Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41   Report Post  
dave weil
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 09:37:02 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"John Atkinson" wrote
in message
oups.com
Arny Krueger wrote:
"Harry Lavo" wrote in message
news "Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
Hmm, truth is stranger than fiction, slippery wording,
or what have you:
http://www.stereophile.com/features/69/index2.html
...Please follow up on the URL above - the rest of
this Atkinson-approved article just gets stranger and
stranger and stranger...

As usual, Arny, you are being disingenuous. You
don't reveal that what you are quoting from is a
man's column, not a review.

I provided a link to the *entire article*.


No, Mr. Krueger, your link takes the reader to _page 3_
of the Web reprint, _not_ the entire article.


Hair splitting, anyone?

I guess Atkinson wants people to believe that his site is so
badly designed that there's no way to link the rest of the
article from the page which I pointed to, being that it
contains the text I quoted.


Even though I keep tripping Atkinson up in childish
deceptions, someone at least semi-competent did the site
design for his ragazine.


You should probably give that person a call.
  #42   Report Post  
George Middius
 
Posts: n/a
Default



IKYABWAIBorg shows "Mr T" how it's done.

I guess in your circles, grinding out lame IKYABWAIs
passes for smarts.


Grinding out lame IKYABWAIs clearly passes for smarts in
your group, George.


LOL!

  #43   Report Post  
ScottW
 
Posts: n/a
Default


John Atkinson wrote:
ScottW wrote:
John Atkinson wrote:
wrote:
Mr. Atkinson, can you explain how a product such as the
"Shakti Electromagnetic Stabilizer" could possibly improve
the sound quality of an audio system?

I have no idea, Mr. Welch. But that doesn't mean it can't
have an effect, of course.

Why does your magazine give positive reviews (in vol.19 no.2
and vol.19 no.4, by J. Scull and B. Willis, respectively) to
such do-nothing frauds?

Putting to one side precisely _how_ you came by your knowledge
that the Shakti Stones are "do-nothing frauds," Mr. Welch,
I commissioned reviews of the Shaktis from 2 reviewers, one
of whom. Mr. Scull, is by hs own admission a subjectivist, the
other of whom, Barry Willis, is an avowed skeptic. Imagine my
surprise, therefore, when _both_ subjectivist and skeptic found
that the Shakti devices had a positive audible effect on the
sounds of their systems. Could it possibly be that Scull and
Willis are right and you are wrong, Mr. Welch?


I just sped through the Willis article and I can't find anywhere
where he says they work. He spends a lot of time discussing
cultures and open mindedness and that he isn't saying they don't
work... just that they didn't work for him in the 20 minutes he
spent listening to 'em at WCES. Am I missing something?


I believe you are talking about Barry's report on Mpingo discs, ScottW,
whereas Mr. Welch was asking about the Shakti Stones.


Your correct. The question of his skepticism remains. His take on
Mpingo discs didn't support that characterization IMO.

ScottW

  #44   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"John Atkinson" wrote in message
oups.com...

wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"BD" wrote in message
ups.com
The OP clearly implies that the magazine published an
article on the quoted piece of gear.... regardless how
much 'slippery' wording is used.

Hmm, truth is stranger than fiction, slippery wording, or what
have you:
http://www.stereophile.com/features/69/index2.html

The Mpingo disk article, is a classic case of stupidity and fraud.


It appears you haven't read it, Mr. McKelvy. Because if you had've
done, you would see that it contains strong opinions for but also
_against_ the efficacy of the Mpingo discs.

First we see Joseph Welch dissing Stereophile in this thread for a
review that had actually appeared in TAS, then we have Arny Kreuger
up to his old debating trade tricks, presenting part of a Web article
as though it were the whole (and taking you in), and now here you are,
dissing an article you don't appear to have read.

Not a very good track record for those who claim to believe in
Science, eh.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile


So, you didn't actually read the review then? If you had you know that the
tenor was very poisitive and offered no measurements or tchnical info of any
kind, just blind drooling approval.

