Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#41
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
"Jenn" wrote in message
I don't weasel out of things, Arny. Sure Jenn, you turn a blind eye to real-world (such as Usenet is real) egregioius behavior by people who also sympathize with you on some abstract issues. |
#42
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
Jenn said: Way to put people into groups and judge them, Arny. Not all "subjectivists" take those kind of tweaks seriously. I've noticed your many denounciations of SHP's crazy tweeks Jenn. Not! I don't comment on everything with which I agree or disagree if others are doing so and I have nothing new to add. Jenn, you can't debug Kroologic with rules of normative human behavior. Sorry. |
#43
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
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. |
#44
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
Jenn said: Does everyone notice how one can't make a point to Arny without him coming back with an insult? You don't say. Really? That Arnii must be very unpopular. |
#45
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message I don't weasel out of things, Arny. Sure Jenn, you turn a blind eye to real-world (such as Usenet is real) egregioius behavior by people who also sympathize with you on some abstract issues. I generally don't comment on "flame wars" from either side; perhaps you haven't noticed that. I think that they are a childish waste of time. I've commented on them (both sides) from time to time. I've also sent private emails once in a while protesting some behavior or another. BTW, your ignoring the rest of my post is noted. |
#46
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
Jenn wrote: 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. Not all "subjectivists" take those kind of tweaks seriously. 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?" 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? In my opinion, Arny is right. What Jenn does is instead of addressing his point she attacks the messenger (Arni). Very typical of her. I would also comment that subjectivists use this tactic all the time because very often or always they have no argument except "I hear it, therefore ..." vlad |
#47
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
In article .com,
"vlad" wrote: Jenn wrote: 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. Not all "subjectivists" take those kind of tweaks seriously. 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?" 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? In my opinion, Arny is right. Of course. 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. Instead of addressing the point that I don't comment on points where my views are already expressed by others (which seems a perfectly sane thing to do), he calls me a coward (attacking the messenger.) Now Vlad, you indicate that me "attacking" Arny is "typical". Could you post some examples of me doing that? Or is that another empty statement from you, rather like you claiming that I said that I have better hearing than others do? I would also comment that subjectivists use this tactic all the time because very often or always they have no argument except "I hear it, therefore ..." vlad |
#48
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote: "MINe 109" wrote in message In article , Jenn wrote: Does everyone notice how one can't make a point to Arny without him coming back with an insult? He's been known insult himself after losing track of who said what in a thread. Hmm, I say "coward" and shows his face? :-( Wouldn't a "coward" hide his face? Chalk up your troll points for this reply, but your previous post supports Jenn's implication quite nicely. Stephen |
#49
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
nob caught masturbating in public
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. 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. |
#50
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
Jenn wrote: In article .com, "vlad" wrote: Jenn wrote: 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. Not all "subjectivists" take those kind of tweaks seriously. 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?" 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? In my opinion, Arny is right. Of course. 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. Instead of addressing the point that I don't comment on points where my views are already expressed by others (which seems a perfectly sane thing to do), he calls me a coward (attacking the messenger.) Now Vlad, you indicate that me "attacking" Arny is "typical". Could you post some examples of me doing that? Or is that another empty statement from you, rather like you claiming that I said that I have better hearing than others do? Jenn, I understand that your perception of each of my statement is that it is "empty". Because we are talking about your perception then: - you are entitled to your perceptions/opinions, - no amount of logical reasoning will change your "perception", "violin timbre in LP's" comes to mind :-) vlad |
#51
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
This assumes that all 'subjectivists' agree that the tweaks proposed by
