Bob Morein said:

"George M. Middius" wrote in message
.. .


Bobo said:

Whatever. I don't think anybody is giving either of us much credibility.

On the contrary, I'm sure most of the group expects dave weil to give
an honest and balanced appraisal. Don't forget that he's been
supportive from the beginning of trotsky's intention to build and
market speakers. He put aside the vitriolic exchanges the two have
had in the past. He's argued with you, Krooger, and Obie about
Singh's right to do his thing. He's also wished trotsky well in the
undertaking. If you were compiling a short list of the RAO regulars
who have genuine cause for bearing a grudge against Singh, dave would
certainly be near the top, and yet he hasn't uttered a discouraging
word about the Jupiter business.

From my POV, I am most aware of the dispute I have with Weil.
The only thing I will grant is that he has more credibility than me, which
isn't hard, considering that I been asserting Greg's guilt by apriori
reasoning.

So unless you think dave weil plotted out a devious strategy for
getting trotsky to send him the speakers, intending all along to
trash their performance, you need to rethink your analysis. And this
is not an occasion calling for a snippet of "If the cameras were
rolling...." fiction.

I am inclined to believe that Weil's judgment will unintentionally give the
speakers more quality than they deserve, for two reasons:
1. There is the "novelty" effect, whereby an anomaly can sound interesting
at first, or until one is committed by purchase.
2. Weil, unlike me, may have scruples about hurting Greg Singh in a material
way.

George, you have the information on cliques at your fingertips.
Who among us trust Weil enough to accept his observation as even mildly
definitive?
Do you mean people who can actually be named, or lurkers rarely heard from?
Either represent a valid assertion, but I would appreciate just a little
clarification.

dave is as straight-forward and as honest as they come. His audio preferences
may turn out to be different than mine, but I will trust his final impressions
of Greg's speakers to be beyond reproach. I know that Internet geeks such as
yourself may have problems with that sort of thinking, but then again, you're
geeks.

Boon

Arny Krueger wrote:

"trotsky" wrote in message
ink.net...


Arny Krueger wrote:





What happened to the rest of my post, Krueger?


No content worth responding to.


Are you admitting to being afraid to discuss the topic?


Which topic am I afraid to discuss Singh? It seems like you have no
excuse
for your reprehensible behavior on RAO. At least give us a hearty mea
culpa!



Krueger, we're not talking about me, we're talking about you, and the
mockery you make of the Christian faith. Are you capable of discussing
this topic or not?

Bobo accepts the reality of his credibility regarding Gregipus.

I've been upfront about my desire to humiliate Trotsky. This is
my personal revenge.

There are two reasons. One is my great personal dislike for him.

My dislike of Trotsky was the impetus to pick him apart. In the picking,

As for the reason as to why I became so exercised, it's been the joy of
humiliating him that has kept me going.

I did a lot of snipping because I wanted to distill your perorations
into a single thought: You despise Gregipus and you've used his
business venture as a vehicle for disparagement. So your desire for a
"definitive" opinion about his speakers must mean that you want
everybody to agree they sound like crap, whether or not that's true.

As for humiliating him, he's no more capable of acknowledging a defeat
than Krooger is. It will never happen.

"George M. Middius" wrote in message
...


Bobo accepts the reality of his credibility regarding Gregipus.

Never in doubt. I said within the first few posts that my motives were
impure.

I've been upfront about my desire to humiliate Trotsky. This is
my personal revenge.

There are two reasons. One is my great personal dislike for him.

My dislike of Trotsky was the impetus to pick him apart. In the
picking,

As for the reason as to why I became so exercised, it's been the
joy of
humiliating him that has kept me going.

I did a lot of snipping because I wanted to distill your perorations
into a single thought: You despise Gregipus and you've used his
business venture as a vehicle for disparagement. So your desire for a
"definitive" opinion about his speakers must mean that you want
everybody to agree they sound like crap, whether or not that's true.

George, I've had plenty of life. Some of it's tough. What happens here is
worth a shrug of the shoulders.
Realizing that, I've had fun making noise, even if the outcome is uncertain.
As is so often the case, I have conflicting feelings about Trotsky. The
hater in me wants to kick the dog, knowing that its
stupidity eases the conscience. The other part of me wishes he had done a
better job; that he had not given me the opportunity. My desire to hear the
speakers is because I prefer to stand on firm ground. If I heard them and
liked them I would say so. Some would deride me, and others would say they
have found an honest man.

There are many cases in this industry of a front man, ie., Matthew Polk in
the white lab coat, and the back room boffins that do the real work. The
fact that Trotsky probably does not have the native abilities required to
design loudspeakers doesn't bother me. He could partner with someone who
does, and the result might be quite viable.