"With a number of the synergistic Cable Jackets, careful attention paid to
grounding, the Mpingo Discs on the front end, and the Spatial Control Kit, I
found the effects on the sound were shockingly as advertised---the size of
the soundstage, its tonal balance, and the focus we achieved were
astonishing. The soundstage was as big as the Great Outdoors (or at least as
big as whatever acoustic was on the source material)---we're not talkin' Big
Audio Bloat here. The Harmonix room-tuning products stopped the walls from
grossly resonating in the audio band, but the Shun Mook treatments enabled
us to tweak and micro-adjust the sound to absolute best effect. We were able
to dial in frequency response for a smooth, seamless, top-to-bottom,
cohesive, Zen-like, harmonious presentation. Images took on a solidity and
palpability that was positively scary. I've used that term before, but
instead of drawing attention to the pyrotechnics, these treatments allowed
me to sink deeply into the music's wash and feel its meaning---with rock,
pop, jazz, classical, you name it. That's what it's all about, no? "

And BTW, what kind of moron would spend $800-1500.00 for a record weight?



  #45   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"John Atkinson" wrote in message
ups.com...

Arny Krueger wrote:
"Harry Lavo" wrote in message
news
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
Hmm, truth is stranger than fiction, slippery wording,
or what have you:
http://www.stereophile.com/features/69/index2.html
...Please follow up on the URL above - the rest of
this Atkinson-approved article just gets stranger and
stranger and stranger...


As usual, Arny, you are being disingenuous. You
don't reveal that what you are quoting from is a
man's column, not a review.


I provided a link to the *entire article*.


No, Mr. Krueger, your link takes the reader to _page 3_
of the Web reprint, _not_ the entire article.


I guess the average retard that reads SP would be too stupid to find the
rest of the article from there.

This is
what I was referring to in the posting to which to you
seem to have taken exception. The correct URL, which takes readers to
the beginning of the full reprint, which
includes an introductory comment by myself, is
http://www.stereophile.com/features/69 .

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

And the thing reads as an endorsement for snake oil which is what it is.




  #46   Report Post  
Steven Sullivan
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In rec.audio.tech John Atkinson wrote:


Putting to one side precisely _how_ you came by your knowledge
that the Shakti Stones are "do-nothing frauds," Mr. Welch,
I commissioned reviews of the Shaktis from 2 reviewers, one
of whom. Mr. Scull, is by hs own admission a subjectivist, the
other of whom, Barry Willis, is an avowed skeptic. Imagine my
surprise, therefore, when _both_ subjectivist and skeptic found
that the Shakti devices had a positive audible effect on the
sounds of their systems. Could it possibly be that Scull and
Willis are right and you are wrong, Mr. Welch?


Was the 'avowed skeptic' skeptical enough to actually subject
the 'device' to a controlled comparison?

Could it be possible that neither Scull nor Willis actually
evaluated the device in a manner that would actually
identify whether the *cause* of the 'positive audible effect'
was subjective or objective?




--

-S
  #47   Report Post  
Steven Sullivan
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In rec.audio.tech Len Moskowitz wrote:

Arny Krueger wrote:


http://www.stereophile.com/features/69/index2.html


This was published back in 1994, written by Jonathan Scull.


I don't have a problem with a writer talking about how something that
seems patently irrational to many of us affects their perception of
music played back over their audio systems.


The whole article is clearly subjective. I can't argue with what people
say that they perceive.


I don't see a single measurement there, and nothing that I would call
misleading.


So, let's see, he said that putting a Mpingo disc on gear makes
it sound better than before.

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?

You wouldn't want, say, some sort of independent evidence that
it actually did what it was claimed to do?

Personally, I don't believe that the Mpingo disks do anything at all,
but I don't have any problems with folks who don't agree with me. If
they want to spend their money, God bless 'em.


But that's a different issue. If people want to spend their money,
they're free to. If they want to claim that they've jsut bought
a perpetual motion machine, they're free to do that too. But they
can't demand , or even expect, that their claims go unchallenged.

