Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#441
|
|||
|
|||
Surf wrote: "Arny Krueger" wrote John's been listening to jerk-offs like Middius and Fremer way too long. I don't think John takes any advice from George, unless he roasts coffee at his home. You did an OK job at the debate. You deserve credit for participating. I don't think either one of you made any converts. Subjectivists believe that there's something about listening to music that blind testing fails to reveal. Objectivists believe that if you can't hear it in a test, it doesn't exist. Bzzt. The real belief is that if you can't hear it, it is rendered moot. |
#442
|
|||
|
|||
Arny Krueger wrote: "George Middius" wrote in message ... What's that? You're too chicken**** to show your face in public? GeeT, why I am not surprised? ;-) How many people still remember when Middius spewed this kind of crap in my direction? He has to spew it somewhere, eh? But isn't it interesting how asking Atkinson a question evokes such a response from "George"? An extreme case of hero worship???? Then there was HE2005... ;-) Imagine how disappointed "George" was that his hero didn't rip you to shreds, as he had fantasized. Oh well, maybe the new Star Wars flick will see him through the summer. ;-) |
#443
|
|||
|
|||
George Middius wrote: Little **** said: Gee, you had Mr. Krueger right there in the same room on 4/29/05. Did you offer "him an opportunity to say the things he had been writing on the newsgroups from behind the safety of his PC to [you] in person"? IOW, did you say "do you have something(s) to say to me face-to-face, Mr. Krueger?", or words to that effect? Tell you what, dickie/toony/Thing/torrie****s/etc/etc/etc, why don't you and I get together and I'll say some things to your face that I've only ever said on RAO. I'll call you a cowardly little **** to your face. I'll call you a liar and a pervert and a parasite and a vengeful, envy-ridden nebbish to your face. Just tell me where and when to find you and we can go. What's that? You're too chicken**** to show your face in public? Gee=99, why I am not surprised? ;-) Oh my...as the Catholic priests succumb to the allure of the alter boys the high priest of grammar stumbles when consumed with hypocrisy. If irony killed.... rest in peace o' prince of participles. ScottW |
#444
|
|||
|
|||
Arny Krueger wrote:
My own suspicions are that our HE2005 meeting was not entirely JA's idea. More of your mind-reading, it appears, Mr. Krueger? Yes, the invitation for you to appear at HE2005 was my idea, triggered by a suggestion made on r.a.o. last December by Mike McKelvy. Here is the exchange in question: Michael McKelvy wrote: Just pick a place, I'm pretty sure if it's reasonable, Arny will show up and debate YOU if you have the courage. "John Atkinson" wrote on December 7 in message . com Okay, I invite Arny Krueger to Home Entertainment 2005, to be held in Manhattan next May, to debate me one-on-one in front of an audience. A free discussion. No restrictions on what subjects Mr. Krueger wishes to talk about, although it is fair to include a section where he and I have to answers questions from the audience. Seems pretty clear to me, Mr. Krueger. But then again, I am not you. John Atkinson Editor, Stereophile |
#445
|
|||
|
|||
O'blather said:
Objectivists believe that if you can't hear it in a test, it doesn't exist. Bzzt. The real belief is that if you can't hear it, it is rendered moot. More gibberish. Do you even know what moot means? The only way your comment makes sense is if the objective is talking about audible differences, not selecting equipment to listen to music. |
#446
|
|||
|
|||
Ozark Malesweski wrote:
Gee, you had Mr. Krueger right there in the same room on 4/29/05. Did you offer "him an opportunity to say the things he had been writing on the newsgroups from behind the safety of his PC to [you] in person"? IOW, did you say "do you have something(s) to say to me face-to-face, Mr. Krueger?", or words to that effect? I didn't think so..... Scrunchy for his pony tail - $1.00 Girdle for his big gut - $35.00 4 month supply of Rogaine for what's left - $50.00 Malesweski calling someone cowardly - Priceless |
#447
|
|||
|
|||
"Joseph Oberlander" wrote
Bzzt. The real belief is that if you can't hear it, it is rendered moot. non-existent........... moot........... that makes the point SO much better. zzzzz....... |
#448
|
|||
|
|||
Arny Krueger wrote:
Atkinson apparently likes to push people's buttons and then whine when he has to face the consequences. I think that's called passive-agressive behavior. At bottom, he is a magazine salesman. Howard Ferstler |
#449
|
|||
|
|||
On Thu, 19 May 2005 10:43:41 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote: Subjectivists believe that there's something about listening to music that blind testing fails to reveal. They also believe in Mpingo disks and Shatki stones. This just shows how ignorant and biased you are, Arnold. |
#450
|
|||
|
|||
At bottom, he is a magazine salesman. Howard Ferstler And a musician, a technician, and a writer And with humor he plays it much lighter... But you're a big farce And it bugs your arse, 'Cause compared to you, he's brighter. Hammingaway |
#451
|
|||
|
|||
On Thu, 19 May 2005 13:41:37 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote: I suspect that Atkinson already had a good idea of what would happen were he to open up that phase of our discussion. He may have had good reason to believe that I do say things to people face-to-face, that would make him flinch. Well, you had your chance and you blew it. |
#452
|
|||
|
|||
dave weil wrote: On Thu, 19 May 2005 10:43:41 -0400, "Arny Krueger" wrote: Subjectivists believe that there's something about listening to music that blind testing fails to reveal. They also believe in Mpingo disks and Shatki stones. This just shows how ignorant and biased you are, Arnold. Well, _somebody_ buys that useless crap, don't they? I doubt it's the skeptical, rational, logical set, so........ |
