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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Who cares?

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

Maybe when you take your own advice...

Uncle Troll said:

I always urge people to spend as much as they can afford on speakers,
because they are the most important part of any system.

The implication here is that spending more on speakers will make your system
sound better.

No, Normy, it's not. In this case duh-Mikey is absolutely right (although
he'd be hard-pressed to explain the real point).

For most people, the speakers (and the room) ARE the system. The
electronics are just slaves to the speakers. The best electronics are the
ones that bring out the best performance the speakers are capable of, not
the ones that have the best measurements.

Another way to understand this simple point is that great speakers with
poor electronics might sound only pretty good, but great electronics with
poor speakers will most likely sound dreadful. I know you never hear any
differences among amps, preamps, or source players, but even you must be
able to hear some differences among loudspeakers.

Hello Eddie,

EddieM wrote:

You seems to be saying then that when the differences among the components
you wish to upgrade are subtle, then the dbt may not be a viable test to use
in detecting differences between those units. I thought all along that dbt is
use to detect subtle sound differences.

sorry if I gave that impression, may be my English isn't good enough,
but this isn't what I meant. I think that DBTs are the only reliable
way to verify audio differences, and among DBTs I think that the ABX
DBT is the most sensitive audio test available.

In the past on this NG, and on many other forums, some doubt have been
arised about the sensitivity of DBTs. I think that most concerns don't
hold considering the available evidence, but even supposing that those
concerns are true DBT results still teach something useful. There are
components that so far no one has been able to prove as audibily
different under DBT conditions, and there are
other components, notably speakers, that are quite easy to prove as
audibly different under the same exact conditions.

Considering that the same exact components that are so easy on the DBTs
are also really different under the most common measurement conditions,
I'm quite confident that those are the components introducing the
biggest inaccuracies in the reproduction chain. So IMHO to improve the
reproduction accuracy most of the efforts should be placed first on
those components, 'cause those components are the best candidate to
provide the biggest improvement. In other words, why should I bother
about cables, whoose effect is at least questionable, when there are
the microphones, the speakers, and the room that introduce such evident
and unquestioned inaccuracies in the reproduction chain?

With regards to your confidence about DBT above, what do you think, in your
opinion, does the "test" or the "proctor" or the "methodology" ...etc. do in
proving beyond doubt (to you) that the components involve, indeed, sound
alike 'cause, as it show, each time test comparisons were made, they sound
the same.

AFAIK some positive results have beed reported also on this NG (Was it
RAHE instead? Sorry, I don't remember.) BTW, I really don't care.
Speakers DBTs are most of the times so easy that usually they aren't
even performed at all. At least building some loudspeakers capable of
passing a DBT test with a negative result is something that scares
almost any competent speaker designer, and I really don't know if it is
possible at all. The effects of the room usually are even bigger than
those of the speakers, and I know of no people that is questioning
this.

So I will start worrying about the supposed side effects of DBTs,
provided that there really are side effects, and also about the best
way of doing DBT, when designing a speaker capable of passing a DBT
with a negative result will be as easy as building some cable capable
of passing a DBT results, and the room effects will be reduced to a
comparable magnitude. I suspect this isn't going to happen anytime
soon.

Bye,

Denis Sbragion

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

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

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

Who cares?

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

Maybe when you take your own advice...

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

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

Thanks.

On Sat, 17 Sep 2005 18:17:11 GMT, SSJVCmag
wrote:

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

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

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

Who cares?

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

Maybe when you take your own advice...

Ahhh Dave, so smart, so hip, so... Well, It takes a tough man to actually
ADD crossposts when politely asked to cut 'em down.

I didn't ADD any crossposts, I just continued YOURS.

You really rock, dude...

But not as much as you, it seems.

Just can't tell ya how much. Get yourself a life and maybe you can get past
this stuff in your head.

Hey, it's YOU who seems to have something stuck in his head - so much
that you flood newsgroups with your holier-than-thou posts. I just
hope that it isn't a ticking time bomb.

Farting in elevators wasn't even funny for most of
us WHEN we were 10, we hardly KEPT it as a Personality Choice, but try...
Really, keep trying, you CAN get past this.
Just don't give up. We're pullin' for ya.

My own advice was that we can all help cut down on this crosspost
dunderheadedness but It'd be ALMOST as rude as the original prank to just
wipe em all off, not knowing which NG actually might WANT this thread, so
asking all to just speak up and/or remove their own does it quick, polite
and considerately. For folks like you that's not really Job One

Certainly "Job One" for me isn't eliminating crossposts, that's for
sure. Why it is for you is a personal issue for you, but until you
take your own advice, you're no better than the orginating poster.

so I guess
the rest of you, just look to this poor guy as a reverse role model. There's
a lesson to be learned from everyone.

