Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#81
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
wrote in message ink.net... Request for proof of a negative, is proof that there is no proof to be offered. Saved for future reference!!! Note! -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access |
#83
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
From: Clyde Slick
Date: Fri, Mar 17 2006 6:04 pm Email: "Clyde Slick" 100,000 posts later, where have your comments gotten you, braveboy? I can see that he's made lots of friends over the years. It's in Google. Look it up. There's nob, and um, er, well, ah, there's nob... |
#84
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
nob caught masturbating in public
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message ups.com... From: Date: Fri, Mar 17 2006 2:20 am Email: Note that Mr. Middius has not posted to this thread as of the time of nob's 'gratuitous' attack. Poor nob! r.a.o. is a wasteland of personal attacks! And it's not *his* fault... Nor yours either, I suppose. A subtle difference: you don't see me whining about it. If you whine about something, while being one of the most egregious offenders, you are a hypocrite. I don't whine. I comment. When it comes to George I gave up trying to appeal to decency, and I let much of what he spews pass without comment. It always comes down to some sort of sexual thing for you, doesn't it? I have no idea what this relates to. Where have I 'always' referred to sex? Enlighten me. This bit you didn't include, seemed to be a sexual reference to me, or should I say pur obsessed woth peckers? I agree. Now put your pecker back in your pants, OK? What would your kids think if they accidentally walked in and saw you like this? |
#85
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
nob caught masturbating in public
From:
Date: Sat, Mar 18 2006 2:33 am Email: You shouldn't post after drinking, nob. It always comes down to some sort of sexual thing for you, doesn't it? I have no idea what this relates to. Where have I 'always' referred to sex? Enlighten me. This bit you didn't include, seemed to be a sexual reference to me, or should I say pur obsessed woth peckers? I agree. Now put your pecker back in your pants, OK? What would your kids think if they accidentally walked in and saw you like this? I know what I said. I still don't see how that 'always comes down to some sort of sexual thing' for me. And you still didn't answer my question: where is this 'always' you referred to? Or is this another baseless and twisted claim, as you are so wont to do? Go takes your meds, nob. Perhaps the interaction with the booze will have some positive effect. |
#86
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
wrote: wrote in message oups.com... wrote: wrote in message oups.com... wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message ... In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: wrote in message ink.net Now that SHP, (can we call you that) or S for short, has classed up the place by giving everybody who want them free tweaks, I'm just wondering how many have tried them? Nobody with a brain. It is hard to believe, but this place is getting even more useless than it was. How low can the so-called subjectivists go? Way to put people into groups and judge them, Arny. Not all "subjectivists" take those kind of tweaks seriously. That any do is a sad statement. That there are markets at all for things like $400.00 volumen knobs or that some people have cryogenicly frozen their cables or believe that the construction of their component rack has anything to do with the sound of anything other than the turntable, or that soem people beleive that lifting cables off the floor improves the sound, or replacing a stock power cord with a 250.00 one will change anything. There's quite a market for snake oil. Show proof that all of those items are fraudulent. Otherwise, you're making a sad statement about your ignorance, and that of all objectivists who denounce everything they don't understand and have never tested, as "snake oil". Request for proof of a negative, is proof that there is no proof to be offered. Who said there was no proof? You basically rejected many valid products no the principle that they are all "snake oil", with no evidence offered that they are. You have some to offer? So let's take the example of the component rack. Mine is made by a company called Target, an open metal frame, which sits on spikes (actually, the one I use for my turntable is mounted on the wall. But to simplify things for you, because you don't know anything about footfall vibrations, we'll use the example of my component rack, so to avoid you claiming "design parameters" and not "contstruction parameters"). I never said that a component rack isn't goof for turntable damping, it is. It's other devices that they are sometimes claimed to help, which is utter nonsense, except for the occaisonal tube amp that happens to be microphonic. snip You wrote: "believe that the construction of their component rack has anything to do with the sound of anything other than the turntable" I understood that to mean that you were claiming component racks can not improve the sound quality of a turntable. Is that not what you were claiming, and if not, then are you claiming that tweako freako component racks DO improve the sound of a turntable? Also, WHAT "devices" are you referring to that qualifies your claim, or do you want to play mystery games? |
#87
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