For a magazine devoted to consumer audio to publish rather far-fetched
claims for a product without any attempt to substantiate them
other than by patently flawed methods -- should that be of concern to
people interested in consumer audio?


I particularly liked the last two sentences:


"Beware of imitations that won't stand an A/B test!" intoned
Mr. Ying. Bill usually doesn't say much, but when he does talk, he
roars.


That was perhaps the most amusing part of the article, yes -- the idea
that an 'A/B' as performed by these clowns would reveal any
accurate information.


--

-S
  #48   Report Post  
Arny Krueger
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Steven Sullivan" wrote in message

In rec.audio.tech John Atkinson
wrote:


Putting to one side precisely _how_ you came by your
knowledge that the Shakti Stones are "do-nothing
frauds," Mr. Welch,
I commissioned reviews of the Shaktis from 2 reviewers,
one
of whom. Mr. Scull, is by hs own admission a
subjectivist, the other of whom, Barry Willis, is an
avowed skeptic. Imagine my surprise, therefore, when
_both_ subjectivist and skeptic found that the Shakti
devices had a positive audible effect on the sounds of
their systems. Could it possibly be that Scull and
Willis are right and you are wrong, Mr. Welch?


Was the 'avowed skeptic' skeptical enough to actually
subject the 'device' to a controlled comparison?


Could it be possible that neither Scull nor Willis
actually
evaluated the device in a manner that would actually
identify whether the *cause* of the 'positive audible
effect'
was subjective or objective?


I checked the Stereophile site and confirmed that "avowed
skeptic" Barry Willis did indeed swallow Ray Kimber's
infamous Diaural loudspeaker sanke oil spew hook, line, and
sinker.

Barry Willis, is an avowed skeptic? If you believe that,
than you'll believe that John Atkinson tells the whole
truth! ;-)


  #49   Report Post  
Sander deWaal
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Steven Sullivan 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? :-)

--

"Audio as a serious hobby is going down the tubes."
- Howard Ferstler, 25/4/2005
  #50   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 13 Sep 2005 23:17:36 GMT, "
wrote:

It is one of the reasons I stopped subscribing in the first place.
The only reason I get it now is because my wife re-subscribed in order to
help with a fundraiser for my son's school.

The Mpingo disk article, is a classic case of stupidity and fraud..


The fact that you have spent good money to subscribe to a magazine
that you detest is the classic case of stupidity.

I didn't, my wife did without my knowledge.

Mr. Atkinson is laughing all the way to the bank.


As do many con artists.




  #51   Report Post  
George Middius
 
Posts: n/a
Default



duh-Mikey falls down and goes splat.

The fact that you have spent good money to subscribe to a magazine
that you detest is the classic case of stupidity.


I didn't, my wife did without my knowledge.


What does that tell you, Mickey?

  #52   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Having read this tale:

http://www.stereophile.com/features/69/index2.html


I was reminded of this tale:

http://snipurl.com/hom4

I think the latter tale would make a splendid production for the
Stereophile Little Theatre with the following cast:

The Emperor - Jonathan Scull (is this "type casting"?)
The Prime Minister - John Atkinson
The tailors - Yu Wah Tan and Bill Ying
The little boy - Arny Krueger (no offence intended, Mr. Krueger)

  #53   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default

John Atkinson wrote:
wrote:
John Atkinson wrote:
wrote:
John Atkinson wrote:
It appears you misunderstood both Mr. Welch's question and
my response, Mr. Krueger. Mr. Welch was quite clearly
referring to a purported Stereophile review of the
"Shakti Hallographic Soundfield Optimizer." As I can't
find any such review in my index, I was asking Mr. Welch
for help in finding it.

Mea Culpa! I confused the "Shakti Hallograph Soundfield
Optimizer" with the "Shakti Electromagnetic Stabilizer".

Or perhaps you were misled by James Randi's implication on his
website that Wayne Donnelly's review of the "Hallographic
Soundfield Optimizer" had appeared in Stereophile?