But I think we are in agreement that he is incredibly fatuous, complacent,
smug, impenetrably unaware of his own limitations.
As for humiliating him, he's no more capable of acknowledging a defeat
than Krooger is. It will never happen.

You're right, and that eases my conscience a little as well. If he slinked
away in silent defeat, I'd feel a little guilty.
The best thing, which is most unlikely, is that some of what his critics
have been saying will penetrate. He'll involve someone who can actually
design and tune, and use his allegedly excellent ears to hone the speakers
to a high degree of subjective satisfaction.

And then he'll sign up a dealer network, which raises the question: Can
someone so needlessly irritating on r.a.o. know what to kiss and when? It's
an essential skill in pushing product.

On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 23:21:06 GMT, Joseph Oberlander
wrote:

They will always choose name-brand

I don't think you can say this.

Well, you can say this, but that won't make it true.

On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 19:42:23 -0400, "Bob Morein"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 16:19:21 -0400, "Bob Morein"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 15:33:44 -0400, "Bob Morein"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 15:08:02 -0400, "Bob Morein"

wrote:

However, when an adversary reverses his position, it is usually
received
with enhanced credibility.
When an adversary reverses, it is the result of overwhelming
evidence
which
compels the adversary to honesty.

This is akin to Mr. Krueger coming on board as saying that I'm an
ideal RAO poster. This would not only be suspect, it might actually
impact on *my* credibility by those who don't like Mr. Krueger's
opinion on anything.

Whatever. I don't think anybody is giving either of us much
credibility.
The controversy has provoked Greg to make statements which are far
more
interesting to lurkers than what we say.

That is until I weigh in. Then, the chips can fall where they may and
people can give whatever credence that they want to give.

No, it begins after you weigh in.
At this point, you have made no statement which requires credibility.
After you publish your result, credibility will determine to what degree
your opinion counts by itself.
If there is confirmation from other individuals who have not been
involved
in this dispute, the importance of your opinion will be amplified.

I really don't care if they're "amplified" or not. I'll simply be
expressing a singular opinion.a

"Singular" means unique.
Did you mean that?

Bob, you don't want to play games with words with me. I'm not a near
functional illiterate like Arnold.

The first definition of singular is this:

Being only one; individual.

If you want, I can say that I'll be expressing an *individual*
opinion.

Frankly, you shouldn't expose your ignorance of the language like
that, as you are a "screenwriter" and all...

On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 20:32:18 -0400, in rec.audio.opinion you wrote:

George, you have the information on cliques at your fingertips.
Who among us trust Weil enough to accept his observation as even mildly
definitive?

"Definitive"? Where on earth did you get that from? Nobody should
expect that and no reasonable person would use it to describe any one
opinion.

Quite right. Anyone expecting a "definitive" observation from me is
nuts. I'm not claiming anything of the sort, nor do I expect anyone to
take it as such. I'll just be reporting my own impressions that people
can correlate with what they know about me and my likes and dislikes
(and yes, my background, I suppose). That's how any rational person
reads criticism.

Put aside your histrionics. What you can get from an experienced,
knowledgeable observer (a description that fits weil, in my view) is
an informed opinion. From the way you and Obie (and duh-Mikey) have
been squawking, one would think it's a million-to-one shot that the
speakers won't sound terrible. If you have to generalize to meet some
bizarre need of yours, I think what you'll get from weil is a ballpark
evaluation. E.g., if he says they're "above average for clarity and
imaging" or "muddy sounding in the bass", won't that give you some
idea? How about "stellar performers on most music" or "a horrible
nightmare of a garage experiment"? Those should put you in the
ballpark too. It's just one guy's opinion.

Yep, that's what I said in the previous post - you know, the one where
Bob couldn't figure out what singular meant, in this context.

George M. Middius a écrit :


Bobo accepts the reality of his credibility regarding Gregipus.


I've been upfront about my desire to humiliate Trotsky. This is
my personal revenge.


There are two reasons. One is my great personal dislike for him.


My dislike of Trotsky was the impetus to pick him apart. In the picking,


As for the reason as to why I became so exercised, it's been the joy of
humiliating him that has kept me going.


I did a lot of snipping because I wanted to distill your perorations
into a single thought: You despise Gregipus and you've used his
business venture as a vehicle for disparagement. So your desire for a
"definitive" opinion about his speakers must mean that you want
everybody to agree they sound like crap, whether or not that's true.

As for humiliating him, he's no more capable of acknowledging a defeat
than Krooger is. It will never happen.


George is the supreme judge here !
Ok George nobody will never rob your place, you are living in a nebula
of words, sentences... And I must admit that your are very good to this
game. In other word you are very witty.
*BUT* you haven't any real material world connection. This is your
definitive and *redhibitory* lack.