wrote in message oups.com... wrote: wrote in message oups.com... wrote: wrote in message oups.com... wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message ... In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: wrote in message ink.net Now that SHP, (can we call you that) or S for short, has classed up the place by giving everybody who want them free tweaks, I'm just wondering how many have tried them? Nobody with a brain. It is hard to believe, but this place is getting even more useless than it was. How low can the so-called subjectivists go? Way to put people into groups and judge them, Arny. Not all "subjectivists" take those kind of tweaks seriously. That any do is a sad statement. That there are markets at all for things like $400.00 volumen knobs or that some people have cryogenicly frozen their cables or believe that the construction of their component rack has anything to do with the sound of anything other than the turntable, or that soem people beleive that lifting cables off the floor improves the sound, or replacing a stock power cord with a 250.00 one will change anything. There's quite a market for snake oil. Show proof that all of those items are fraudulent. Otherwise, you're making a sad statement about your ignorance, and that of all objectivists who denounce everything they don't understand and have never tested, as "snake oil". Request for proof of a negative, is proof that there is no proof to be offered. Who said there was no proof? You basically rejected many valid products no the principle that they are all "snake oil", with no evidence offered that they are. You have some to offer? So let's take the example of the component rack. Mine is made by a company called Target, an open metal frame, which sits on spikes (actually, the one I use for my turntable is mounted on the wall. But to simplify things for you, because you don't know anything about footfall vibrations, we'll use the example of my component rack, so to avoid you claiming "design parameters" and not "contstruction parameters"). I never said that a component rack isn't goof for turntable damping, it is. It's other devices that they are sometimes claimed to help, which is utter nonsense, except for the occaisonal tube amp that happens to be microphonic. snip You wrote: "believe that the construction of their component rack has anything to do with the sound of anything other than the turntable" I understood that to mean that you were claiming component racks can not improve the sound quality of a turntable. Is that not what you were claiming, and if not, then are you claiming that tweako freako component racks DO improve the sound of a turntable? Also, WHAT "devices" are you referring to that qualifies your claim, or do you want to play mystery games? So you have a reading problem as well as a temper problem and a problem with logic. Clearly I said the only thing a component rack can help is a turntable. There is nothing tweako freako about having a stable platform that won't allow footfalls and other noises be introduced into the reproduction chain of a turntable. Of course the fact that turntables allow this is yet another indictment of their obsolescence. I've seen people wondering what racks they should buy because they are convinced that the right rack improves everything, not jut the turntable, they're the same kind of folks that buy a $400.00 knob because they believe it would make things sound better. |
#88
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
"George M. Middius" cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote in message ... Jenn said: Way to put people into groups and judge them, Arny. Not all "subjectivists" take those kind of tweaks seriously. That any do is a sad statement. I agree. The difference being that Mickey actually believes somebody does take those alleged "tweaks" seriously. Only Krooger is krazy enough to do that, but Mr. ****'s religion is completely hostile to this kind of inanity. As opposed to you just being completely hostile. |
#89
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
wrote in message ups.com... Arny Krueger hypocritically wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: I've noticed your many denounciations of SHP's crazy tweeks Jenn. Not! In another part of your silly rant, you write: "Prove me wrong with deeds not empty words, Jenn." I'm still waiting for YOU to prove me wrong that the tweaks are "crazy" and need to be "denounced" by any and all here (otherwise, according to you, they are "cowards" if they don't denounce them, and believe they are not valid). If you can't prove that Arny, all you've proven is that you're a mad bigot making unsupported claims, and not to be taken seriously. Arny whines: It's just an unsupported claim. Everything you said about my tweaks or anything else you disagree with in audio are "unsupported claims", hypocrite. Arny whines: What insults? I'm just making statements that are objectively true. More hypocristy, hypocrite? More reading problems Mr. S. That was my statement not his. No weasel Jenn - I think you're a coward. You're worse than a coward you're a biased coward. Like Weil you go ballistic over minor nits when they relate to an so-called objectivist, while you're blind and dumb when subjectivists **** all over the place not to mention logic and reason. Nice rant there, you lunatic hypocrite. What was that you were saying above about me and other "subjectivists" being foul-mouthed? What was that you were saying you hypocrite, about "logic and reason", when all you have offered to discount the tweaks is sweeping dismissals with no evidence forthcoming? What's that you're saying, weasel Arnold, about being a "biased coward", when all you've shown is biases towards the tweaks, and then you run like a coward and ignore all the times I've asked you to support your assertions? The burden of proof is yours Mr. S, prove any of this stuff works, but mostly prove the L shaped tweak, because that is clearly (to me) the most ludicrous one of al. Good to see you didn't try to weasel out of that, Jenn. And yet all you've ever done is weasel out of demands for evidence that the tweaks are not valid. Burden of proof is stil yours. You make the claim that they work, it is your burden to demonstrate they do. |
#90
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
"Jenn" wrote in message ... In article .com, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: From: Jenn Date: Fri, Mar 17 2006 2:41 pm Email: Jenn Oh, I quite agree that the "obs" throw around insults. I'm just saying that the subjs do too. That's clearly true. But it's equally true that the 'obs' seem to think that their insults are better, or warranted, or more justified, for some reason. Of course. Because as a gnereal rule, the 'Obs' don't start the insults, they simply respond to them when they are flung. |
