Clyde Slick wrote:


Debating trade trick no 28. Purposefully misinterpret and misrepresent
waht I say, and then prove the misinterpreted misrepresentation is wrong.

I thought that was his trick numero uno. He tries it all the time.

"EddieM" wrote in message
m

**** You.

Clearly posted in a moment of total clarity - Eddie style!
;-)

"Fella" wrote in message

Arny Krueger wrote:


Pace, rhythm and timing is what musicans do, and what
recording engineers sometimes modify. It's not a property
of
amplifiers or CD players.

.....

Given that low cost players can provide facsimile
reproduction of CDs,

You don't even have a clue as to what you are missing out
on

You're just posturing.

Wire is wire as Pinkerton would say it.

So now you are putting words into pinkertons mouth?

Where?

If wire is
wire and some el-cheapo radioshack wire would do the
*same*
thing then why in the hell did pinkerton go to all that
trouble "home brew"ing all the exotic teflon silver bla
bla?

I think the story goes that he had a ton of the teflon
silver stuff on hand, and wanted to use it up.

What the f.ck is wrong with you people?

Why does anything have to be wrong with us?

Fact of the matter is that I do a fair amount of
listening
to a $80 Pioneer SX205 receiver.

Yea, you listen to it? What does it say?

Depends what I'm playing through it.

"Fella" wrote in message

Clyde Slick wrote:


Debating trade trick no 28. Purposefully misinterpret and
misrepresent waht I say, and then prove the
misinterpreted
misrepresentation is wrong.

I thought that was his trick numero uno. He tries it all
the
time.

After the butcher job you did on Pinkerton's post, Fella?

How long ago did they remove your self-awareness?

"Fella" wrote in message
.. .
Arny Krueger wrote:


Pace, rhythm and timing is what musicans do, and what
recording engineers sometimes modify. It's not a property of
amplifiers or CD players.

.....

Given that low cost players can provide facsimile
reproduction of CDs,


You don't even have a clue as to what you are missing out on.




Wire is wire as Pinkerton would say it.

So now you are putting words into pinkertons mouth? If wire is wire and
some el-cheapo radioshack wire would do the *same* thing then why in the
hell did pinkerton go to all that trouble "home brew"ing all the exotic
teflon silver bla bla?


What the f.ck is wrong with you people?


That "people" part is open to debate in his case...


Fact of the matter is that I do a fair amount of listening
to a $80 Pioneer SX205 receiver.


Yea, you listen to it? What does it say?

Based on his history, my money is on "**** you!"

Cheers,

Margaret

"Margaret von B." wrote
in
message

Yea, you listen to it? What does it say?

Based on his history, my money is on "**** you!"

Obviously, Maggie is feeling the pressure, too.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
news
"Margaret von B." wrote
in
message

Yea, you listen to it? What does it say?

Based on his history, my money is on "**** you!"

Obviously, Maggie is feeling the pressure, too.



Quit whining, Arny!

Margaret

On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 16:47:17 +0000 (UTC), Stewart Pinkerton
wrote:


Nowadays, they mostly don't. Most modern R&D in amps and CD players is
biased towards cost reduction. That's why my 'Chinky cheapy' Pioneer
DV-575A will play any kind of silver disc while providing sound
quality identical to that of a SOTA 'audiophile brand' CD player

Care to provide the dbt details that supports your statement?

On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 06:21:29 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"paul packer" wrote in message


On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 05:03:47 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

Looks like Pinkerton tricked you into hanging yourself
with
your own tongue, Jeff. ;-)

Is that anatomically possible, Arnie?

Paul, since you brought up anatomically impossible acts, why
don't you try performing that well-known one?

Or have you already proved it?

Do I have to draw you a picture, Paul?

That's not nice, Arnie. And you were always such a kind and gentle
soul. I hope years of debating George hasn't resulted in
cross-pollination. :-)

paul packer said:

Forgive me if I've misunderstood, but aren't the mass tests in mags
like Hi-Fi Choice/What Hi-Fi all done blind--that is the participants
don't see the components and aren't told anything about them.
Nevertheless they detect differences and a few can even identify the
same components over and over. Surely this proves that there's no
expectation factor and that indeed components do sound significantly
different. Or does it not?