If I were easily misled, Mr. Atkinson, I would be a loyal
Stereophile reader. Do you see Randi everywhere, Mr. Atkinson?


No, I was specifically referring to a message in another current thread
to which you are posting, specifically:
--------------------------------------------
(Chevdo) wrote to joseph_welch in
message MQrVe.269840$on1.40437@clgrps13 on Tue, 13 Sep 2005 03:38:20
GMT
In article .com,
says...
The man is a repugnant malignancy:
http://snipurl.com/hmrq
...
http://www.randi.org/jr/120304youve.html#2

---------------------------------------------

The URL above takes you to an essay by Randi in which he presents
a review of the "Hallograph" as though it had appeared in
Stereophile. As the posting was in response to you, I assumed
that it was that that had triggered your outburst of bile.


Surely you know the old saw regarding "when you assume". It describes
you _perfectly_, Mr. Atkinson.


If I were a huckster and conman like yourself, an intelligent,
persistent, hard-nosed sceptic like Randi would get under my
skin, too.


Oh dear, Mr. Welch, you really do appear to have got panties in
a wad. :-)


You mistake my utter lack of respect for you, my contempt of you and my
derision of you for anger, Mr. Atkinson. You're none too smart, are
you?

  #54   Report Post  
dave weil
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 17:44:57 +0000 (UTC), Steven Sullivan
wrote:

I don't see a single measurement there, and nothing that I would call
misleading.


So, let's see, he said that putting a Mpingo disc on gear makes
it sound better than before.

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?


Well, what if he said that painting a car red made it look better,
would you have a problem with that?

Because that's a better analogy, due to the subjective nature of
evaluating sound.
  #55   Report Post  
dave weil
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 18:58:28 GMT, "
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 13 Sep 2005 23:17:36 GMT, "
wrote:

It is one of the reasons I stopped subscribing in the first place.
The only reason I get it now is because my wife re-subscribed in order to
help with a fundraiser for my son's school.

The Mpingo disk article, is a classic case of stupidity and fraud..


The fact that you have spent good money to subscribe to a magazine
that you detest is the classic case of stupidity.

I didn't, my wife did without my knowledge.


Why didn't you cancel the subscription.

Mr. Atkinson is laughing all the way to the bank.


As do many con artists.


You are acquainted with a lot of them, are you?



  #56   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default

John Atkinson wrote:
wrote:
John Atkinson wrote:
wrote:
John Atkinson wrote:
It appears you misunderstood both Mr. Welch's question and
my response, Mr. Krueger. Mr. Welch was quite clearly
referring to a purported Stereophile review of the
"Shakti Hallographic Soundfield Optimizer." As I can't
find any such review in my index, I was asking Mr. Welch
for help in finding it.

Mea Culpa! I confused the "Shakti Hallograph Soundfield
Optimizer" with the "Shakti Electromagnetic Stabilizer".

Or perhaps you were misled by James Randi's implication on his
website that Wayne Donnelly's review of the "Hallographic
Soundfield Optimizer" had appeared in Stereophile?


If I were easily misled, Mr. Atkinson, I would be a loyal
Stereophile reader. Do you see Randi everywhere, Mr. Atkinson?


No, I was specifically referring to a message in another current thread
to which you are posting, specifically:
--------------------------------------------
(Chevdo) wrote to joseph_welch in
message MQrVe.269840$on1.40437@clgrps13 on Tue, 13 Sep 2005 03:38:20
GMT
In article .com,
says...
The man is a repugnant malignancy:
http://snipurl.com/hmrq
...
http://www.randi.org/jr/120304youve.html#2

---------------------------------------------

The URL above takes you to an essay by Randi in which he presents
a review of the "Hallograph" as though it had appeared in
Stereophile. As the posting was in response to you, I assumed
that it was that that had triggered your outburst of bile.

If I were a huckster and conman like yourself, an intelligent,
persistent, hard-nosed sceptic like Randi would get under my
skin, too.