#91
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
"Jenn" wrote in message ... In article . net, wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message ... In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: wrote in message ink.net Now that SHP, (can we call you that) or S for short, has classed up the place by giving everybody who want them free tweaks, I'm just wondering how many have tried them? Nobody with a brain. It is hard to believe, but this place is getting even more useless than it was. How low can the so-called subjectivists go? Way to put people into groups and judge them, Arny. Something about about 8 years of experience on Usenet with holier-than-thou subjectivists who can't seem to find the time to criticize anybody but objectivists. People could say the same about just about any group. It doesn't make it true. It just seems impolite and inaccurate to ascribe traits to an entire group like that. Not all "subjectivists" take those kind of tweaks seriously. Can't prove it by me. Can't prove it by the google record. I've noticed your many denounciations of SHP's crazy tweeks Jenn. Not! Avoidance of my point noted. It's just an unsupported claim. What is there of substance to avoid? My point was totally supported by your initial sentence: "How low can the so-called subjectivists go?" Show me a general trend of subjectivists objecting to the obvious BS we get here from foul-mothed instigators like Fella and SHP. Show me a general trend of objectivists objecting to non-called-for insults by you, for example. What insults? I'm just making statements that are objectively true. Calling someone a coward is not an insult? The knife cuts both ways, so why generalize? Subjectivists lead the pack when it comes to insults, name-calling and profanity around here. Fact. Probably true, but it's not because they are subjectivists. I don't comment on everything with which I agree or disagree if others are doing so and I have nothing new to add. That's the coward's road - it suits you well. Does everyone notice how one can't make a point to Arny without him coming back with an insult? Does anyone notice how one can't make a general point about the cowardice of subjectivists without Jenn whining about it? You implied that I'm a coward. Everyone can see that. Why weasel out of your statement? No weasel Jenn - I think you're a coward. LOL In what way? Which of the over the top subjectivists ahve found time to criticize? If I'm reading you correctly, I've criticized several, some today. Having not read every post, I'm sorry that I missed any of them. Which threads or which people? |
#92
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
wrote in message ink.net... "Jenn" wrote in message ... In article .com, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: From: Jenn Date: Fri, Mar 17 2006 2:41 pm Email: Jenn Oh, I quite agree that the "obs" throw around insults. I'm just saying that the subjs do too. That's clearly true. But it's equally true that the 'obs' seem to think that their insults are better, or warranted, or more justified, for some reason. Of course. Because as a gnereal rule, the 'Obs' don't start the insults, they simply respond to them when they are flung. The irony of it all! This is in regards to Jenn's comments. jenn was harrassed by 'obj' ARny's insults, no reason at all for Arny to start them. -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access |
#93
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 17:59:28 GMT, Jenn
wrote: What Jenn does is instead of addressing his point she attacks the messenger (Arni). Very typical of her. Read further up. Arny does EXACTLY what you claim I did. Don't argue with Vlad, Jenn. You'll get impaled. :-) |
#94
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
On 16 Mar 2006 17:34:20 -0800, wrote:
paul packer wrote: On 16 Mar 2006 15:44:30 -0800, wrote: ignorant closed-minded mindless sheep RAO regulars are too stupid valid new ideas from silly bogus ones that they pull out of the toilet (of their mind). any concept that ignorant backward trailer-trash slack-jawed witless yokels (which breed like crabgrass on this newsgroup) Therefore, the cretinous bigoted moron of RAO The primitive thinker of RAO the RAO lemming High praise indeed! (Incidentally, what are closed-minded mindless sheep?) I'm sure I have NO idea. That's just what the insult-o-meter (c) came up with. It's kind of outdated (early 50's model). I suppose it does need a software upgrade. And perhaps not only it. |
#95
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
From:
Date: Sat, Mar 18 2006 2:59 pm Email: Because as a gnereal rule, the 'Obs' don't start the insults, they simply respond to them when they are flung. Translation: "They make me do it!" I stated this yesterday and you disagreed. Now you agree. Make up your 'mind' nob. |
#96
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
From:
Date: Sat, Mar 18 2006 3:00 pm Email: nob tries to set Jenn up: If I'm reading you correctly, I've criticized several, some today. Having not read every post, I'm sorry that I missed any of them. Which threads or which people? As Arny would say, "Look it up in Google. You want me to do your work for you?" And Jenn, if you do decide to post an answer to this, be aware that you'll most likely be heading into "But you didn't criticize them hard enough" or "But you didn't say anything to insert name here" territory. |
#97
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
In article et,
wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message ... In article . net, wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message ... In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message m In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message . com In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: wrote in message ink.net Now that SHP, (can we call you that) or S for short, has classed up the place by giving everybody who want them free tweaks, I'm just wondering how many have tried them? Nobody with a brain. It is hard to believe, but this place is getting even more useless than it was. How low can the so-called subjectivists go? Way to put people into groups and judge them, Arny. Something about about 8 years of experience on Usenet with holier-than-thou subjectivists who can't seem to find the time to criticize anybody but objectivists. People could say the same about just about any group. It doesn't make it true. It just seems impolite and inaccurate to ascribe traits to an entire group like that. Not all "subjectivists" take those kind of tweaks seriously. Can't prove it by me. Can't prove it by the google record. I've noticed your many denounciations of SHP's crazy tweeks Jenn. Not! Avoidance of my point noted. It's just an unsupported claim. What is there of substance to avoid? My point was totally supported by your initial sentence: "How low can the so-called subjectivists go?" Show me a general trend of subjectivists objecting to the obvious BS we get here from foul-mothed instigators like Fella and SHP. Show me a general trend of objectivists objecting to non-called-for insults by you, for example. What insults? I'm just making statements that are objectively true. Calling someone a coward is not an insult? The knife cuts both ways, so why generalize? Subjectivists lead the pack when it comes to insults, name-calling and profanity around here. Fact. Probably true, but it's not because they are subjectivists. I don't comment on everything with which I agree or disagree if others are doing so and I have nothing new to add. That's the coward's road - it suits you well. Does everyone notice how one can't make a point to Arny without him coming back with an insult? Does anyone notice how one can't make a general point about the cowardice of subjectivists without Jenn whining about it? You implied that I'm a coward. Everyone can see that. Why weasel out of your statement? No weasel Jenn - I think you're a coward. LOL In what way? Which of the over the top subjectivists ahve found time to criticize? If I'm reading you correctly, I've criticized several, some today. Having not read every post, I'm sorry that I missed any of them. Which threads or which people? They are in the Google record. |
#98
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
In article . net,
wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message ... In article .com, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: From: Jenn Date: Fri, Mar 17 2006 2:41 pm Email: Jenn Oh, I quite agree that the "obs" throw around insults. I'm just saying that the subjs do too. That's clearly true. But it's equally true that the 'obs' seem to think that their insults are better, or warranted, or more justified, for some reason. Of course. Because as a gnereal rule, the 'Obs' don't start the insults, they simply respond to them when they are flung. I've seen it happen both directions. It's all stupid, IMHO. |
#99
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Shovels is afraid
Shovels, have you forgiven me? Are we friends again? The difference being that Mickey actually believes somebody does take those alleged "tweaks" seriously. Only Krooger is krazy enough to do that, but Mr. ****'s religion is completely hostile to this kind of inanity. There is somebody that did take my "alleged tweaks" seriously, Morc. I don't know what to make of your butchering of Mork's name. I didn't watch that show much, a couple times maybe. But you apparently did, enough anyway so that it's a cultural touchstone for you. And you can't even remember how the character's name is spelled. For shame. You need to redeploy that shovel from snow duty to head-bashing duty, starting with your own. That would be YOU. Did you get the name of the mule that kicked you in the head, and made you forget what you wrote a few weeks ago?: Is this what you're babbling about, Shovels? http://groups.google.com/group/rec.a...d76d3d8?hl=en& I'm sure that proves something to a loony tune like yourself.... As to the 5-pinhole paper tweak, Morc From Orc says: "Just to clue you in, I tried it this afternoon" Yep. I said that. Proceed with your "proof". Now don't you feel like a silly ass, for saying what you just did? Seems that your religion, Morc, is completely hostile to the truth. I dunno, Shovels. You're the one who has the problem with reality. BTW, you went back on your promise to ignore me forevermore. That was less than 1 day ago, and here you again, begging for more punishment. When you were Jamie, you sprayed us with your babble-spittle for a couple of weeks before you melted down. What's happened since then? You seem even balmier than before. |
#100
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
From:
Date: Fri, Mar 17 2006 2:24 am Email: That there are markets at all for things like $400.00 volumen knobs or that some people have cryogenicly frozen their cables or believe that the construction of their component rack has anything to do with the sound of anything other than the turntable, or that soem people beleive that lifting cables off the floor improves the sound, or replacing a stock power cord with a 250.00 one will change anything. There's quite a market for snake oil. All of this may or may not be true. Either way, how does any of this effect you again? (IOW, who cares?) Oh. I forgot. You're the self-appointed Savior. |
#101
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
"Jenn" wrote in message
In article .com, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: From: Jenn Date: Fri, Mar 17 2006 2:41 pm Email: Jenn Oh, I quite agree that the "obs" throw around insults. I'm just saying that the subjs do too. That's clearly true. But it's equally true that the 'obs' seem to think that their insults are better, or warranted, or more justified, for some reason. Of course. One reason being, there are less of them. Note all the insulting posts from the usual suspects that I slough. |