Exactly. Just as some of us have known all along that Dubya was lying about
why he was invading Iraq, and some of you needed the "smoking gun" memo to
figure it out.

paul packer said:

I suggest switching from a carpenter's hammer to a ball peen

A ball peen? Is that rude?

That's a nonsequitur, Paulie -- an important "debating trade" tool. You may
need another checkup.

Drunkie is snarling and loaded again.

Actually, the reason that many of us unsubscribed from RAO is that
it's 'regulars' are gullible idiots like Art Sackman, and pointless
no-life cripples like Hiddius Gorge.

So you admit I scared you off. I'm so proud.

On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 06:22:09 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


If you unsubscribed from RAO, Stewart, why are you
cross-posting from there?

Inability to notice the crosspost from rec.audio.tech
noted.

Well, here's a better question: if you unsubscribed from RAO why are
you still taking part in the kind of futile and endlessly repeating
debate that presumably caused you to unsubscribe from RAO in the first
place?

paul packer said:

If you unsubscribed from RAO, Stewart, why are you
cross-posting from there?

Inability to notice the crosspost from rec.audio.tech
noted.

Well, here's a better question: if you unsubscribed from RAO why are
you still taking part in the kind of futile and endlessly repeating
debate that presumably caused you to unsubscribe from RAO in the first
place?

Did you realize that Mr. **** stuck his ****ty nose into the exchange?

BTW, Pukey is hoping to get knighted before the old Queen dies. That's the
real reason he exed RAO -- we have no respect for royalty.

Arny Krueger wrote:

Why does anything have to be wrong with us?


You confessed once over in rat that you actually also hear differences
in real world listening environments, as opposed to in DBT's but that
you disregard that. So how does that work? Is it because it is sighted?
And then you have the audacity to claim that abx is about trusting your
ears???!!! How much of an idiot can you get to be? Is there no limit to
this? What the f.ck is rong with you?!?! You *HEAR* something but you
don't *trust* what you hear, since you also *see* and know.. You say "I
am seeing what is playing, what I am hearing can't be true. Here, let me
put a bunch of cheap banana interconnects and level matching gear and
cheap relay abx box in between this amp and the speakers. Let me level
match this with some $80 pioneer receiver. Let me get all wound-up and
stressed out about the whole issue.. Yeah OK, now I hear no difference,
great."

There *has* to be something wrong with you to do that.

BTW: Did you google up that BAT (with the tube stage in) or have you
ever heard one yourself? Did you hear what it does to voices, what it
does to the midrange? Man, talk about bloated midrange. HUUGE
motherf.cker. Or maybe it just reacted to my speakers and room in a
peculiar way. Dunno. In any case, holger czukay, for instance, sounded
like he was some king-kong, barely able to fit into the universe.
Yeah, and some $80 pioneer sounds the same you say, sure.

Margaret von B. wrote:
"Fella" wrote in message
.. .

Arny Krueger wrote:


Fact of the matter is that I do a fair amount of listening
to a $80 Pioneer SX205 receiver.


Yea, you listen to it? What does it say?


Based on his history, my money is on "**** you!"



That could very much be true in arny's case. In a way that, the pioneer
might be ****ing him over pretty badly. It would explain all this bitter
anger and hate.

I remember when I just started working here I was in some kind of a
cubicle space. Working very close to me was this guy who'd brought some
old pioneer receiver (or was it yamaha?) and little mission monitor type
of speakers. He'd (we'd) listen to radio all day. It was damn
irritating, screechy disgusting sound. I'd go home all wound up and angry.

On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 11:27:09 GMT, (paul packer)
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 06:21:29 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"paul packer" wrote in message


On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 05:03:47 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

Looks like Pinkerton tricked you into hanging yourself
with
your own tongue, Jeff. ;-)

Is that anatomically possible, Arnie?

Paul, since you brought up anatomically impossible acts, why
don't you try performing that well-known one?

Or have you already proved it?

Do I have to draw you a picture, Paul?

That's not nice, Arnie. And you were always such a kind and gentle
soul. I hope years of debating George hasn't resulted in
cross-pollination. :-)

As I once noted to you a long time ago when you were defending Arnold,
this day has come.

I'm hoping that the kind and gentle comment was totally ironic, but
I'm not sure.