You forget the most important in this story, the industrial aspect of
the business.
I will simplify in order you understand correctly.
Imagine that Trotsky has built a real *good* speaker. Dave test it, no
problem, I trust Dave honesty and I don't want to debate his hability to
do that. So Dave presents us his report : the Trotsky speakers are very
good.
You will turn back to Bob and you will tell him triumphing :
"Bobo your hate for Trotsky make us lost this party you're a moron,
shame is on you, get away from RAO and don't speak to me anymore !"
I guess that you will say this in better words ! ;-)

George there is something which can be evaluate in a manufacturing
process without any needs to test the final product. This thing is the
Trotsky's aptitude to reproduce an *acceptable* level of quality in a
*regular* base.

When we watch carefully the material choices, purchasing methods,
suppliers, subcontractors etc... all the Trotsky arguments, we must say
that we are not confident.
*Confident* ! This is the main key of a relation between customer and
manufacturer.

I understand in this matter your language skill is a little bit out of
game, but I grant you the right to come for a second round.

--
Lionel J. M. Chapuis
Unemployed technical Clown

dave weil a écrit :

Stop speculating about my motives because you're overthinking it. I
simply want to report my opinion of the speakers without bringing the
designer's personality or methods into it. I've never particularly
cared about the "behind-the-scenes" stuff.

No I don't want to stop speculating...
You are too romantic Dave, too romantic and too sentimental. Your are
the worst tester for Trotsky speakers. You are totally unable to have
the minimum "Krooborg" behaviour in this matter...
You are surely a very good *music* listener, I would like to explore
every advises you can give concerning music, but please stop this
testing game.
Anyway I am sure that you have already spent more time, energy,
intelligence in this matter than Troksky never spent...
....This is perhaps what you was unconsciously looking for, in an
indefinable way Trotsky business is a little bit your baby now...

--
Lionel J. M. Chapuis
Unemployed Clown

"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 19:42:23 -0400, "Bob Morein"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 16:19:21 -0400, "Bob Morein"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 15:33:44 -0400, "Bob Morein"

wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 15:08:02 -0400, "Bob Morein"

wrote:
[snip]

If you want, I can say that I'll be expressing an *individual*
opinion.

Yes, I prefer that, thanks.

Frankly, you shouldn't expose your ignorance of the language like
that, as you are a "screenwriter" and all...

"Lionel" lionel{dot}chapuis{at}free{dot}fr wrote in message
...
dave weil a écrit :

Stop speculating about my motives because you're overthinking it. I
simply want to report my opinion of the speakers without bringing the
designer's personality or methods into it. I've never particularly
cared about the "behind-the-scenes" stuff.

No I don't want to stop speculating...
You are too romantic Dave, too romantic and too sentimental. Your are
the worst tester for Trotsky speakers. You are totally unable to have
the minimum "Krooborg" behaviour in this matter...
You are surely a very good *music* listener, I would like to explore
every advises you can give concerning music, but please stop this
testing game.
Anyway I am sure that you have already spent more time, energy,
intelligence in this matter than Troksky never spent...
...This is perhaps what you was unconsciously looking for, in an
indefinable way Trotsky business is a little bit your baby now...

Partners? Is Weil shilling for Trotsky?
Or is it going to be a formal partnership, as in T&W Audio?

Sounds as appetizing as chocolate covered tuna fish.

"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 23:21:06 GMT, Joseph Oberlander
wrote:

They will always choose name-brand

I don't think you can say this.

Well, you can say this, but that won't make it true.

You can say that, but it won't make it false either.

Bobo tries to inflate his Obie-Wanna Brand Name doll.

They will always choose name-brand

I don't think you can say this.

Well, you can say this, but that won't make it true.

You can say that, but it won't make it false either.

Past experience with the human race shows that the probability dave is
right (and I, since I made the same point) is around 99%. Probability
Obie is right is the complementary likelihood.

"trotsky" wrote in message
nk.net...

Arny Krueger wrote:

"Bob Morein" wrote in message
...

"trotsky" wrote in message
link.net...

Arny Krueger wrote:

"trotsky" wrote in message
hlink.net...

Arny Krueger wrote:

Given Singh's abysmal technical skill level and the well-known
methodologies
for speaker design and evaluation that he avoided, it's probable
that
Jupiter speakers have one or more horrendous response anomalies.

Singh has a number of opportunities to provide a well-supported response,
but instead runs away from my statement

That's blatantly false.

Prove it with unbiased support for your claim.

The Europas are one of the most neutral
speakers I have heard at ANY price.

Key words: "I have heard" coming from the designer of self-same
speakers.