#102
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message In article .com, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: From: Jenn Date: Fri, Mar 17 2006 2:41 pm Email: Jenn Oh, I quite agree that the "obs" throw around insults. I'm just saying that the subjs do too. That's clearly true. But it's equally true that the 'obs' seem to think that their insults are better, or warranted, or more justified, for some reason. Of course. One reason being, there are less of them. Note all the insulting posts from the usual suspects that I slough. Sorry, that doesn't make sense. |
#103
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message oups.com... From: Date: Fri, Mar 17 2006 2:24 am Email: That there are markets at all for things like $400.00 volumen knobs or that some people have cryogenicly frozen their cables or believe that the construction of their component rack has anything to do with the sound of anything other than the turntable, or that soem people beleive that lifting cables off the floor improves the sound, or replacing a stock power cord with a 250.00 one will change anything. There's quite a market for snake oil. All of this may or may not be true. Either way, how does any of this effect you again? (IOW, who cares?) Oh. I forgot. You're the self-appointed Savior. Well we have that in common then. |
#104
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
"Jenn" wrote in message ... In article et, wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message ... In article . net, wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message ... In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message m In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message . com In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: wrote in message ink.net Now that SHP, (can we call you that) or S for short, has classed up the place by giving everybody who want them free tweaks, I'm just wondering how many have tried them? Nobody with a brain. It is hard to believe, but this place is getting even more useless than it was. How low can the so-called subjectivists go? Way to put people into groups and judge them, Arny. Something about about 8 years of experience on Usenet with holier-than-thou subjectivists who can't seem to find the time to criticize anybody but objectivists. People could say the same about just about any group. It doesn't make it true. It just seems impolite and inaccurate to ascribe traits to an entire group like that. Not all "subjectivists" take those kind of tweaks seriously. Can't prove it by me. Can't prove it by the google record. I've noticed your many denounciations of SHP's crazy tweeks Jenn. Not! Avoidance of my point noted. It's just an unsupported claim. What is there of substance to avoid? My point was totally supported by your initial sentence: "How low can the so-called subjectivists go?" Show me a general trend of subjectivists objecting to the obvious BS we get here from foul-mothed instigators like Fella and SHP. Show me a general trend of objectivists objecting to non-called-for insults by you, for example. What insults? I'm just making statements that are objectively true. Calling someone a coward is not an insult? The knife cuts both ways, so why generalize? Subjectivists lead the pack when it comes to insults, name-calling and profanity around here. Fact. Probably true, but it's not because they are subjectivists. I don't comment on everything with which I agree or disagree if others are doing so and I have nothing new to add. That's the coward's road - it suits you well. Does everyone notice how one can't make a point to Arny without him coming back with an insult? Does anyone notice how one can't make a general point about the cowardice of subjectivists without Jenn whining about it? You implied that I'm a coward. Everyone can see that. Why weasel out of your statement? No weasel Jenn - I think you're a coward. LOL In what way? Which of the over the top subjectivists ahve found time to criticize? If I'm reading you correctly, I've criticized several, some today. Having not read every post, I'm sorry that I missed any of them. Which threads or which people? They are in the Google record. Could you be more vague? A little help, thread title perhaps some sort of clue. Please. |
#105
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
In article .net,
wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message ... In article et, wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message ... In article . net, wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message ... In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message om In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message .co m In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message gy. com In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: wrote in message ink.net Now that SHP, (can we call you that) or S for short, has classed up the place by giving everybody who want them free tweaks, I'm just wondering how many have tried them? Nobody with a brain. It is hard to believe, but this place is getting even more useless than it was. How low can the so-called subjectivists go? Way to put people into groups and judge them, Arny. Something about about 8 years of experience on Usenet with holier-than-thou subjectivists who can't seem to find the time to criticize anybody but objectivists. People could say the same about just about any group. It doesn't make it true. It just seems impolite and inaccurate to ascribe traits to an entire group like that. Not all "subjectivists" take those kind of tweaks seriously. Can't prove it by me. Can't prove it by the google record. I've noticed your many denounciations of SHP's crazy tweeks Jenn. Not! Avoidance of my point noted. It's just an unsupported claim. What is there of substance to avoid? My point was totally supported by your initial sentence: "How low can the so-called subjectivists go?" Show me a general trend of subjectivists objecting to the obvious BS