am going to have to get guru help to do this Google work.
Hell, I can hardly access my own email sometimes, and have
never even been into the Google archive. Cut me some slack
and let me work on the procedure after I contact an expert
or two.

Howard,

try this link for info on deleting archives:
http://www.google.ca/googlegroups/help.html#9

hope that helps,

Bill

Well, I set up an account and then tried to log on and the
damned thing keeps saying that I am doing a login error.
Oops, I see now that I have to wait for a conformation
message. Man, what a pain in the ass this has become.

Hey, people, I give anybody here permission to delete the
article in my name.

Because I am such a nice guy, I will not wish this kind of
work onto John Atkinson, who was somewhat responsible for
having that "edited" TAV article posted so long ago.

Howard Ferstler

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...
Sander deWaal wrote:

Howard Ferstler said:

I am going to have to get guru help to do this Google work.
Hell, I can hardly access my own email sometimes, and have
never even been into the Google archive. Cut me some slack
and let me work on the procedure after I contact an expert
or two.

Arnold, can't you help this poor soul? ;-)

Yeah, I really would like to get this over with.

Incidentally, quite some time ago, John allowed an edited
version of a "The Audiophile Voice" article that I published
to be posted on RAO. He did not post it directly, but he did
send a copy to someone who did not have scruples (he claimed
that they said they would not post it) and they posted it.

Several people said I should have sued, but I am really not
that kind of person.

In any case, I have at least managed to get it deleted from
the standard thread links, and I have asked the people at
Google to delete it. I am not sure if this will do the
trick, but hopefully it will.

As for The Audiophile Voice article, well, I have no
problems with it being in the archives forever, in spite of
its being originally edited to make me look like a poor
writer.

Howard Ferstler

"at least" you acknowledged an error and tried to make a correction.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Brother Horace the Envious said:

both Villchur and Allison think that, notwithstanding
your own technical talents, Stereophile is junk journalism.

Even if that's true (and as usual, it's an unsubstantiated claim), you
gave no frame of reference for that "opinion". Since it sounds like more
of an envy-driven diatribe than an evenhanded, dispassionate evaluation,
one might fairly wonder if those individuals are as lacking in class and
conscience as you are.

BTW, when was the last time you lashed out at the likes of d'Agostino?
He's probably only half as bad as Tiefenbrun in your lexicon.

Brother Horace the infantile said:

Have you apologized for attempting steal an article from Stereophile?

I never claimed that I wrote the article.

Still not getting the whole copyright concept, I see.

Not that it will ever happen, but how would you feel if people started
stealing your "stuff" and passing it off as their own?

Brother Horace the Willfully Ignorant whined:

It is still retrievable in the Google archive, Mr. Ferstler.
you will need to delete it using the Google software.

Thanks in advance for doing so.

But has it at least disappeared from the usenet listing that
is readily accessible? I have no way of telling, because it
has at least disappeared when I pull up the thread.

http://www.google.com/googlegroups/help.html#9

Or if you're already registered on google.com:

http://services.google.com:8882/urlconsole/controller

Idiot.

Briel wrote:

In article ,
says...

But has it at least disappeared from the usenet listing that
is readily accessible? I have no way of telling, because it
has at least disappeared when I pull up the thread.

I am going to have to get guru help to do this Google work.
Hell, I can hardly access my own email sometimes, and have
never even been into the Google archive. Cut me some slack
and let me work on the procedure after I contact an expert
or two.

Howard,

try this link for info on deleting archives:
http://www.google.ca/googlegroups/help.html#9

hope that helps,

Bill

OK, I have jumped through the hoops and have an account set
up and have located the page that allows one to remove
Google group posts.

I have also located the Google listing of the actual
article.

The instructions say to block and drop the message ID from
the article's header into the proper square on the remove
page. However, I have tried this and it does not work with
either of the squares.

Here is the Google message ID I copied, as it looks on the
header:



As you can see, it has those three dots between the prefix
and @ sign, and I think that may be the problem. That
message also lists my email address ,
and not as my full address.

For some reason the header is not including all of the
required information. I think I could dump the article if I
had the full header, but all I can come up with is the one
listed above.

I am beginning to think that maybe I should require Mr.
Atkinson to delete that "edited" TAV article of mine that
was posted to RAO long ago. The job would be bugging him as
much as deleting the recent message I posted is bugging me.

Nah, I am too nice to want that.

Howard Ferstler

Brother Horace the Grasping whined:

Yes, that's true. Krooger is a compulsive liar and slander, and you are a
coward and a thief. Quite distinct, the two of you are, aside from the
traits you share -- rabid religiosity, compulsion to call people names,
and undergo rituals of masochism in public.