Singh has a number of opportunities to provide a well-supported response,
but instead runs away from my statement


Because you have no Christian
morals, Krueger, you have no problem perpetuating blatant
falsehoods.

Fact of the matter is that Singh hasn't shown me actually perpetuating
even
one falsehood. I've supported my claims with unbiased references.

Singh has an opportunity to respond, but runs away from my statement

Krueger, I can't believe it, you're too ****ing afraid to respond to me
directly! That was easy.

It's not a matter of fear Singh, its a matter of wanting to discuss the
matter with a more responsive person. As I've shown above, you've already
failed to respond to the technical issues I raised in a responsible way a
number of times.

Are you going to clean up your act Singh, or are you going to continue to
whine incoherently?

"trotsky" wrote in message
nk.net...
Bob Morein wrote:

"trotsky" wrote in message
ink.net...

Arny Krueger wrote:


"trotsky" wrote in message
link.net...


Arny Krueger wrote:



Given Singh's abysmal technical skill level and the well-known
methodologies
for speaker design and evaluation that he avoided, it's probable
that
Jupiter speakers have one or more horrendous response anomalies.


That's blatantly false.


Prove it with unbiased support for your claim.



The Europas are one of the most neutral
speakers I have heard at ANY price.


Key words: "I have heard" coming from the designer of self-same
speakers.

Note that Singh has failed to support his claim about the sound quality of
his speakers in any meaningful way

Because you have no Christian
morals, Krueger, you have no problem perpetuating blatant falsehoods.

Note that Singh has failed to support this claim in any meaningful way

Ironic Singh, coming from a person with no discernable ethics of *any*
kind.

Note that Singh has failed to even try to show that he actually has any
ethics

Yeah, but I'm an atheist, and you're masquerading as a Christian. You
make a joke out of the religion.

You've made a joke out of atheism.

Bob, when you lack cleverness as much as you do, suicide must come up as
an option often.

As I've shown in the other subthread you've been dancing around properly
responding to Singh, Morein is exactly right. You are a disgrace to all
ethical atheists because you have zero ethics and morals as well as zero
common sense.

"trotsky" wrote in message
ink.net...

Krueger, we're not talking about me, we're talking about you.

That's a lie, Singh. Morien and I have been discussing the mockery you've
made out of atheism because you have no discernable ethics. Do you want to
play, or sit this one out?

"George M. Middius" wrote in message
...


Bobo tries to inflate his Obie-Wanna Brand Name doll.

They will always choose name-brand

I don't think you can say this.

Well, you can say this, but that won't make it true.

You can say that, but it won't make it false either.

Past experience with the human race shows that the probability dave is
right (and I, since I made the same point) is around 99%. Probability
Obie is right is the complementary likelihood.

Perhaps Oberlander's point should be restated in less absolutist terms.
Human behavior always incorporates a random element.
The is a finite chance that the "consumer" will buy a non-brand name
speaker.
Particularly if it's sold out of the back of a white van .
But seriously, you are correct in assuming that all possible variations of
choice exist.

If Trotsky's success is measured in selling a mere 25 units a year, then
Trotsky's (a.k.a. Greg Singh) standard sales tactic of up-sucking, lip
smacking, kow-towing, and ass-kissing, added to a convincing derision of
brands we know to be junk, such as B&W, Kef, Tannoy, Bug-Tussel (which a
friend of mine just won on eBay for $1300), MB Quart, Canton, et al. -- have
the distinct possibility of reaching the desired sales goal.

All the more reason to be vigilant.

"Marc Phillips" wrote in message
...

dave is as straight-forward and as honest as they come.

Consider the source, a proven liar. Like Greg Singh, Marc Phillips has been
posting blatant lies and pedophile fantasies on RAO for a long time.

His audio preferences
may turn out to be different than mine, but I will trust his final
impressions
of Greg's speakers to be beyond reproach.

Note the deceptive form of this sentence. It sounds like it means something
but it can easily be restated: Weil's reactions are probably irrelevant to
those of any reasonable, thinking person, but they're from his heart.

Given that it is well known that Weil is a cruel liar, and its probable that
Phillips is an even crueler liar, this is all a bunch of eye wash.

I know that Internet geeks such as
yourself may have problems with that sort of thinking, but then again,
you're
geeks.

Then as is his style, Phillips descends into childish name-calling.

"Bob Morein" wrote in message
...

"George M. Middius" wrote in message
...


Bobo tries to inflate his Obie-Wanna Brand Name doll.

They will always choose name-brand

I don't think you can say this.

Well, you can say this, but that won't make it true.

You can say that, but it won't make it false either.

Past experience with the human race shows that the probability dave is
right (and I, since I made the same point) is around 99%. Probability
Obie is right is the complementary likelihood.