we get here from foul-mothed instigators like Fella and SHP. Show me a general trend of objectivists objecting to non-called-for insults by you, for example. What insults? I'm just making statements that are objectively true. Calling someone a coward is not an insult? The knife cuts both ways, so why generalize? Subjectivists lead the pack when it comes to insults, name-calling and profanity around here. Fact. Probably true, but it's not because they are subjectivists. I don't comment on everything with which I agree or disagree if others are doing so and I have nothing new to add. That's the coward's road - it suits you well. Does everyone notice how one can't make a point to Arny without him coming back with an insult? Does anyone notice how one can't make a general point about the cowardice of subjectivists without Jenn whining about it? You implied that I'm a coward. Everyone can see that. Why weasel out of your statement? No weasel Jenn - I think you're a coward. LOL In what way? Which of the over the top subjectivists ahve found time to criticize? If I'm reading you correctly, I've criticized several, some today. Having not read every post, I'm sorry that I missed any of them. Which threads or which people? They are in the Google record. Could you be more vague? It's a response that one receives here quite often from others. A little help, thread title perhaps some sort of clue. Please. I don't recall. There were some recently. |
#106
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
"Jenn" wrote in message
In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message In article .com, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: From: Jenn Date: Fri, Mar 17 2006 2:41 pm Email: Jenn Oh, I quite agree that the "obs" throw around insults. I'm just saying that the subjs do too. That's clearly true. But it's equally true that the 'obs' seem to think that their insults are better, or warranted, or more justified, for some reason. Of course. One reason being, there are less of them. Note all the insulting posts from the usual suspects that I slough. Sorry, that doesn't make sense. IOW note all the insulting responses to my posts from the usual list of suspects that go unanswered. Note all the threads with my name in conjunction with insults, in their title lines that go from start to finish without even one response by me. |
#107
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message In article .com, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: From: Jenn Date: Fri, Mar 17 2006 2:41 pm Email: Jenn Oh, I quite agree that the "obs" throw around insults. I'm just saying that the subjs do too. That's clearly true. But it's equally true that the 'obs' seem to think that their insults are better, or warranted, or more justified, for some reason. Of course. One reason being, there are less of them. Note all the insulting posts from the usual suspects that I slough. Sorry, that doesn't make sense. IOW note all the insulting responses to my posts from the usual list of suspects that go unanswered. Note all the threads with my name in conjunction with insults, in their title lines that go from start to finish without even one response by me. Well, that doesn't really make sense IRT "But it's equally true that the "obs" seem to think..." but anyway... Of course I note those things. And why don't you respond to them? I suspect that it's because they don't deserve response, and that responding to them only validates them. That's the reason that **I** don't respond to them. So you are supporting my point, really. You were critical of me for not being critical of the flame wars against you. |
#108
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
"Jenn" wrote in message
In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message In article .com, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: From: Jenn Date: Fri, Mar 17 2006 2:41 pm Email: Jenn Oh, I quite agree that the "obs" throw around insults. I'm just saying that the subjs do too. That's clearly true. But it's equally true that the 'obs' seem to think that their insults are better, or warranted, or more justified, for some reason. Of course. One reason being, there are less of them. IOW note all the insulting responses to my posts from the usual list of suspects that go unanswered. Note all the threads with my name in conjunction with insults, in their title lines that go from start to finish without even one response by me. Well, that doesn't really make sense IRT "But it's equally true that the "obs" seem to think..." but anyway... Of course it does, Jen. It's not a matter of the subs throwing around insults, too. It's a matter of them being the predominate source of insults on RAO. In my case its a matter of them throwing several times more insults at me than I may throw back. Take George, Art and David for example. It appears that they have very little to do but insult me and belittle my posts. David hasn't gotten a direct response out of me in years, but he's still at it, sometimes several times a day. Of course I note those things. And why don't you respond to them? I suspect that it's because they don't deserve response, and that responding to them only validates them. Let's get back to the point of your comment Jen. The subs around here in general make posts that deserve no response. That's the reason that **I** don't respond to them. Irrelevant to your claim about the so-called obs, Jen. So you are supporting my point, really. You were critical of me for not being critical of the flame wars against you. No Jen, I'm critical for trying to pretend that *the* major source of insults around here are the so-called subjectivists. I'd go so far as to say that were Middius, Art, and David just sort of mysteriously go away, RAO might even have some crediblity as an audio group. It's no secret that along the way several of the so-called subs have said that they intend to try as hard as they can to trash RAO until the last so-called ob went away. |
#109
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
are we classed up yet?