Given

Yes, it's virtually a given that in your way, you're nearly as dishonest
and dishonorable as the Krooborg is. Nobody has yet linked you to
pedophilia, though, so overall you're not as despicable.

Brother Horace of the Loose Lips said:

I marvel at how you guys manage to pull up so many of my
past comments.

No doubt you can't remember saying those things because, in fact, you
stole them from somebody else. Maybe from Allison or one of your other
clay idols.....

Clyde Slick wrote:

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...
Sander deWaal wrote:

Howard Ferstler said:

I am going to have to get guru help to do this Google work.
Hell, I can hardly access my own email sometimes, and have
never even been into the Google archive. Cut me some slack
and let me work on the procedure after I contact an expert
or two.

Arnold, can't you help this poor soul? ;-)

Yeah, I really would like to get this over with.

Incidentally, quite some time ago, John allowed an edited
version of a "The Audiophile Voice" article that I published
to be posted on RAO. He did not post it directly, but he did
send a copy to someone who did not have scruples (he claimed
that they said they would not post it) and they posted it.

Several people said I should have sued, but I am really not
that kind of person.

In any case, I have at least managed to get it deleted from
the standard thread links, and I have asked the people at
Google to delete it. I am not sure if this will do the
trick, but hopefully it will.

As for The Audiophile Voice article, well, I have no
problems with it being in the archives forever, in spite of
its being originally edited to make me look like a poor
writer.

Howard Ferstler

"at least" you acknowledged an error and tried to make a correction.

And I am currently working my ass off trying to get that
damned copyrighted article deleted from the Google archives.

Unfortunately, every time I pull up the article to copy the
message ID over to the remove Google groups message page the
thing is wrong. It only includes some of the required
information:



Virtually all of the message ID examples they show on their
info page do not include dots between the prefix and the @
sign, and so the damned deletion info is rejected.

Howard Ferstler

"George M. Middius" wrote:

Brother Horace the Envious said:

both Villchur and Allison think that, notwithstanding
your own technical talents, Stereophile is junk journalism.

Even if that's true (and as usual, it's an unsubstantiated claim), you
gave no frame of reference for that "opinion". Since it sounds like more
of an envy-driven diatribe than an evenhanded, dispassionate evaluation,
one might fairly wonder if those individuals are as lacking in class and
conscience as you are.

If you think those guys lack class you are obviously in no
position to judge much of anything of value. Heck, go read
the damned article in the Stereophile archives. It was men
like those who got audio going as a viable hobby, and it is
guys like you who are wrecking it.

Howard Ferstler

"George M. Middius" wrote:

Brother Horace the infantile said:

Have you apologized for attempting steal an article from Stereophile?

I never claimed that I wrote the article.

Still not getting the whole copyright concept, I see.

Not that it will ever happen, but how would you feel if people started
stealing your "stuff" and passing it off as their own?

Well, just what do you think of John allowing his "edited"
version of my The Audiophile Voice article to get posted
here on RAO some time ago? Yes, I know he apologized (and I
have apologized for what I did), but rather than simply post
an article that outlined the work of two good men, it
appears to me that what he allowed to be accidentally posted
was an attempt to make me look bad.

Now, which operation do you think was worse? Be fair.

Howard Ferstler

"George M. Middius" wrote:

Brother Horace the Willfully Ignorant whined:

It is still retrievable in the Google archive, Mr. Ferstler.
you will need to delete it using the Google software.

Thanks in advance for doing so.

But has it at least disappeared from the usenet listing that
is readily accessible? I have no way of telling, because it
has at least disappeared when I pull up the thread.

http://www.google.com/googlegroups/help.html#9

Or if you're already registered on google.com:

http://services.google.com:8882/urlconsole/controller

Idiot.

When I pull up the Google page to copy the message ID over
to the delete-message page only part of the ID shows up.
There is a three-dot gap between the prefix number and the @
sign. If the Google examples they use is correct, there
should be no three-dot gap.

Hey, computer wizard, give me some pointers about how to get
the full message ID. Do that, and I will delete the message
in a flash.

Howard Ferstler

"George M. Middius" wrote:

Brother Horace the Grasping whined:

Yes, that's true. Krooger is a compulsive liar and slander, and you are a
coward and a thief. Quite distinct, the two of you are, aside from the
traits you share -- rabid religiosity, compulsion to call people names,
and undergo rituals of masochism in public.

Given

Yes, it's virtually a given that in your way, you're nearly as dishonest
and dishonorable as the Krooborg is. Nobody has yet linked you to
pedophilia, though, so overall you're not as despicable.

Coming from you, this is quite a complement.

Howard Ferstler