Arny Krueger wrote:
"Fella" wrote in message


Clyde Slick wrote:


Debating trade trick no 28. Purposefully misinterpret and
misrepresent waht I say, and then prove the

misinterpreted

misrepresentation is wrong.

I thought that was his trick numero uno. He tries it all

the

time.


After the butcher job you did on Pinkerton's post, Fella?

Ok, so this must be trick no 2. You do this all the time arny. I
accepted my mistake with not seeing the word "in" in pinkertons post. It
was a mistake, this mr T pointed it out, and yes, I acknowledged it. The
most important aspect here is that I did not do it *intentionally*.

But you, arny, you have bad will, you are totaly bereft of any kind of a
human dignity whatsoever. You intentionally twist and pervert, you are
one of lowest, cheapest kind of a demagouge I've ever had the
displeasure to meet. All that matters for you is to "win" (hahaaa) these
"debates" in the eyes of the other dumskull borgs that follow you to
your blind alley..



How long ago did they remove your self-awareness?


If IRONY would...

"Fella" wrote in message

Arny Krueger wrote:

Why does anything have to be wrong with us?


You confessed once over in rat that you actually also hear
differences in real world listening environments, as
opposed
to in DBT's but that you disregard that.

I also hear differences in DBTs so what does that mean?

So how does that work?

Things sound different and I hear differences.

Is it because it is sighted?

It even happens sometimes when the listening test is blind.

And then you have the
audacity to claim that abx is about trusting your
ears???!!!

This comment does not follow from any logical progression of
ideas.

How much of an idiot can you get to be?

I've had enough of your abuse, Fella. Try doing something
anatomically impossible.

"paul packer" wrote in message


On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 06:22:09 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


If you unsubscribed from RAO, Stewart, why are you
cross-posting from there?

Inability to notice the crosspost from rec.audio.tech
noted.

Well, here's a better question: if you unsubscribed from
RAO
why are you still taking part in the kind of futile and
endlessly repeating debate that presumably caused you to
unsubscribe from RAO in the first place?

Where did I say that I unsubscribed from RAO?

Packer, your hanging out with Middius seems to have caused
you to read things that nobody wrote. He's got the same
problem you know.

On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 08:32:33 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"paul packer" wrote in message


On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 06:22:09 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


If you unsubscribed from RAO, Stewart, why are you
cross-posting from there?

Inability to notice the crosspost from rec.audio.tech
noted.

Well, here's a better question: if you unsubscribed from
RAO
why are you still taking part in the kind of futile and
endlessly repeating debate that presumably caused you to
unsubscribe from RAO in the first place?

Where did I say that I unsubscribed from RAO?

Packer, your hanging out with Middius seems to have caused
you to read things that nobody wrote. He's got the same
problem you know.

Inability to note that he Mr. Packer never claimed that *you* unsub'ed
from RAO; that he was simply rephrasing the first question to Mr.
Pinkerton.

So, since you are reading things that nobody wrote, does this mean
that YOU have been hanging out with Middius?

Arny Krueger wrote:


I also hear differences in DBTs so what does that mean?


That one or the other is "malfunctioning" ?




I've had enough of your abuse, Fella.

I had asked pinkerton a question. It was you who dropped into the
exchange butt-first. "heereee felllaaa, kick my butt fellaa" .. So I
kekced yer buttt. Stop whining!

BTW: Nice of you to avoid the BAT question. Typical. You google
skccciieence-tist you.

I only mentioned the BAT amp there because I had *just* been through a
two week audition with it. It has a supersized midrange, it is
incredibly fluent, lush. So much that one ends up listening to the amp,
not the music. It is an amp to "die for" as my friend said once. I
was *still* under the influence of that amp... Then you go and do a
google on "bat integrated" I guess. And you throw about your google
copy-paste knowledge against my first hand experience. You are a
cheat arny, you are a liar.

dave weil said to Turdborg:

So, since you are reading things that nobody wrote, does this mean
that YOU have been hanging out with Middius?

Hardly™. I always flush.

"George M. Middius" cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast
[dot] net wrote in message

dave weil said to Turdborg:

So, since you are reading things that nobody wrote, does
this
mean that YOU have been hanging out with Middius?

HardlyT. I always flush.

Nope, Sackman keeps floating up, again and again.