From: Newsgroups: rec.audio.opinion Subject: Will That Be Paper or Plastic? Date: 3 Mar 2006 20:46:02 -0800 .... So anway, I'd like to see if I can "class things up a bit" by opening up an actual attempt at an audio-related discussion. Perhaps it can be considered a slight diversion from the usual flame wars .... |
#110
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
Correction: No Jen, I'm critical for trying to pretend that *the* major source of insults around here are the so-called objectivists. I'd go so far as to say that were Middius, Art, and David just sort of mysteriously go away, RAO might even have some crediblity as an audio group. |
#111
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
Arny Krueger wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message In article .com, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: From: Jenn Date: Fri, Mar 17 2006 2:41 pm Email: Jenn Oh, I quite agree that the "obs" throw around insults. I'm just saying that the subjs do too. That's clearly true. But it's equally true that the 'obs' seem to think that their insults are better, or warranted, or more justified, for some reason. Of course. One reason being, there are less of them. IOW note all the insulting responses to my posts from the usual list of suspects that go unanswered. Note all the threads with my name in conjunction with insults, in their title lines that go from start to finish without even one response by me. Well, that doesn't really make sense IRT "But it's equally true that the "obs" seem to think..." but anyway... Of course it does, Jen. It's not a matter of the subs throwing around insults, too. It's a matter of them being the predominate source of insults on RAO. What I'm saying is that your statement that "there are less of them" really has nothing to do with Shhh's statement that the obs believe that their insults are "better" or "more justified". Anyway, I see your point. In my case its a matter of them throwing several times more insults at me than I may throw back. Take George, Art and David for example. It appears that they have very little to do but insult me and belittle my posts. David hasn't gotten a direct response out of me in years, but he's still at it, sometimes several times a day. I understand, and on the surface, I even agree. People here who would be labeled as "subjecivists" throw a greater quantity of insults than do the "objectivists". Who started it? I have no idea, and it isn't important enough to me to go way back in the record. What I DO think is that it's ALL silly, from both "sides". But that's just me. If I don't like it, I can just move on, as can anyone else. If we would all just treat others as we wish to be treated, all would be good, but I'm sure that there is too much water under the bridge for that to happen. Pity. Of course I note those things. And why don't you respond to them? I suspect that it's because they don't deserve response, and that responding to them only validates them. Let's get back to the point of your comment Jen. The subs around here in general make posts that deserve no response. Then simply don't respond. If you think that my posts, for example, are not worth responding to, just don't respond. That's the reason that **I** don't respond to them. Irrelevant to your claim about the so-called obs, Jen. I admit to mixing threads here. What I'm referring to above is your statement that I don't speak up when the "subjs" act up to you. So you are supporting my point, really. You were critical of me for not being critical of the flame wars against you. No Jen, I'm critical for trying to pretend that *the* major source of insults around here are the so-called subjectivists. I'd go so far as to say that were Middius, Art, and David just sort of mysteriously go away, RAO might even have some crediblity as an audio group. See above. It's no secret that along the way several of the so-called subs have said that they intend to try as hard as they can to trash RAO until the last so-called ob went away. That's stupid, IMO. Arny, let me make a final statement from my POV about this: The knife cuts both ways for sure. People who are your "enemies" here obviously are persistant to a fault. You, on the other hand, whether you see it or not, tend to give them a great deal of ammo. Just treat people well, respect their opinions, and you might be surprised at the long-term result. |
#112
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
In article . com,
"Jenn" wrote: Arny, let me make a final statement from my POV about this: The knife cuts both ways for sure. People who are your "enemies" here obviously are persistant to a fault. You, on the other hand, whether you see it or not, tend to give them a great deal of ammo. Just treat people well, respect their opinions, and you might be surprised at the long-term result. I outlined Arny's "RAO rehabilitation" some years ago. Good times. Stephen |
#113
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 11:05:35 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote: David hasn't gotten a direct response out of me in years, but he's still at it, sometimes several times a day. Just because I'm one of the only people that you are afraid to address, for whatever reason, doesn't mean that I'm going to stop commenting when you act like an ass, which is pretty much daily. It just makes it easier for me not to have to do the inevitable responding back and forth to your bull**** that Jenn is having to go through right now. |
#114
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
dave weil said: It just makes it easier for me not to have to do the inevitable responding back and forth to your bull**** that Jenn is having to go through right now. One day, Jenn may well look back in fondness at her indoctrination into the morass of "the debating trade". |
#115
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
"Jenn" wrote in message