Perhaps Oberlander's point should be restated in less absolutist terms.

Right. Oberlander does get overtaken by his own hype pretty often.

Human behavior always incorporates a random element.

Right. I've heard people say things like: There are 100 guys out there who
have money to burn and will buy something new and different only because
it's something new and different.

The is a finite chance that the "consumer" will buy a non-brand name
speaker.

Perhaps a bad choice of words, in that "Satrun" is a brand name of sorts.

Particularly if it's sold out of the back of a white van .

LOL but actually false. There's a brand name there, too! Acoustic-something,
right?

But seriously, you are correct in assuming that all possible variations of
choice exist.

Again a bad choice of words since the number of all possible variations
approaches infinity, but the number of available options is merely a very
large number.

If Trotsky's success is measured in selling a mere 25 units a year, then
Trotsky's (a.k.a. Greg Singh) standard sales tactic of up-sucking, lip
smacking, kow-towing, and ass-kissing, added to a convincing derision of
brands we know to be junk, such as B&W, Kef, Tannoy, Bug-Tussel (which a
friend of mine just won on eBay for $1300), MB Quart, Canton, et al. --
have
the distinct possibility of reaching the desired sales goal.

You may be interested to know that I've worked with the proprietor of
Buggtussel on AES projects on several occasions. While I disagree with some
aspects of some of his designs (i.e., transmission lines are a well-known
waste of box volume) his work includes some interesting innovations, is
accomplished with reference to and use of established good design
technologies, and FWIW the sound quality of his results are generally way
above average to my ears and the ears of people I trust.

You can read more details about Buggtussel at
http://www.stereotimes.com/speak032902.shtm .

All the more reason to be vigilant.

Singh might do well to study the Buggtussel story...

On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 14:31:04 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

Not at all, Singh. Your ethics work something like this. You go looking for
a Christian with some fellow thugs, and then say to yourselves: Let's kick
the **** out of this guy because it will make us feel good to see another
human suffer for no reason but our pleasure. Then, if he tries to defend
himself, you accuse him of being a hypocrite for not letting you beat the
heck out of the parts you haven't yet tried to turn into mincemeat.

Let's talk about all the pedophile fantasies you've posted on RAO Singh, and
try to position them in your alleged ethical value system. How does this
work, Singh? Inquiring minds want to know!

Greg does no profess to be a Christian, Arnii. You do.

So, in view of your stated religious beliefs, how do you square away
the kind of dig you've just directed at dave? Don't you think that
making comments about his father's death is going to be painful to
him?

Of course you do. That's why you made those comments.

If you had any Christian morals at all, you would not resort to such
comments, no matter how angry someone had made you feel. Or do you
contend that causing someone distress or hurting them is good
behaviour for a Christian if there exists a suitable justification for
inflicting that damage--a strong disagreement about loudspeakers, for
example?

And before you even *bother* mouthing off about me not being a
Christian and therefore being a hypocrite for marking these comments,
a few words for you:

**** off. These are *your* beliefs, not mine. You're the guy who
believes in an imaginary idol, not me.

--
td

The Devil a écrit :

So, in view of your stated religious beliefs, how do you square away
the kind of dig you've just directed at dave? Don't you think that
making comments about his father's death is going to be painful to
him?

Of course you do. That's why you made those comments.

If you had any Christian morals at all, you would not resort to such
comments, no matter how angry someone had made you feel. Or do you
contend that causing someone distress or hurting them is good
behaviour for a Christian if there exists a suitable justification for
inflicting that damage--a strong disagreement about loudspeakers, for
example?

And before you even *bother* mouthing off about me not being a
Christian and therefore being a hypocrite for marking these comments,
a few words for you:

**** off. These are *your* beliefs, not mine. You're the guy who
believes in an imaginary idol, not me.

--
td

Good ! I was waiting for that since a long time.
Thank you.

Sincerely,

--
Lionel Chapuis

"The Devil" wrote in message
news:vji5nvo6jfc2nme2h0j53s48l4vc7cfrcr@rdmzrnewst xt.nz...

On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 14:31:04 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

Not at all, Singh. Your ethics work something like this. You go looking
for
a Christian with some fellow thugs, and then say to yourselves: Let's
kick
the **** out of this guy because it will make us feel good to see another
human suffer for no reason but our pleasure. Then, if he tries to defend
himself, you accuse him of being a hypocrite for not letting you beat the
heck out of the parts you haven't yet tried to turn into mincemeat.

Let's talk about all the pedophile fantasies you've posted on RAO Singh,
and
try to position them in your alleged ethical value system. How does this
work, Singh? Inquiring minds want to know!