George M. Middius wrote:
dave weil said to Turdborg:

So, since you are reading things that nobody wrote, does this mean
that YOU have been hanging out with Middius?

Hardly=99. I always flush.

Will you trolls from R.O.A please **** off back to the Land of The
Brave and Zenophobic.Please.

On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 07:37:46 -0500, dave weil
wrote:
Inability to note that he Mr. Packer never claimed that *you* unsub'ed
from RAO; that he was simply rephrasing the first question to Mr.
Pinkerton.

Thank you, Dave. It's nice to know that somebody at RAO is able to
correctly interpret a simple post.

"paul packer" wrote in message

On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 07:37:46 -0500, dave weil
wrote:

Inability to note that he Mr. Packer never claimed that
*you*
unsub'ed from RAO; that he was simply rephrasing the
first
question to Mr. Pinkerton.

Thank you, Dave. It's nice to know that somebody at RAO is
able to correctly interpret a simple post.

One dirty hand washes another.

Pinkerton's name appeared nowhere in Packer's reply to me.

Check the following link to see the truth that Packer and
Weil wish to obfuscate:

http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...aed382fc511906

On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 07:09:51 -0500, dave weil
wrote:


Do I have to draw you a picture, Paul?

That's not nice, Arnie. And you were always such a kind and gentle
soul. I hope years of debating George hasn't resulted in
cross-pollination. :-)

As I once noted to you a long time ago when you were defending Arnold,
this day has come.

Arnie has begun to swagger of late. His confidence has soared. The
dark side of that is a certain arrogance which wasn't present at the
time you're referring to. As for my defending him, I believe I merely
gave him the benefit of the doubt, perhaps as a reaction against
George's absurdly exaggerated hatred, which as you know I was never
quite able to share. But then of course I was never really in on the
in-fighting, so I may not be a good judge.

I'm hoping that the kind and gentle comment was totally ironic, but
I'm not sure.

Ironic, but not totally. Compared to a certain poster we have here on
aus.hi-fi, Arnie is a genuine angel. Perhaps you'd consider a swap?

On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 07:33:47 -0400, George M. Middius cmndr
[underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote:



paul packer said:

Forgive me if I've misunderstood, but aren't the mass tests in mags
like Hi-Fi Choice/What Hi-Fi all done blind--that is the participants
don't see the components and aren't told anything about them.
Nevertheless they detect differences and a few can even identify the
same components over and over. Surely this proves that there's no
expectation factor and that indeed components do sound significantly
different. Or does it not?

Exactly. Just as some of us have known all along that Dubya was lying about
why he was invading Iraq, and some of you needed the "smoking gun" memo to
figure it out.

Only you could turn a blind listening test post into another diatribe
against Bush, George.

"paul packer" wrote in message


Arnie has begun to swagger of late.

Nahh Packer, you're just getting weaker. Look at this,
you're remonstrating with one of the all-time whiner-losers
of RAO, David "pity me" Weil.

His confidence has soared.

Realizing that the golden ear side of RAO has dumbed down to
just Middius a few hangers-on and their sockpuppets can do
that to a person.

As for my defending
him, I believe I merely gave him the benefit of the doubt,

More like try to damn with faint praise.

perhaps as a reaction against George's absurdly
exaggerated
hatred, which as you know I was never quite able to share.

But, you're working on it, aren't you Packer?

But then of course I was never really in on the
in-fighting, so I
may not be a good judge.

Speaks to your lack of self-awareness, Packer.

On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 06:20:58 -0500, dave weil
wrote:

On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 16:47:17 +0000 (UTC), Stewart Pinkerton
wrote:


Nowadays, they mostly don't. Most modern R&D in amps and CD players is
biased towards cost reduction. That's why my 'Chinky cheapy' Pioneer
DV-575A will play any kind of silver disc while providing sound
quality identical to that of a SOTA 'audiophile brand' CD player

Care to provide the dbt details that supports your statement?

Don't call him on it, Dave. As a 575 owner (called 676 here) I'm
anxious to believe that he's right.

On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 09:51:12 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"paul packer" wrote in message

On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 07:37:46 -0500, dave weil
wrote:

Inability to note that he Mr. Packer never claimed that
*you*
unsub'ed from RAO; that he was simply rephrasing the
first
question to Mr. Pinkerton.

