Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#481
|
|||
|
|||
Denon vs Yamaha receiver
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message
Arny Krueger wrote: I've already offered to share some blame, but that's not good enough for all of the RAO trolls. They've said in so many words that they aren't going to be happy until I not only abandon RAO, but also commit suicide right away. Any number of specific means of suicide have been suggested any number of times. So, why do you persist in posting to RAO? A fair question. Some newbies stumble into it. I often try to help them find more productive places when they become frustrated with it. Everyone else has abandoned it. Pretty much. I am among the few remaining who post there, and are interested in audio. It's all flames. Some exceptions. There's nothing coherent going on over there. Precious little, yes. All that posting there has ever bought you (or anyone else) is grief. Pretty close to the way things have been for the last few years. I guess I'm too sentimental about the days when a lot of audio was discussed there. This being said, I don't understand why you not only persist in posting there but continuing to crosspost junk there into other audio groups. I try to seal off the crossposts. It's dirty work but someone probably has to do it. I've done that to this particular thread any number of times, but it keeps growing so many branches. After this post... |
#482
|
|||
|
|||
Denon vs Yamaha receiver
I've found that to be a fairly common problem. Listen to the
argument over almost any traffic accident. Everyone insists it was the other guy's fault. Sit in a court room some day as I recently did (as a witness) in a DUI case. Every defendant has a story to tell that explains his actions or denies them entirely. Of course, some are truly innocent -- but all?!? In RAO this argument is kinda flipped around. For years a number of people have repeatedly claimed that I'm personally responsible for *everything* that is wrong with RAO. That's SOP with folks who like to carry flame wars. Fill the forum with abuse and then blame the object of said abuse for what they've posted. Fortunately, almost any visitor with a little common sense can see what's happening right away. It's the same story in USENET flame wars. Everyone insists that the whole thing is the other guy's fault. I've already offered to share some blame, but that's not good enough for all of the RAO trolls.... If that is the case I suggest you simply filter them. I haven't seen a post from Middius since I kill-filed him. Once in a while I see a post where someone quotes and replies to him. Unless the post is of particular interest I hit [f5] and it's gone in a flash. They've said in so many words that they aren't going to be happy until I not only abandon RAO, but also commit suicide right away. People who post that sort of trash get their jollies from watching you respond. If you filter them most get really bored with the thing after a while. Only the truly insane carry on a vendetta long after the object of their vitriol stops responding. After a while their actions start to annoy so many people that they become the outcasts. Any number of specific means of suicide have been suggested any number of times. None of which means squat to you unless you let it. Who are these people that you should even care what they say, let alone what they think? They're obviously not a part of your real life or they would be more circumspect about what they say. I disagree with something you or Dave says so I make a snide comment. Well, there are several forms of suicide comment, of course. Did you misread the above? I said "snide" not suicide. Ignore dummies and concentrate on replying to serious queries. Life's too much fun to waste it worrying about what some USENET troll suggests. You take offense and crack right back. Only when this gets repeated enough to irritate me. If you filter them you won't see it. Then they're just shouting at the wall. :^) I don't like your reply and the war is on. Sometimes the resulting flame fest lasts for years, effectively destroying a newsgroup. Welcome to RAO! This is common to many newsgroups. There are lots of people who can't find a vent for their anger and frustration in real life so they use the talk tough where they feel safe in the relative anonymity of the Internet. It's analogous to road rage. The difference is some character on a newsgroup isn't driving a 2-tom Buick toward you. He's just plining away on a keyboard in his bedroom. Imagine what would happen if everyone just said, "Look, I don't agree with your ideas but I was wrong to call you a [fill in the blank]. I apologize for my part of the problem." That's about as unlikely as things get on Usenet. Sad, isn't it? Those two simple words, "I'm sorry," seem to be the hardest things for any of us (myself included) to say. Why is that? That's pretty well known to most of us I think. Yup, but sometimes it bears repeating. No flame here, Arny. I agree with a lot of what you say about audio and I suspect you're a likeable guy in person. I disagree with you about some of the personal taunts -- not that they're unprovoked but that they're counter-productive. Sure its counter productive, that's the whole point. The history of RAO is that maybe 5-6 years ago it was a wild and wooly place, but there were a fair number of intelligent discussions of audio. At some point certain people became dissatisfied with the direction things were going and decided to do everything they could to force certain people away. Frankly I'm just about the only person on their "hit list" that still stops by. I know what you mean. The oly question for you is are you going to continue to allow them to get to you or will you just filter them and enjoy chatting with people who actually want to discuss audio? I disagree with the others who flame you for the same reasons. If you guys can ever decide to make peace (hint: requires consumption of a significant portion of crow) it will be a good thing. In the meantime I refuse to join the war. I think that staying clear of RAO is a good thing to do, particularly for people who aren't yet involved in any of its long term disputes. I can go there, spot who is serious and who is just picking fights in one or two minutes and set my filters one minute later. After that the newsgroup is a pleasant, useful (though much quieter) place. |
#483
|
|||
|
|||
Denon vs Yamaha receiver
I've found that to be a fairly common problem. Listen to the