Greg does no profess to be a Christian, Arnii. You do.

It appears that Greg won't admit to having any system of ethics at all. Why
should anybody do business with a person who has zero ethics and takes zero
responsibility for his past actions?

BTW, congratulations at observing the obvious Graham. This contrasts with
your past inabilities to discern even the obvious. However you screwed your
facts badly, probably because you were intoxicated with some mind-altering
substance or other while you were posting.

So, in view of your stated religious beliefs, how do you square away
the kind of dig you've just directed at dave?

Who is "dave" and why is he relevant? The portions of my post that you
quoted were a response to Greg.

Don't you think that
making comments about his father's death is going to be painful to
him?

Where did I specifically mention Dave Weil's father? Prove that this whole
dave's father thing is not another one of your mind farts.

Of course you do. That's why you made those comments.

You're delusional Graham if you think that I specifically mentioned Dave
Weil's father. Anybody who looks at the thread can see that. Well, anybody
who has normal intelligence and reading ability and who's not drunk.

If you had any Christian morals at all, you would not resort to such
comments, no matter how angry someone had made you feel.

Prove that I specifically mentioned Dave's father. If I didn't mention him
specifically then this whole issue is a figment of your imagination, Graham.

Or do you
contend that causing someone distress or hurting them is good
behaviour for a Christian if there exists a suitable justification for
inflicting that damage--a strong disagreement about loudspeakers, for
example?

I was simply speaking to Dave's credibility as a reviewer which he's
recently been touting by obviously deceptive means. Well means that are
obvious to RAO regulars, but means that might deceive some newbies.

And before you even *bother* mouthing off about me not being a
Christian and therefore being a hypocrite for marking these comments,
a few words for you:

**** off. These are *your* beliefs, not mine. You're the guy who
believes in an imaginary idol, not me.

Graham, besides quoting my comments to Singh as if I said them to Dave, and
then talking about non-existent comments I made to Dave, you've got a few
other more serious problems. Like what is this Jesus idol thing you are
ranting about?

I'll stick by my comments to Singh. RAO is a hell-hole because of
self-righteous idiots such as yourself, Graham. Let's talk about all the
pedophile fantasies that you've imposed on RAO readers over the past 4
years. What kind of ethical behavior is that? If you won't take
responsibility for your obviously reprehensible actions, why should I bother
to respond seriously to the highly erroneous garbage you've just drunkenly
posted?

Get help Graham, you've got a problem that RAO can't solve!

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 07:42:01 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

You're delusional Graham if you think that I specifically mentioned Dave
Weil's father.

snip--unread, as per usual

Well, I'm glad you specifically acknowledged that your family has a
problem relating to your children and unusual circumstances of death.

--
td

On 23/9/03 21:51, in article
, "trotsky"
wrote:

Bob, you're like a broken record--you can discuss me and my work, but
you lack the balls and self awareness to discuss what you do. Come back
when you grow up, okay?

I'm a genius. It's been in all the papers. I just haven't had to really
get a job or career yet. Yeah, I know I'm 51 but when I finally get moving
I'll really be terrific!

Now, where did I put that crack pipe??


--
Robert Morein.

Failed 51 year old loser student.
Failed Temple University
Ejected from Grad program after seven years
Ejected from Drexel University after dissertation judged "bull**** nonsense"
Sued Drexel and Lost
Even took it to the Supreme Court, but they laughed at me!
But I get even with studentsandthelaw.org my harassment site.
My poor jew mother Jane Morein died with a broken heart, watching this
poor twisted loser fail at everything I've ever done.
Daddy Sylvan Morein, who studied hard and became a fair to middlin' dentist,
is now stuck at home with his loser son; unwanted by life or any of the
relatives.
But I've discovered at last my calling: INTERNET WACKO!



Man, am I a Loser!

Arny Krueger wrote:

"trotsky" wrote in message
nk.net...





Krueger, I can't believe it, you're too ****ing afraid to respond to me
directly! That was easy.


It's not a matter of fear Singh, its a matter of wanting to discuss the
matter with a more responsive person. As I've shown above, you've already
failed to respond to the technical issues I raised in a responsible way a
number of times.

Are you going to clean up your act Singh, or are you going to continue to
whine incoherently?



Krueger, quit trying to change the subject back to me, it makes you look
like a coward. Your attitude on this newsgroup is decidedly
non-Christian. Agree or disagree?

"The Devil" wrote in message
news:l6m5nv8ul9ci1ad7ve6fgds2b6mp52e82r@rdmzrnewst xt.nz...
On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 07:42:01 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

You're delusional Graham if you think that I specifically mentioned Dave
Weil's father.

snip--unread, as per usual

Typical of idiots with totally closed minds.