Soundhaspriority are valid and useful. Clearly not all do. Did I miss something? By "not all", who here are you implying does? I'm not implying that anybody does. I am, I suppose, a 'subjectivist' but I hardly buy the thought that the tweaks proposed are valid or even worthy of trying. Yet you have no evidence that they aren't valid or worthy of trying. Which proves that you're really no different than Arny, who also mistakenly believes that the only valid things in audio are those that conform to his flawed thinking. The rest can be casually dismissed without trial. With qualifications like that, don't pretend you are a "subjectivist". At best, you're what Arny calls himself: "a reliable subjectivist". No, the difference between the 'usual suspects' and me is that I do not care if you want to use tweaks. I personally do not think it worth the time, but if you do, go for it. I am not, and have not, tried to convince anybody one way or another. If you are trying to force me to do trials in order to dismiss an idea that I personally do not agree with or find worthy (conforming to your thoughts), then it is you who are most like Arny between the two of us. I will not try to force you to do DBTs any more than I would try to force Arny to try your tweaks. You are, however, making Arny's argument for him: that all 'subjectivists' can be pigeonholed into a group. This last one looks potentially dangerous to me, at least as far as equipment life is concerned. Same ignorant thing that Arny said. Are you sure you're not him? As for the speaker grounding tweak, not only have I tested it, I've already given examples of commecial models that incorporate the grounding. Plus, I've made several offers for people to come and observe my speaker setup, where I show the speakers being grounded as described, and the amp working perfectly. That's more evidence I'm supplying than you've ever shown for any of your false assertions about everything. If it works for your setup, great. I thought you were stating that it would work for all setups. My mistake. Perhaps I've misunderstood some of the posts I've seen from 'objectivists.' Perhaps the 'objectivists' never actually disagree on anything and they all proceed in lock-step with one another. I hadn't thought that to be the case. I've certainly proved it to be the case with subjectivists. Unless you can come up with one example, that I've asked you for above. So you actually *are* an objectivist and this is a simple troll. Things make much more sense now. I think that trying to pigeonhole either group in such a manner is counterproductive at best and extremely intellectually dishonest at worst. The exception is what I've said here. What Arny said is worthless, but that describes just about everything he says. But if it's actually true, it can't be _reasonably_ disproven (among those who listen to reason). Something can be true for you and not true for others. Those silly 'objectivists.' They all lie and then try to get everybody to agree with their distorted sense of reality. I've already proven that both of you ideologues do that. You ALL reside under a distorted sense of reality. At least in relation to audio; if not many other things. And I've lied? Please show me where. If something is not true for me, then it is not true for me. If something is true for you, then it is true for you. Your tweaks work for you. You believe that they make your system sound better. I do not wish to try them. I have no problem with that. Why do you? |
#52
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
From: Arny Krueger
Date: Fri, Mar 17 2006 9:33 am Email: "Arny Krueger" Avoidance of my point noted. It's just an unsupported claim. What is there of substance to avoid? 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. Jesus. LOL! Jenn, please become more 'brave.' This is a matter of life or death. |
#53
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
In article .com,
"vlad" wrote: Jenn wrote: In article .com, "vlad" wrote: Jenn wrote: In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message m 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. 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?" 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? In my opinion, Arny is right. Of course. 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. Instead of addressing the point that I don't comment on points where my views are already expressed by others (which seems a perfectly sane thing to do), he calls me a coward (attacking the messenger.) Now Vlad, you indicate that me "attacking" Arny is "typical". Could you post some examples of me doing that? Or is that another empty statement from you, rather like you claiming that I said that I have better hearing than others do? Jenn, I understand that your perception of each of my statement is that it is "empty". Because we are talking about your perception then: - you are entitled to your perceptions/opinions, Why thanks! - no amount of logical reasoning will change your "perception", No, no "reasoning" will change what I hear. Why should it? How can it? "violin timbre in LP's" comes to mind :-) vlad Obviously, you can't find the supposed posts where I "attack" Arny. So it's yet another false accusation. Is that all that you have? Is all of this brought on by what I hear? It must be, because every other accusation you make against me turns out to be false. Are you having fun? |
#54
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
In article . com,
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: From: Arny Krueger Date: Fri, Mar 17 2006 9:33 am Email: "Arny Krueger" Avoidance of my point noted. It's just an unsupported claim. What is there of substance to avoid? 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. Jesus. LOL! Jenn, please become more 'brave.' This is a matter of life or death. LOL |
#55
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
From: Arny Krueger
Date: Fri, Mar 17 2006 9:55 am Email: "Arny Krueger" Not all "subjectivists" take those kind of tweaks seriously. Can't prove it by me. Can't prove it by the google record. And why should I care if I 'prove' anything to you? LOL! You really do think that you're a god. 