Except that you yourself are flooding 3 newsgroups with your snide
posts. It's just as annoying to OTHERS to see your multiple no-content
posts clogging up newsgroups several times a day.

Just ask yourself this - how much support have you gotten for your
windmill-tilting? Zero.

And now, I'll bid you adieu and hope that your demons don't consume
you.

William Sommerwerck wrote:
John Atkinson wrote:
Bill Sommerwerck wrote:
I guess you are never going to forgive me for firing you as
a Stereophile reviewer, are you Bill?

Liar, liar, liar.

Ah Bill, I see your gift for repartee has not deserted you :-)

I quit, for a number of reasons. (My disappointment with JA as
editor was one of them, but not the most-significant.) Then,
after the fracas over reviewing ethics, * you removed me from
the Contributing Editors list (where I would otherwise have
remained indefinitely, even after I stopped contributing).

You say "removed you from the contributing editors list."
I say "fired." Not sure what the difference is, Bill.

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

Because it is not true, Bill. I have such discussions all the time.
Indeed, if you cast your mind back to the winter of 1990, I
arranged to have dinner with you in Seattle, where we could have
had a "serious conversation," except that you stood me up. :-(

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

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

Then why I do remember it so well? (Yes, yes, yes...)

I have no idea, Bill. But the fact remains that, contrary to your
assertion, the Diva _did_ appear in the "Recommended Components"
listing. Hence your indictoment of me is without foundation.

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

As far as I am aware. If you wish, I will dig it out of storage and
send you a copy. Please email me your current street address.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

SSJVCmag said:

snip

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

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

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

Think about it, it's a refreshing thought.

--

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

In article ,
says...

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

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

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

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

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

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

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



Chevdo said:

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

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



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

Chevdoborg whined:

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

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

You wish.

I know.

It makes me laugh

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

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

SSJVCmag said:

snip

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

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

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

Think about it, it's a refreshing thought.

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

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

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

And thanks, as always!

"SSJVCmag" wrote..

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


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

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

"SSJVCmag" wrote..

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


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

Thanks!
You guys are GREAT!

In .com, John Atkinson
wrote :

If you wish, I will dig it out of storage and
send you a copy.

Goooooood if you insist, I accept, thank you for your proposal.

I accept that you send me *immediatly* the screenprint of Mr Krueger's
Webpage that you pretended to have saved on you computer before (according
to your post) an alleged "modification".

If you cannot you will be obliged to recognize that you are a *LIAR*. Just
an other Usenet forgery.
Rather than opportunate your former employers you should accept the deal
with me ?
Let us see if you really are the gentleman that you pretend to be...

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


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

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


Stop crossposting yourself, asshole

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

Who cares?

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


Stop it yourself, ASSHOLE

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

Right, he just includes and endorses idiotic fraudulent stuff

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


MOMMY, MOMMY, he crossposted. BWAAAAH

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

Right, he just includes and endorses idiotic fraudulent stuff

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


MOMMY, MOMMY, HE CROSSPOSTED,,bwaahhhhh!

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

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

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

Who cares?

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

Maybe when you take your own advice...

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

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

Thanks.


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

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

SSJVCmag said:

snip

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

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

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

Think about it, it's a refreshing thought.

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

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

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

And thanks, as always!


You are a stupid, ARROGANT asshole

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

"SSJVCmag" wrote..

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


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

Thanks!
You guys are GREAT!


**** YOU, SSJVC

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

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

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

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


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

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

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



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

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

Separate messages crossposted at
11:00
11:01
11:02
11:03
11:06
11:09
11:10

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

The rest of you: thanks for trimming the crossposts!

With sympathy for what's apparently normal...

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

Consistancy is indeed the sign of a mature mind.

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

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

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

'arrogance'...
Fascinating.

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

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

The rest of you: thanks for trimming the crossposts!


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

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

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

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

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


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



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

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


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

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

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

Consistancy is indeed the sign of a mature mind.

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


What can I say, I like to pick on morons


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

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

'arrogance'...
Fascinating.


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

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

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


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

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


What can I say, I like to pick on morons

Your choice of adversary is revealing.


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

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

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


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

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

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

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


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

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



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

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

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




What can I say, I like to pick on morons

Your choice of adversary is revealing.