Thank you, Dave. It's nice to know that somebody at RAO is
able to correctly interpret a simple post.

One dirty hand washes another.

Pinkerton's name appeared nowhere in Packer's reply to me.

His name isn't Stewart? That's news to me.

Check the following link to see the truth that Packer and
Weil wish to obfuscate:

http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...aed382fc511906

First line in the post referenced by the above link:

If you unsubscribed from RAO, Stewart, why are you
cross-posting from there?

Nope, no Pinkerton there. Apparently Arnold doesn't know Mr.
Pinkerton's first name and is unable to follow a thread.

Obfuscation from Mr. Krueger, anyone?

On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 09:51:12 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


Thank you, Dave. It's nice to know that somebody at RAO is
able to correctly interpret a simple post.

One dirty hand washes another.

Pinkerton's name appeared nowhere in Packer's reply to me.

Does it have to? I thought it was clear enough that I was simply using
my reply to you to rephrase the question to Mr. Pinkerton. I'll
remember to be more specific in future.

On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 13:57:53 GMT, (paul packer)
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 07:09:51 -0500, dave weil
wrote:


Do I have to draw you a picture, Paul?

That's not nice, Arnie. And you were always such a kind and gentle
soul. I hope years of debating George hasn't resulted in
cross-pollination. :-)

As I once noted to you a long time ago when you were defending Arnold,
this day has come.

Arnie has begun to swagger of late. His confidence has soared. The
dark side of that is a certain arrogance which wasn't present at the
time you're referring to. As for my defending him, I believe I merely
gave him the benefit of the doubt, perhaps as a reaction against
George's absurdly exaggerated hatred, which as you know I was never
quite able to share. But then of course I was never really in on the
in-fighting, so I may not be a good judge.

Well, that was my point at the time. You seemed unwilling to see the
sort of abuse that he has heaped on this newgroup for years. The abuse
that he just heaped on you is very typical, if a bit mild for him. You
saw him getting **** but didn't understand the "nature of the beast"
or WHY he has garnered such treatment, which is why I tried to educate
you. You've now been suitably informed, by Mr. Krueger himself. ScottW
has learned the same lesson, as have other Krueger defenders.

He hasn't "begun to swagger of late". This has been his MO for years.

I'm hoping that the kind and gentle comment was totally ironic, but
I'm not sure.

Ironic, but not totally. Compared to a certain poster we have here on
aus.hi-fi, Arnie is a genuine angel. Perhaps you'd consider a swap?

Nope.

Arnii, do you still deny having **** where your brains should be?

Why does anything have to be wrong with us?

It doesn't. As I've mentioned many times, it's entirely possible therapy would
help you. And if not just therapy, then some medication. We just covered this
yesterday, and you got all flustered and demanded guidance on using Thorazine.
You seem to be at once embracing and rejecting the idea of getting professional
help. If your wife's insurance doesn't cover it, you can get free treatment at a
community clinic.

On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 10:13:33 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"paul packer" wrote in message


Arnie has begun to swagger of late.

Nahh Packer, you're just getting weaker. Look at this,
you're remonstrating with one of the all-time whiner-losers
of RAO, David "pity me" Weil.

His confidence has soared.

Realizing that the golden ear side of RAO has dumbed down to
just Middius a few hangers-on and their sockpuppets can do
that to a person.

As for my defending
him, I believe I merely gave him the benefit of the doubt,

More like try to damn with faint praise.

perhaps as a reaction against George's absurdly
exaggerated
hatred, which as you know I was never quite able to share.

But, you're working on it, aren't you Packer?

But then of course I was never really in on the
in-fighting, so I
may not be a good judge.

Speaks to your lack of self-awareness, Packer.

This is the key indicator that you're on Mr. Krueger's **** list. You
are reduced to a last name. It's a form of rudeness that Mr. Krueger
is reduced to.

On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 10:13:33 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"paul packer" wrote in message


Arnie has begun to swagger of late.

Nahh Packer, you're just getting weaker. Look at this,
you're remonstrating with one of the all-time whiner-losers
of RAO, David "pity me" Weil.

I found Dave to be one of the few RAO regulars who could with any
shred of evidence be described as a gentleman. That's no small
achievement.

His confidence has soared.

Realizing that the golden ear side of RAO has dumbed down to
just Middius a few hangers-on and their sockpuppets can do
that to a person.