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. I'd rather have you explain to me why I should care. I think you and nob make interesting mental-health studies, which I personally am finding more fun exploring than tweaks. Does anyone notice how one can make a general point about the cowardice of subjectivists without Jenn whining about it? Um, because what you are falsely and illogically asserting has nothing to do with 'cowardice'? One of the problems with so-called subjectism that we see on audio groups is that subjectivists are really all about relativism. There are no fixed reference points in their worlds - just what makes them feel good or bad. In the real world there are almost no audio technicans of note that aren't objectivists, because part of technical competence involves finding fixed reference points and basing far-reaching decisions on them. Leaving labels aside, one of the problems with *you* is that you seem to think that nobody can figure anything out for themselves. I personally do not care one whit whether or not somebody wants to spend $1500 on a power cable if that makes them feel good. If they want to place an aspirin tablet on their speakers because to them it 'reveals hidden inner detail' so what? Why should I post anything about it? You obviously think this is a 'war,' apparently replete with casualties and medals and 'heroism.' Not posting against everything that you don't agree with is somehow 'cowardice.' Do you have any idea how screwed up of a view that is? I'd be more concerned with the technicians. If they try to place an aspirin tablet on an instrument amplifier in a professional recording studio, maybe then there's a problem. As for hobbyists, who really cares? Why should I be interested in trying to 'convert' people to *any* point of view? And if I choose not to, exactly how does that make me a 'coward'? If aspirin on their amplifier makes them enjoy their system more it does not effect me one bit. And it has the benefit, *to that individual* of making them enjoy their system more. Why should I care, even if I don't believe it has any basis? This is not rec.audio.tech. Most people here are not claiming to be 'technicians.' This is not a war. What is most interesting to me is the view that you and nob (in particular) display. It isn't brave: it's messed up in a pathological kind of way. |
#56
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
From: Jenn
Date: Fri, Mar 17 2006 11:10 am Email: Jenn 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 disagree. Perhaps Arny does not read nob's posts. One would call nob an 'objectivist.' Same for Stewart. He insults all the time. But then again, Arny's 'biased.';-) |
#57
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
In article . com,
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: From: Jenn Date: Fri, Mar 17 2006 11:10 am Email: Jenn 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 disagree. Perhaps Arny does not read nob's posts. One would call nob an 'objectivist.' Same for Stewart. He insults all the time. Oh, I quite agree that the "obs" throw around insults. I'm just saying that the subjs do too. But then again, Arny's 'biased.';-) Of course, everyone is. If that weren't true there would be no need for blind tests, right? ;-) |
#58
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
From: vlad
Date: Fri, Mar 17 2006 11:51 am Email: "vlad" In my opinion, Arny is right. What Jenn does is instead of addressing his point she attacks the messenger (Arni). Very typical of her. So in your opinion, calling someone a 'coward' because they do not address every claim, whether true or false to the individual, is OK and is also valid. Interesting view. I would also comment that subjectivists use this tactic all the time because very often or always they have no argument except "I hear it, therefore ..." No, it's more like "If you hear it and if it makes you happy, why should I care?" The only issue I would have with somebody (for example) buying a $1500 power cable is if they stole the money or neglected their children to get it. Other than that, WTF should you (or anybody else) care? Please explain. |
#59
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
From: Arny Krueger
Date: Fri, Mar 17 2006 10:46 am Email: "Arny Krueger" The knife cuts both ways, so why generalize? Subjectivists lead the pack when it comes to insults, name-calling and profanity around here. Fact. That's the coward's way out. If there is a post that you do not agree with, you *must* post against it. That is your logic. Please provide your Google proof that you have ever spoken up against an 'objectivist' that was using insults, name-calling, or profanity. Otherwise, STF up, coward. (This line of reasoning is much like nob justifying his personal attacks: "They're worse than I am, so it's OK!") |
#60
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 , "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? |
#61
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
"Jenn" wrote in message ... In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message I don't weasel out of things, Arny. Sure Jenn, you turn a blind eye to real-world (such as Usenet is real) egregioius behavior by people who also sympathize with you on some abstract issues. I generally don't comment on "flame wars" from either side; perhaps you haven't noticed that. That is the cowards way, take no side, treat everyone as if they are morally equivalent. |
#62
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: Does everyone notice how one can't make a point to Arny without him coming back with an insult? You don't say. Really? That Arnii must be very unpopular. Especially with swine. |
#63
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. I've noticed your many denounciations of SHP's crazy tweeks Jenn. Not! I don't comment on everything with which I agree or disagree if others are doing so and I have nothing new to add. Jenn, you can't debug Kroologic with rules of normative human behavior. Sorry. What does a swine know of normative human behavior? |
#64
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
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. |
#65
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
From:
Date: Fri, Mar 17 2006 2:52 pm Email: nob, I was wrong about you. You actually *do* contribute to discussions here in a non-insulting way. Further, you prove Arny's assertion that 'objectivists' do not cast insults around. Especially with swine. Than again, maybe not. |
#66
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
From:
Date: Fri, Mar 17 2006 1:19 am Email: I say its the exact opposite reason. If you have a brain as you allege, then why can't you show evidence that you do by proving the tweaks don't work? You are an 'objectivist' troll. 'nuff said. |
#67
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
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. |