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

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


tomorrow, or, hopefully, NOT.

On 9/18/05 12:25 AM, in article ,
"SSJVCmag" wrote:

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


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

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


DANG! slipped on my own crosspost-slipup!
Fixed it.

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

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

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

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


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

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


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

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

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

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

Well, no, the thread's singularly and appropriately back on RAO where you
it started. That's fine. That's how things work.

Only if that is where you are reading and posting from.
I believe that you read and post from RAP


If you have some deep-seated need to keep crossposting to people elsewhere
(who as we've mentioned, never had, and still don't have, any interest in
this thread) then that's telling.



No, I am crossposting to you.
And anyway, you don't speak for others.

If you want to stop, is ok with me

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

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

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



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

"SSJVCmag" wrote in message
...

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



On 9/18/05 12:49 AM, in article , "Clyde
Slick" wrote:

you don't speak for anyone but yourself.

Never said different. Good! You're paying attention.
That helps things a lot.
(I -was- wondering...)


At any rate, I cross to RAP, cause I beleive that is where you read and post
from.
I'm talking to YOU
If you want to stop, its ok with me.
Just write off RAO

You really should read my posts before trying to respond to them.
Makes you look awake.
You really shouldn't be crossposting... It's naughty! I've been doing
nothing but trying to minimise it. Besides, a guy I've been corresponding
with on a RAO thread says so!

Nighties...

Denis Sbragion wrote
Hello Eddie,

EddieM wrote:

You seems to be saying then that when the differences among the components
you wish to upgrade are subtle, then the dbt may not be a viable test to
use
in detecting differences between those units. I thought all along that dbt
is
use to detect subtle sound differences.

sorry if I gave that impression, may be my English isn't good enough,
but this isn't what I meant. I think that DBTs are the only reliable
way to verify audio differences, and among DBTs I think that the ABX
DBT is the most sensitive audio test available.

In the past on this NG, and on many other forums, some doubt have been
arised about the sensitivity of DBTs. I think that most concerns don't
hold considering the available evidence, but even supposing that those
concerns are true DBT results still teach something useful. There are
components that so far no one has been able to prove as audibily
different under DBT conditions, and there are
other components, notably speakers, that are quite easy to prove as
audibly different under the same exact conditions.

Considering that the same exact components that are so easy on the DBTs
are also really different under the most common measurement conditions,
I'm quite confident that those are the components introducing the
biggest inaccuracies in the reproduction chain. So IMHO to improve the
reproduction accuracy most of the efforts should be placed first on
those components, 'cause those components are the best candidate to
provide the biggest improvement. In other words, why should I bother
about cables, whoose effect is at least questionable, when there are
the microphones, the speakers, and the room that introduce such evident
and unquestioned inaccuracies in the reproduction chain?

With regards to your confidence about DBT above, what do you think, in your
opinion, does the "test" or the "proctor" or the "methodology" ...etc. do
in
proving beyond doubt (to you) that the components involve, indeed, sound
alike 'cause, as it show, each time test comparisons were made, they sound
the same.

AFAIK some positive results have beed reported also on this NG (Was it
RAHE instead? Sorry, I don't remember.) BTW, I really don't care.
Speakers DBTs are most of the times so easy that usually they aren't
even performed at all. At least building some loudspeakers capable of
passing a DBT test with a negative result is something that scares
almost any competent speaker designer, and I really don't know if it is
possible at all. The effects of the room usually are even bigger than
those of the speakers, and I know of no people that is questioning
this.

So I will start worrying about the supposed side effects of DBTs,
provided that there really are side effects, and also about the best
way of doing DBT, when designing a speaker capable of passing a DBT
with a negative result will be as easy as building some cable capable
of passing a DBT results, and the room effects will be reduced to a
comparable magnitude. I suspect this isn't going to happen anytime
soon.

Bye,

Denis Sbragion


Thanks Denis, thank you for your kind reply. There are obvious key issues
I find disagreeable in your statements above concerning dbt. I suppose it's
better to just leave it to that.

(Chevododo) wrote:



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



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

How does someone defraud someone of that, Chevodingdong ?

"Sander deWaal" wrote in message
...
"Clyde Slick" said:


If he'd written instead that painting a car red made it
go faster than before, you wouldn't find anything wrong about
that either?


But that's true.

Ever seen a green Ferrari? :-)


only in my rear view mirror.


**grin**

--

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


No doubt you was also headed in the other direction at the time.