Oh dear, Mr. Welch, you really do appear to have got panties in
a wad. :-)

This is akin to confusing the Green Bottle of "medicine"
with the Blue Bottle of "medicine" at an old traveling
"Medicine Show"; both are likely equally ineffective and
fraudulent.

And you know that how, Mr. Welch? When did you try these
devices for yourself?


Which one? The Blue Bottle or the Green Bottle?


Don't be coy, Mr. Welch, You have expressed a strong opinion
on these accessories. Surely you have tried them, to be so sure
that they are ineffective? Or are you, like Randi, simply
making things up?

Perhaps oou need to try some anger-managment strategies before you
next come out from behind the safety of your PC screen. :-)


The safety of my PC screen, Mr. Atkinson? Would you like me to publicly
call you out for being the conman and huckster that you are at the next
Stereophile event, Mr. Atkinson? If so, please let me know. It would
be my great pleasure to grant you your wish, Mr. Atkinson.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile


  #57   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default

surf wrote:
wrote

A much more likely scenario, Mr. Atkinson, is that your reviewers are
either deluded, incompetent and/or corrupt and cynical.



A possible scenario then, is that the reviewers perceived something
you don't understand. Given the possible scenario you've pointed out,
a certainty is that you're an asshole.



Ah, a True Believer, gullible and credulous! Without doubt, Mr.
Atkinsons's favorite type; the very foundation of his scams. What else
do you believe in? Astrology? The Akashic record? Psychic readings?
Tarot Cards? The Afterlife?

Oh, and can't you do better than juvenile insults, grasshopper?

  #58   Report Post  
Arny Krueger
 
Posts: n/a
Default

wrote in message
oups.com
John Atkinson wrote:


Perhaps oou need to try some anger-managment strategies
before you next come out from behind the safety of your
PC screen. :-)


The safety of my PC screen, Mr. Atkinson? Would you like
me to publicly call you out for being the conman and
huckster that you are at the next Stereophile event, Mr.
Atkinson? If so, please let me know. It would be my
great pleasure to grant you your wish, Mr. Atkinson.


Atkinson tried to pull this same BS with me, apparently
forgetting that he and I were face-to-face for about an hour
at HE2005 just a few months before. Since he was present at
Fremer's little hissy fit, he knows that I stand my ground
pretty well.



  #61   Report Post  
Clyde Slick
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

Right now you've got some of the biggest boobs in the history of Usenet on
your team.


Admit it, you have no chanc at all with Maggie.


  #62   Report Post  
Clyde Slick
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"John Atkinson" wrote in message
ups.com...

Arny Krueger wrote:
"Harry Lavo" wrote in message
news
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
Hmm, truth is stranger than fiction, slippery wording,
or what have you:
http://www.stereophile.com/features/69/index2.html
...Please follow up on the URL above - the rest of
this Atkinson-approved article just gets stranger and
stranger and stranger...


As usual, Arny, you are being disingenuous. You
don't reveal that what you are quoting from is a
man's column, not a review.


I provided a link to the *entire article*.


No, Mr. Krueger, your link takes the reader to _page 3_
of the Web reprint, _not_ the entire article. This is
what I was referring to in the posting to which to you
seem to have taken exception. The correct URL, which takes readers to
the beginning of the full reprint, which
includes an introductory comment by myself, is
http://www.stereophile.com/features/69 .

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile


Is this due to Arny's debating trade tactics
or to his general ineptness on web issues?


  #63   Report Post  
Clyde Slick
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

Even though I keep tripping Atkinson up in childish deceptions, someone
at least semi-competent did the site design for his ragazine.


Maybe JA will be nice enough to give you his name.


  #64   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"George Middius" wrote in message
...


duh-Mikey falls down and goes splat.

The fact that you have spent good money to subscribe to a magazine
that you detest is the classic case of stupidity.


I didn't, my wife did without my knowledge.


What does that tell you, Mickey?

That I know more about audio magazines than she does.
She knew only that it was about audio and figured I would enjoy it.