Well, I'm glad you specifically acknowledged that your family has a
problem relating to your children and unusual circumstances of death.

Say what?

Bob Morein wrote:

"George M. Middius" wrote in message
...


Bobo tries to inflate his Obie-Wanna Brand Name doll.


They will always choose name-brand

I don't think you can say this.

Well, you can say this, but that won't make it true.

You can say that, but it won't make it false either.

Past experience with the human race shows that the probability dave is
right (and I, since I made the same point) is around 99%. Probability
Obie is right is the complementary likelihood.


Perhaps Oberlander's point should be restated in less absolutist terms.
Human behavior always incorporates a random element.
The is a finite chance that the "consumer" will buy a non-brand name
speaker.
Particularly if it's sold out of the back of a white van .
But seriously, you are correct in assuming that all possible variations of
choice exist.

If Trotsky's success is measured in selling a mere 25 units a year,



What do you mean "mere", Bob? That would outgross Mr. Krueger by a
comfortable margin. It's almost like you're calling Arny a loser here.

Bob Morein wrote:

On 23/9/03 21:51, in article
, "trotsky"
wrote:


Bob, you're like a broken record--you can discuss me and my work, but
you lack the balls and self awareness to discuss what you do. Come back
when you grow up, okay?


I'm a genius. It's been in all the papers. I just haven't had to really
get a job or career yet. Yeah, I know I'm 51 but when I finally get
moving
I'll really be terrific!

Now, where did I put that crack pipe??



Tell the truth: you keep a rope with a noose around to keep you "motivated".

trotsky said:

Tell the truth: you keep a rope with a noose around to keep you "motivated".

Don't feed the trolls, Gregipus. I think even Krooger has this
particular one figured out.

"trotsky" wrote in message
ink.net
Arny Krueger wrote:

Singh might do well to study the Buggtussel story...

But Arny, I've been using your business as a business model.

I seriously doubt that.

Shouldn't there be some sort of solidarity amongst "web publishers?"

I thought your primary line of business was selling speakers, not giving
away unique technical information.

Here's a question Singh: Do you even know what technical information about
audio is?

"trotsky" wrote in message
nk.net
Arny Krueger wrote:

As I've shown in the other subthread you've been dancing around
properly responding to Singh, Morein is exactly right. You are a
disgrace to all ethical atheists because you have zero ethics and
morals as well as zero common sense.

I'm not sure what you're saying here, Krueger.

Yes Singh, I guess you are *that* stupid. Is this the FAS kicking in or
what?

Are you saying there's a "right" way to be an atheist?

Of course.

There's nothing that non-conformists hate more than other non-conformists
who fail to rise to meet the rising standards of non-conformity. That's
especially true of atheism now that atheism is no longer a true minority.
Atheism is just a sect of Secular Humanism, and Secular Humanism is now the
prevailing World religion.

That's a non-Christian thing to say, too.

Prove it.

Note that Singh runs away from this question in virtually any context,
technical, moral, or what have you.

"trotsky" wrote in message
nk.net
Arny Krueger wrote:

"trotsky" wrote in message
ink.net...


Krueger, we're not talking about me, we're talking about you.


That's a lie, Singh. Morien and I have been discussing the mockery
you've made out of atheism because you have no discernable ethics.
Do you want to play, or sit this one out?

Morion already shot his wad and said that everything he's said about
me isn't based on reasoning, just dislike.

Prove it.

You used to claim you
were a reasonable person, Krueger--what happened?

I still am a very reasonable, easy-going person. Remember, I sleep with
bears in the figurative sense, and live to tell the tale.

Simply put, do you no longer consider yourself a Christian?

I'm too much of a skeptic to not be Christian.

Of course Singh I know this is all over your head. It takes Grace for
Christianity to make sense, and you are one of the most graceless people
I've ever had the displeasure of meeting.

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 09:16:20 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

snip--unread, as per usual

Typical of idiots with totally closed minds.

Have mercy, you abominable scrabble-eyed freak-nonce. You surely don't
hate me so much you wish I would read your posts, do you?

Well, I'm glad you specifically acknowledged that your family has a
problem relating to your children and unusual circumstances of death.

Say what?

What.

That's the only thing I'll ever do for you in my life. Treasure the
moment, ****-lips.

--
td

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 04:16:22 -0400, "Bob Morein"
wrote:

If you want, I can say that I'll be expressing an *individual*
opinion.

Yes, I prefer that, thanks.

I don't know why, unless you just have a mental block against the word
singular.

As I have clearly shown, you have a singular idea of the way the word
is used (this is using *your* definition BTW).

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 10:35:51 +0200, Lionel
lionel{dot}chapuis{at}free{dot}fr wrote:


I just want to say that if the Trotsky's speakers are really bull****
Dave would not be able to tell that, never.