argument over almost any traffic accident. Everyone insists it was the other guy's fault. Sit in a court room some day as I recently did (as a witness) in a DUI case. Every defendant has a story to tell that explains his actions or denies them entirely. Of course, some are truly innocent -- but all?!? In RAO this argument is kinda flipped around. For years a number of people have repeatedly claimed that I'm personally responsible for *everything* that is wrong with RAO. That's SOP with folks who like to carry flame wars. Fill the forum with abuse and then blame the object of said abuse for what they've posted. Fortunately, almost any visitor with a little common sense can see what's happening right away. It's the same story in USENET flame wars. Everyone insists that the whole thing is the other guy's fault. I've already offered to share some blame, but that's not good enough for all of the RAO trolls.... If that is the case I suggest you simply filter them. I haven't seen a post from Middius since I kill-filed him. Once in a while I see a post where someone quotes and replies to him. Unless the post is of particular interest I hit [f5] and it's gone in a flash. They've said in so many words that they aren't going to be happy until I not only abandon RAO, but also commit suicide right away. People who post that sort of trash get their jollies from watching you respond. If you filter them most get really bored with the thing after a while. Only the truly insane carry on a vendetta long after the object of their vitriol stops responding. After a while their actions start to annoy so many people that they become the outcasts. Any number of specific means of suicide have been suggested any number of times. None of which means squat to you unless you let it. Who are these people that you should even care what they say, let alone what they think? They're obviously not a part of your real life or they would be more circumspect about what they say. I disagree with something you or Dave says so I make a snide comment. Well, there are several forms of suicide comment, of course. Did you misread the above? I said "snide" not suicide. Ignore dummies and concentrate on replying to serious queries. Life's too much fun to waste it worrying about what some USENET troll suggests. You take offense and crack right back. Only when this gets repeated enough to irritate me. If you filter them you won't see it. Then they're just shouting at the wall. :^) I don't like your reply and the war is on. Sometimes the resulting flame fest lasts for years, effectively destroying a newsgroup. Welcome to RAO! This is common to many newsgroups. There are lots of people who can't find a vent for their anger and frustration in real life so they use the talk tough where they feel safe in the relative anonymity of the Internet. It's analogous to road rage. The difference is some character on a newsgroup isn't driving a 2-tom Buick toward you. He's just plining away on a keyboard in his bedroom. Imagine what would happen if everyone just said, "Look, I don't agree with your ideas but I was wrong to call you a [fill in the blank]. I apologize for my part of the problem." That's about as unlikely as things get on Usenet. Sad, isn't it? Those two simple words, "I'm sorry," seem to be the hardest things for any of us (myself included) to say. Why is that? That's pretty well known to most of us I think. Yup, but sometimes it bears repeating. No flame here, Arny. I agree with a lot of what you say about audio and I suspect you're a likeable guy in person. I disagree with you about some of the personal taunts -- not that they're unprovoked but that they're counter-productive. Sure its counter productive, that's the whole point. The history of RAO is that maybe 5-6 years ago it was a wild and wooly place, but there were a fair number of intelligent discussions of audio. At some point certain people became dissatisfied with the direction things were going and decided to do everything they could to force certain people away. Frankly I'm just about the only person on their "hit list" that still stops by. I know what you mean. The oly question for you is are you going to continue to allow them to get to you or will you just filter them and enjoy chatting with people who actually want to discuss audio? I disagree with the others who flame you for the same reasons. If you guys can ever decide to make peace (hint: requires consumption of a significant portion of crow) it will be a good thing. In the meantime I refuse to join the war. I think that staying clear of RAO is a good thing to do, particularly for people who aren't yet involved in any of its long term disputes. I can go there, spot who is serious and who is just picking fights in one or two minutes and set my filters one minute later. After that the newsgroup is a pleasant, useful (though much quieter) place. |
#484
|
|||
|
|||
Denon vs Yamaha receiver
On Mon, 6 Oct 2003 18:37:06 -0400, "Robert L. Bass"
wrote: I think that staying clear of RAO is a good thing to do, particularly for people who aren't yet involved in any of its long term disputes. I can go there, spot who is serious and who is just picking fights in one or two minutes and set my filters one minute later. After that the newsgroup is a pleasant, useful (though much quieter) place. Why are you having a dialog with Arnold then? |
#485
|
|||
|
|||
Denon vs Yamaha receiver
On Mon, 6 Oct 2003 18:37:06 -0400, "Robert L. Bass"
wrote: I think that staying clear of RAO is a good thing to do, particularly for people who aren't yet involved in any of its long term disputes. I can go there, spot who is serious and who is just picking fights in one or two minutes and set my filters one minute later. After that the newsgroup is a pleasant, useful (though much quieter) place. Why are you having a dialog with Arnold then? |
#486
|
|||
|
|||
Denon vs Yamaha receiver
On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 01:13:35 -0400, "Robert L. Bass"
wrote: Oh absolutely! I mean comeon guys, who CARES what Denon did in the 1970s!!!! Does that all matter, especially considering my original post asked for opinions over one Denon model vs a Yamaha one? Welcome to USENET. :^) Sorry to jump in here; nothing really to add, but just wanted to say I was a part of the longest freakin' thread in usenet history! But then I just went back and read some of the posts; and I thought I was off-topic! |
#487
|
|||
|
|||
Denon vs Yamaha receiver
enigma wrote: Sorry to jump in here; nothing really to add, but just wanted to say I was a part of the longest freakin' thread in usenet history! I think "test" holds that honor. Don |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Used Yamaha receiver | General | |||
Denon AVR-2803 or Yamaha RX-V1400 | Audio Opinions | |||
Question regarding "tone defeat" button on Denon receiver | Audio Opinions | |||
Denon vs Yamaha receiver | Audio Opinions | |||
What brand of low end receiver to go with (Yamaha, Sony, etc) | General |