  #65   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 18:58:28 GMT, "
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
. ..
On Tue, 13 Sep 2005 23:17:36 GMT, "
wrote:

It is one of the reasons I stopped subscribing in the first place.
The only reason I get it now is because my wife re-subscribed in order
to
help with a fundraiser for my son's school.

The Mpingo disk article, is a classic case of stupidity and fraud..

The fact that you have spent good money to subscribe to a magazine
that you detest is the classic case of stupidity.

I didn't, my wife did without my knowledge.


Why didn't you cancel the subscription.

Unlike some people, I can separate the gibberish from the worthwhile.
It was part of a fundraiser for my son's school.


Mr. Atkinson is laughing all the way to the bank.


As do many con artists.


You are acquainted with a lot of them, are you?

Only from seeing their names in the news.




  #66   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default


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


Mr.T said:

Could it possibly be that Scull and
Willis are right and you are wrong, Mr. Welch?


If they were, they would have provided proof.


I can see why you hide behind an anonym. Nobody as dumb as you wants his
real identity known.


If irony killed.


  #67   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Mr.T" MrT@home wrote in message
u...

"George M. Middius" cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net
wrote
in message ...
I can see why you hide behind an anonym. Nobody as dumb as you wants his
real identity known.


Actually it is far more stupid to expose your ignorance openly to the
world
as you do.


He'snot really exposing anything since there is no such person as George
Middius posting to RAO.


  #68   Report Post  
Clyde Slick
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Sander deWaal" wrote in message
...
Steven Sullivan 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.


  #69   Report Post  
Clyde Slick
 
Posts: n/a
Default


" wrote in message
link.net...

"George Middius" wrote in message
...


duh-Mikey falls down and goes splat.

The fact that you have spent good money to subscribe to a magazine
that you detest is the classic case of stupidity.


I didn't, my wife did without my knowledge.


What does that tell you, Mickey?

That I know more about audio magazines than she does.
She knew only that it was about audio and figured I would enjoy it.


perhaps this mag is more to your liking.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/k...atingbugs.html


  #70   Report Post  
Clyde Slick
 
Posts: n/a
Default


" wrote in message
link.net...

"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 18:58:28 GMT, "
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 13 Sep 2005 23:17:36 GMT, "
wrote:

It is one of the reasons I stopped subscribing in the first place.
The only reason I get it now is because my wife re-subscribed in order
to
help with a fundraiser for my son's school.

The Mpingo disk article, is a classic case of stupidity and fraud..

The fact that you have spent good money to subscribe to a magazine
that you detest is the classic case of stupidity.

I didn't, my wife did without my knowledge.


Why didn't you cancel the subscription.

Unlike some people, I can separate the gibberish from the worthwhile.
It was part of a fundraiser for my son's school.


She should have chosen this one from the 'menu'.
http://www.planetscott.com/babes/wavearticle.asp





  #71   Report Post  
surf
 
Posts: n/a
Default

wrote ...
surf wrote:
wrote

A much more likely scenario, Mr. Atkinson, is that your reviewers are
either deluded, incompetent and/or corrupt and cynical.



A possible scenario then, is that the reviewers perceived something
you don't understand. Given the possible scenario you've pointed out,
a certainty is that you're an asshole.



Ah, a True Believer, gullible and credulous! Without doubt, Mr.
Atkinsons's favorite type; the very foundation of his scams. What else
do you believe in? Astrology? The Akashic record? Psychic readings?
Tarot Cards? The Afterlife?


oops, now you've made an assumption. I was merely pointing out the
possible scenario that YOU alluded to above.

Oh, and can't you do better than juvenile insults, grasshopper?


not an insult - just an observation, esquire.


  #73   Report Post  
dizzy
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 00:07:00 -0500, dave weil
wrote:

On Tue, 13 Sep 2005 23:17:36 GMT, "
wrote:

It is one of the reasons I stopped subscribing in the first place.
The only reason I get it now is because my wife re-subscribed in order to
help with a fundraiser for my son's school.

The Mpingo disk article, is a classic case of stupidity and fraud..