Sure I would. Considering my history with Greg, it would be delightful
revenge. He's been *very* nasty to me countless times. Nothing would
please me more than to say that his speakers are a pile of **** on a
speaker stand. I'd be able to lord it over him *and* push his buttons
over and over again.

Unfortunately, I'm afraid that I won't be able to do that. I know
*that* much already.

That doesn't mean that I'll necessarily agree with his assesments of
the speakers as the second coming of live music either.

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 06:19:07 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 20:32:18 -0400, in rec.audio.opinion you wrote:

George, you have the information on cliques at your fingertips.
Who among us trust Weil enough to accept his observation as even mildly
definitive?

"Definitive"? Where on earth did you get that from? Nobody should
expect that and no reasonable person would use it to describe any one
opinion.

Quite right. Anyone expecting a "definitive" observation from me is
nuts.

Ditto for anybody expecting a competent observation.

I'm not claiming anything of the sort, nor do I expect anyone to
take it as such. I'll just be reporting my own impressions that people
can correlate with what they know about me and my likes and dislikes
(and yes, my background, I suppose).

Yup. Weil's background is that he flunked out of college, dropped out of the
Army, became a waiter, collects broken and abysmally cheap speakers, has no
relevant technical expertise, and denies reality every time it bites him in
the nose.

That's how any rational person reads criticism.

Years of experience has shown that using the word rational in any
description of Weil's personal judgment needs to be proceeded or followed
with a negative modifier.

When are you going to quite whining?

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 10:20:44 -0500, dave weil
wrote:

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 04:20:08 -0400, "Bob Morein"
wrote:

Partners? Is Weil shilling for Trotsky?

Nope.

Has Bob *become* McLardy?

--
td

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 06:26:49 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
.. .

On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 23:21:06 GMT, Joseph Oberlander
wrote:

They will always choose name-brand

I don't think you can say this.

*always* is a big word. However just answer this question: why should any
logical person buy Singh's overpriced, underdesigned speakers?

I'm not sure that they should. I haven't finished my evaluation yet.

Why should any logical person take what *you* say about his speakers
with anything other than a bulldozer worth of salt?

Well, you can say this, but that won't make it true.

Gee Weil, that's your approach - make the same false claim over and over
again in the vain hopes that if you repeat it enough people will actually
believe it. This sort of thing can work in your profession, where the sales
methodology includes likkering up the mark, and then hyping high-priced
alleged taste treats that the customer's alcohol-numbed palate can't
distinguish from soggy white bread.

Yes, I would assume that this is your outlook on dining out.

I would also assume that even with liquor, you'd have trouble
distinguishing anything from the think that you've admittedly enjoyed
for lunch, i.e. a couple of pieces of soggy white bread with some sort
of pressed meat between them.

BTW, I'm in a bit of a sour mood because I just found out that one of
the best bass players in Nashville (a town FILLED with more bass
players than you can shake a stick at) passed away from an aneurysm he
suffered at the weekend. Those of us who knew him are going to miss
him terribly. He was a gentle giant and a gentle soul.

Arny Krueger wrote:

"trotsky" wrote in message
nk.net

Arny Krueger wrote:


"trotsky" wrote in message
link.net...


Krueger, I can't believe it, you're too ****ing afraid to respond
to me directly! That was easy.


It's not a matter of fear Singh, its a matter of wanting to discuss
the matter with a more responsive person. As I've shown above,
you've already failed to respond to the technical issues I raised in
a responsible way a number of times.


Are you going to clean up your act Singh, or are you going to
continue to whine incoherently?


Krueger, quit trying to change the subject back to me, it makes you
look like a coward. Your attitude on this newsgroup is decidedly
non-Christian. Agree or disagree?


Disagree. However Singh, I decline to discuss this matter much further
with
people who have zero ethics and morals such as yourself, Phillips,
Middius,
or Graham.



Wow, these guys must've really served up a crown of thorns for you. For
some reason, though, I could swear it was the other way around.




Any reasonable discussion has to be based on common ground, and I have no
common ground with people who have a track record of flooding RAO with
their
pedophile fantasies, such as yourself, Phillips, Middius, or Graham.


I have no pedophile fantasies, Krueger. In fact, the recurring rumor is
that you're a pedophile. Why is this?

dave weil said:

The mere fact that Ellis is selling speakers (more than he can handle)
is a great example that Joseph has himself used.

I'm sure that there are plenty of other examples of lesser-known
speakers being sold.

I think Obie and Bobo want there to be a High Council of Speaker
Makers that dole out marketing licenses. Startups like trotsky would
have to supplicate for their blessing.