#68
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
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. |
#69
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
Shhhh! said: 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. Jesus. LOL! Jenn, please become more 'brave.' This is a matter of life or death. The Krooborg has this persistent delusion that he is a "master of the debating trade". He believes, truly and deeply, that because he never admits he lost a debate, that means he never did lose one. His cancerous egomania then extrapolates from that premise to project onto all of his snot-victims a certainty of fear and dread. You may have noticed that duh-Mikey has bought into Mr. ****'s delusions to some degree. The dumber they are, the more awed they are by Kroologic and the more impressed by Krooglish. -- http://NewsGuy.com/overview.htm 30Gb $9.95 Carry Forward and On Demand Bandwidth |
#70
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
From:
Date: Fri, Mar 17 2006 2:54 pm Email: What does a swine know of normative human behavior? I don't know, nob. What? |
#71
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
Arny Krueger wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: Not all "subjectivists" take those kind of tweaks seriously. Can't prove it by me. Can't prove it by the google record. I can prove that little "Morc from Orc" Middius took the tweaks seriously. 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. That's a pretty stupid statement Kreuger, even for you. You're wrong about this as well, and it's trivial to prove. Does anyone notice how one can make a general point about the cowardice of subjectivists without Jenn whining about it? Yes, I did notice that you can make general points about the cowardice of subjecftivists, without Jenn whining about it. Most of the "whining" seems to come from you. I also noticed that a general point can be made about the cowardice of subjectivists and objectivists here. Both camps are too afraid to venture into unknown territory, and prefer to remain "comfortably ignorant". One of the problems with so-called subjectism.... bigoted rant snipped At this point, you can pretty much turn your tv off folks. |
#72
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
From: Jenn
Date: Fri, Mar 17 2006 2:59 pm Email: Jenn I generally don't comment on "flame wars" from either side; perhaps you haven't noticed that. That is the cowards way, take no side, treat everyone as if they are morally equivalent. Except that I'm not doing that. I'm not here to argue morality. But you are arguing morality by default. If you don't argue *against* the sin of tweaks, or *against* the sin differing views or preferences (whether or not they are based in technology), that means that you are (by default) *for* the sins of murder, or blaspheming, or theft, or any other number of things denoting loose morals. Therefore, audio = morals. Inability to see that noted. So now that I have proven this point beyond doubt to any rational person, do you still like high-quality LPs, you proven thieving, blasphemous murderer? And stop coveting those two asses Arny and nob, OK? Their neighbors have dibs. |
#73
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
George "Morc" Middius, after a date with Pepe, wrote: 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. There is somebody that did take my "alleged tweaks" seriously, Morc. 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?: As to the 5-pinhole paper tweak, Morc From Orc says: "Just to clue you in, I tried it this afternoon" 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. |
#74
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
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. -- http://NewsGuy.com/overview.htm 30Gb $9.95 Carry Forward and On Demand Bandwidth |
#75
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
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? 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? 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. |
#77
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "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. I've noticed your many denounciations of SHP's crazy tweeks Jenn. Not! maybe she is merely ignoring the troll. -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access |
#78
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "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. Not all "subjectivists" take those kind of tweaks seriously. 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? 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. 100,000 posts later, where have your comments gotten you, braveboy? -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access |
#79
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 , "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. 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?" 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? Gee, I never noticed that. -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access |
#80
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
How much class can we stand?
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "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. 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. 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 make a general point about the cowardice of subjectivists without Jenn whining about it? One of the problems with so-called subjectism that we see on audio groups is that subjectivists are really all about relativism. There are no fixed reference points in their worlds - just what makes them feel good or bad. In the real world there are almost no audio technicans of note that aren't objectivists, because part of technical competence involves finding fixed reference points and basing far-reaching decisions on them. Then explain your behavior, your having falsely accused a number of people of sending you kiddie porn email, explain it in absolute moral terms, no moral relativism, please. -- 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 |