I have to give you your due: you outstayed most of the opposition.

As for my defending
him, I believe I merely gave him the benefit of the doubt,

More like try to damn with faint praise.

Now who's whining?

perhaps as a reaction against George's absurdly
exaggerated
hatred, which as you know I was never quite able to share.

But, you're working on it, aren't you Packer?

A touch of paranoia, Arnie? Please provide the evidence for that
statement.

But then of course I was never really in on the
in-fighting, so I
may not be a good judge.

Speaks to your lack of self-awareness, Packer.

Unnecessary nastiness again. Would you rather that I'd have been
sufficiently in on the in-fighting to have hated you as much as George
did (does). Think before you answer that.

On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 14:15:20 GMT, (paul packer)
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 06:20:58 -0500, dave weil
wrote:

On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 16:47:17 +0000 (UTC), Stewart Pinkerton
wrote:


Nowadays, they mostly don't. Most modern R&D in amps and CD players is
biased towards cost reduction. That's why my 'Chinky cheapy' Pioneer
DV-575A will play any kind of silver disc while providing sound
quality identical to that of a SOTA 'audiophile brand' CD player

Care to provide the dbt details that supports your statement?

Don't call him on it, Dave. As a 575 owner (called 676 here) I'm
anxious to believe that he's right.

That's fine. I'm sure that it is a fine unit as well. But when one
excoriates people for something, they should be willing to play by
their own rules and not do the very same thing that they're accusing
others of.

Oh yeah, I'm only minutes or a couple of hours away from accepting
delivery of my region-free-capable $65 progressive scan DVD player.
The only thing that would make it totally cool is if it had SACD and
DVD-A capability, but since it plays most everything else, I'm happy,
especially for the price. Looks like this Luddite now has *8* optical
readers in house (9 if you count the original optical non-writable
drive in my computer). Of course I STILL don't have SACD or DVD-A
capability chuckle, but, I can still play laserdiscs on two of my
optical devices if I so choose.

On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 14:23:30 GMT, (paul packer)
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 09:51:12 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


Thank you, Dave. It's nice to know that somebody at RAO is
able to correctly interpret a simple post.

One dirty hand washes another.

Pinkerton's name appeared nowhere in Packer's reply to me.

Does it have to?

But it did (at least his first name, which IS his name, after all).

On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 14:31:53 GMT, (paul packer)
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 10:13:33 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"paul packer" wrote in message


Arnie has begun to swagger of late.

Nahh Packer, you're just getting weaker. Look at this,
you're remonstrating with one of the all-time whiner-losers
of RAO, David "pity me" Weil.

I found Dave to be one of the few RAO regulars who could with any
shred of evidence be described as a gentleman. That's no small
achievement.

Uh oh...boy are YOU in for it. From several continents chuckle. I'll
say this in my defense, I tend to treat people as they treat me, even
my "opponents". I can have some heated exchanges with some of them,
but if they don't stoop to nastiness, I'll try to maintain the same
decorum. Some people complain that this makes me "boring". So be it.

His confidence has soared.

Realizing that the golden ear side of RAO has dumbed down to
just Middius a few hangers-on and their sockpuppets can do
that to a person.

I have to give you your due: you outstayed most of the opposition.

He's unflappable, *that's* for sure. Only thing is, this
unflappability points out his blinders and his intractability.

As for my defending
him, I believe I merely gave him the benefit of the doubt,

More like try to damn with faint praise.

Now who's whining?

perhaps as a reaction against George's absurdly
exaggerated
hatred, which as you know I was never quite able to share.

But, you're working on it, aren't you Packer?

A touch of paranoia, Arnie? Please provide the evidence for that
statement.

He's forgotten your previous support for him. But I don't think that
matters now. Once on the **** list, always on the **** list. I don't
think he's EVER retrenched once he's gotton to the "last name only"
stage. The funny thing is, you didn't even "attack him".

But then of course I was never really in on the
in-fighting, so I
may not be a good judge.

Speaks to your lack of self-awareness, Packer.

Unnecessary nastiness again. Would you rather that I'd have been
sufficiently in on the in-fighting to have hated you as much as George
did (does). Think before you answer that.

Well, he's certainly propelling you toward that direction. Even
"gentlemen" can despise his tactics.