ups.com Arny Krueger wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message In article .com, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: From: Jenn Date: Fri, Mar 17 2006 2:41 pm Email: Jenn Oh, I quite agree that the "obs" throw around insults. I'm just saying that the subjs do too. That's clearly true. But it's equally true that the 'obs' seem to think that their insults are better, or warranted, or more justified, for some reason. Of course. One reason being, there are less of them. IOW note all the insulting responses to my posts from the usual list of suspects that go unanswered. Note all the threads with my name in conjunction with insults, in their title lines that go from start to finish without even one response by me. Well, that doesn't really make sense IRT "But it's equally true that the "obs" seem to think..." but anyway... Of course it does, Jen. It's not a matter of the subs throwing around insults, too. It's a matter of them being the predominate source of insults on RAO. What I'm saying is that your statement that "there are less of them" really has nothing to do with Shhh's statement that the obs believe that their insults are "better" or "more justified". Anyway, I see your point. In my case its a matter of them throwing several times more insults at me than I may throw back. Take George, Art and David for example. It appears that they have very little to do but insult me and belittle my posts. David hasn't gotten a direct response out of me in years, but he's still at it, sometimes several times a day. I understand, and on the surface, I even agree. People here who would be labeled as "subjecivists" throw a greater quantity of insults than do the "objectivists". Who started it? I have no idea, and it isn't important enough to me to go way back in the record. What I DO think is that it's ALL silly, from both "sides". But that's just me. If I don't like it, I can just move on, as can anyone else. If we would all just treat others as we wish to be treated, all would be good, but I'm sure that there is too much water under the bridge for that to happen. Pity. Of course I note those things. And why don't you respond to them? I suspect that it's because they don't deserve response, and that responding to them only validates them. Let's get back to the point of your comment Jen. The subs around here in general make posts that deserve no response. Then simply don't respond. If you think that my posts, for example, are not worth responding to, just don't respond. That's the reason that **I** don't respond to them. Irrelevant to your claim about the so-called obs, Jen. I admit to mixing threads here. What I'm referring to above is your statement that I don't speak up when the "subjs" act up to you. So you are supporting my point, really. You were critical of me for not being critical of the flame wars against you. No Jen, I'm critical for trying to pretend that *the* major source of insults around here are the so-called subjectivists. I'd go so far as to say that were Middius, Art, and David just sort of mysteriously go away, RAO might even have some crediblity as an audio group. See above. It's no secret that along the way several of the so-called subs have said that they intend to try as hard as they can to trash RAO until the last so-called ob went away. That's stupid, IMO. Of course it;s stupid. But, we're talking about people who are stupid and selfish. Arny, let me make a final statement from my POV about this: The knife cuts both ways for sure. People who are your "enemies" here obviously are persistant to a fault. You, on the other hand, whether you see it or not, tend to give them a great deal of ammo. Anybody who advocates reason is their enemy. Just treat people well, respect their opinions, and you might be surprised at the long-term result. Obfuscation of the true problem noted. |
#116
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
"MINe 109" wrote in message
In article . com, "Jenn" wrote: Arny, let me make a final statement from my POV about this: The knife cuts both ways for sure. People who are your "enemies" here obviously are persistant to a fault. You, on the other hand, whether you see it or not, tend to give them a great deal of ammo. Just treat people well, respect their opinions, and you might be surprised at the long-term result. I outlined Arny's "RAO rehabilitation" some years ago. I've never bothered to do the same for you Stephen because I know you're hopeless. |
#117
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote: "MINe 109" wrote in message In article . com, "Jenn" wrote: Arny, let me make a final statement from my POV about this: The knife cuts both ways for sure. People who are your "enemies" here obviously are persistant to a fault. You, on the other hand, whether you see it or not, tend to give them a great deal of ammo. Just treat people well, respect their opinions, and you might be surprised at the long-term result. I outlined Arny's "RAO rehabilitation" some years ago. I've never bothered to do the same for you Stephen because I know you're hopeless. As you can see, he didn't follow my advice then or now. Five years. Just flies by, doesn't it? Stephen |
#118
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
"MINe 109" wrote in message
In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "MINe 109" wrote in message In article . com, "Jenn" wrote: Arny, let me make a final statement from my POV about this: The knife cuts both ways for sure. People who are your "enemies" here obviously are persistant to a fault. You, on the other hand, whether you see it or not, tend to give them a great deal of ammo. Just treat people well, respect their opinions, and you might be surprised at the long-term result. I outlined Arny's "RAO rehabilitation" some years ago. I've never bothered to do the same for you Stephen because I know you're hopeless. As you can see, he didn't follow my advice then or now. I considered the source - sue me! Five years. Just flies by, doesn't it? Whatever that means. |
#119
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote: "MINe 109" wrote in message In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "MINe 109" wrote in message In article . com, "Jenn" wrote: Arny, let me make a final statement from my POV about this: The knife cuts both ways for sure. People who are your "enemies" here obviously are persistant to a fault. You, on the other hand, whether you see it or not, tend to give them a great deal of ammo. Just treat people well, respect their opinions, and you might be surprised at the long-term result. I outlined Arny's "RAO rehabilitation" some years ago. I've never bothered to do the same for you Stephen because I know you're hopeless. As you can see, he didn't follow my advice then or now. I considered the source - sue me! It was good advice then and it's good advice now, no matter the source. However, it's clear that you *can't* follow it. Five years. Just flies by, doesn't it? Whatever that means. Time flies like an arrow. You know the rest. Stephen |
#120
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... IOW note all the insulting responses to my posts from the usual list of suspects that go unanswered. Note all the threads with my name in conjunction with insults, in their title lines that go from start to finish without even one response by me. Ha! You're lack of rsponse indicates your agreement. I thought I'd throw a little Kroologic at ya. -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
phase splitter | Vacuum Tubes | |||
Class of Operation | Vacuum Tubes | |||
Mains transformer question. | Vacuum Tubes | |||
KISS 191B by Andre Jute | Vacuum Tubes |