The fact that you have spent good money to subscribe to a magazine
that you detest is the classic case of stupidity.

Mr. Atkinson is laughing all the way to the bank.


Well, they damn-near GIVE the thing away...

  #74   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Arny Krueger wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com
John Atkinson wrote:


Perhaps oou need to try some anger-managment strategies
before you next come out from behind the safety of your
PC screen. :-)


The safety of my PC screen, Mr. Atkinson? Would you like
me to publicly call you out for being the conman and
huckster that you are at the next Stereophile event, Mr.
Atkinson? If so, please let me know. It would be my
great pleasure to grant you your wish, Mr. Atkinson.


Atkinson tried to pull this same BS with me, apparently
forgetting that he and I were face-to-face for about an hour
at HE2005 just a few months before. Since he was present at
Fremer's little hissy fit, he knows that I stand my ground
pretty well.


Not a surprise, really. Mr. Atkinson is the one who hides behind his
magazine and his PC. He'll probably crap his trousers come next June.

  #75   Report Post  
Arny Krueger
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
news
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

Right now you've got some of the biggest boobs in the
history of Usenet on your team.


Admit it, you have no chance at all with Maggie.


Never have been attracted to big boobs.




  #76   Report Post  
George M. Middius
 
Posts: n/a
Default



dizzy said:

The fact that you have spent good money to subscribe to a magazine
that you detest is the classic case of stupidity.


Mr. Atkinson is laughing all the way to the bank.


Well, they damn-near GIVE the thing away...


So a few more paid subs won't benefit the Lords of Subjectivism at all,
right?



  #77   Report Post  
George M. Middius
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Arnii has a new wind-up toy. Probably Petey Axelgrease's sockpuppet.

Not a surprise, really. Mr. Atkinson is the one who hides behind his
magazine and his PC. He'll probably crap his trousers come next June.


Did you ever try to actually hit somebody with those stumpy little
midget-arms?




  #78   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
news

" wrote in message
link.net...

"George Middius" wrote in message
...


duh-Mikey falls down and goes splat.

The fact that you have spent good money to subscribe to a magazine
that you detest is the classic case of stupidity.

I didn't, my wife did without my knowledge.

What does that tell you, Mickey?

That I know more about audio magazines than she does.
She knew only that it was about audio and figured I would enjoy it.


perhaps this mag is more to your liking.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/k...atingbugs.html

Still George's bitch I see.


  #79   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"surf" wrote in message
news
wrote

A much more likely scenario, Mr. Atkinson, is that your reviewers are
either deluded, incompetent and/or corrupt and cynical.



A possible scenario then, is that the reviewers perceived something
you don't understand.


How could they perceive the impossible without being both deluded and
incompetent?

Don't you think a claim as wierd as those being made for Mpingo disks or
Shakti Stones deserves some technical measurments?

That none have been offered pretty much says it all IMO.

Given the possible scenario you've pointed out,
a certainty is that you're an asshole.



  #80   Report Post  
Arny Krueger
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"surf" wrote in message
news
wrote

A much more likely scenario, Mr. Atkinson, is that your
reviewers are either deluded, incompetent and/or corrupt
and cynical.



A possible scenario then, is that the reviewers perceived
something you don't understand.


Not likely given that I understand the smell of money well
enough.


Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
John Atkinson: audio ignoramus or sleazebag? Rich.Andrews Audio Opinions 22 December 28th 04 03:02 AM
question for anyone who bought an Aardvark product bundled with Cakewalk [email protected] Pro Audio 3 May 28th 04 02:32 PM
question for anyone who bought an Aardvark product bundled with Cakewalk [email protected] Pro Audio 0 May 28th 04 01:48 AM
question for anyone who bought an Aardvark product bundled with Cakewalk [email protected] Pro Audio 0 May 28th 04 01:48 AM
RCA out and Speaker Question in 2004 Ranger Edge Question magicianstalk Car Audio 0 March 10th 04 03:32 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:17 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AudioBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Audio and hi-fi"