#453
|
|||
|
|||
Howard Ferstler wrote: At bottom, [Atkinson] is a magazine salesman. Thank you, Mr. Ferstler, and a damnably good one, even if I do say so myself :-) John Atkinson Editor, Stereophile |
#454
|
|||
|
|||
the big Ozark with the little dick wrote:
He has to spew it somewhere, eh? He wasn't just spewing. He was issuing a challenge. But you knew that, chicken****. You usual response to "George" is conspicuously absent. Aren't you going to be up at Ozark Lake again soon? |
#455
|
|||
|
|||
Thank you, Mr. Ferstler, and a damnably good one, even if I do say so myself :-) Now Howie with envy is green... With insults he vents his spleen To be quite blunt.. When it comes to affront Could it be that he's the Queen? err... King, that is :-) Hammingaway |
#456
|
|||
|
|||
dave weil said to Turdborg: Well, you had your chance and you blew it. At a minimum, Krooger's performance removed any trace of doubt as to whose voice we heard on The Tape. |
#457
|
|||
|
|||
Surf said: He wasn't just spewing. He was issuing a challenge. But you knew that, chicken****. You usual response to "George" is conspicuously absent. Aren't you going to be up at Ozark Lake again soon? Anybody heard from Nexus? Maybe he and Dickie can get together to fine-tune Thing's system. You do have a nice system, right, Thing? Or did you have to hock it to pay the lawyer? ;-) |
#458
|
|||
|
|||
dave weil said: This just shows how ignorant and biased you are, Arnold. If Krooger were able to actually think about the lies and slanders before they pop out of his keyboard, he wouldn't be the Krooborg. |
#459
|
|||
|
|||
George Middius puffs up *his* feathers: snip Just tell me where and when to find you and we can go. Your asshole pal Tom Albertz thinks he has all the info, "George". Ask him for the address, phone, etc. Then, do come on by to that locale. I'm sure you'll get a warm welcome. How much do you trust Asshole Tom's info? How are the cajones, "George", got any? :-D What's that? You're too chicken**** to show your face in public? Gee=99, why I am not surprised? ;-) I say you are all wind and no sail, "George". All show, no go. Just socks stuffed in the trousers. And the same for Asshole Tom Albertz. And does Michael Klyne in Oklahoma really want in on this?. He seemed smarter than that. See ya around, "George"! Or will I??? |
#460
|
|||
|
|||
"John Atkinson" wrote in message oups.com... Howard Ferstler wrote: At bottom, [Atkinson] is a magazine salesman. Thank you, Mr. Ferstler, and a damnably good one, even if I do say so myself :-) There's this little confusion you seem to have relating to being an equipment reviewer, John. |
#461
|
|||
|
|||
Arny Krueger wrote: "John Atkinson" wrote in message oups.com... Howard Ferstler wrote: At bottom, [Atkinson] is a magazine salesman. Thank you, Mr. Ferstler, and a damnably good one, even if I do say so myself :-) There's this little confusion you seem to have relating to being an equipment reviewer, John. Keyword: Salesman |
#462
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message oups.com... Arny Krueger wrote: "John Atkinson" wrote in message oups.com... Howard Ferstler wrote: At bottom, [Atkinson] is a magazine salesman. Thank you, Mr. Ferstler, and a damnably good one, even if I do say so myself :-) There's this little confusion you seem to have relating to being an equipment reviewer, John. Keyword: Salesman Agreed. |
#463
|
|||
|
|||
|
#464
|
|||
|
|||
Michael Conzo wrote: In article , "John Atkinson" wrote: Howard Ferstler wrote: At bottom, [Atkinson] is a magazine salesman. Thank you, Mr. Ferstler, and a damnably good one, even if I do say so myself :-) John Atkinson Editor, Stereophile Just so you understand that your career has nothing to do with "audio" unlike Ferstler who has no commercial axes to grind excepting his own. Commercial interests don't look to colour his writings, but are the sole motivation in your career. Well said! |
#465
|
|||
|
|||
"Michael Conzo" wrote in message ... Arnie, Bwian McCarty and the bicycle lube man. A winners circle, no doubt! :-) Now, who has the gerbil in his.....ummm..... pocket? Cheers, Margaret |
#466
|
|||
|
|||
Richard Malesweski wrote ...
Your asshole pal Tom Albertz thinks he has all the info Why am I an asshole, dick? What have I done that you haven't done? It's OK for the goose? Why so upset? Why so ****ed? We touched a nerve? Is it true you sold the old shack in Rogers? Have you moved on to run a new scam somewhere else? Isn't Lisa going to miss you this fall? She's counting on you being there. You're her Shining Star. Right? I'm not surprised that bicycle service scam didn't work out. What were you thinking? Have you really moved on or are you just calling George's bluff? Nice PLONK, btw. This little display of yours is really empty. No new information. Just an invitation to use the info that's already been revealed. No one needs an invitation to visit Rogers, Arkansas, do they? You're pretty confident no one will travel to NWA just to find a fat, old hippy living in his parents home spending all day at the computer. Just like you were confident no one would travel to Lake of the Ozarks last time you made this big puffed up challenge. There's just not much chance of it, is there. |
#467
|
|||
|
|||
George Middius wrote: O'blather said: Objectivists believe that if you can't hear it in a test, it doesn't exist. Bzzt. The real belief is that if you can't hear it, it is rendered moot. More gibberish. Do you even know what moot means? The only way your comment makes sense is if the objective is talking about audible differences, not selecting equipment to listen to music. The difference is - since you seem to be having comprehension problems lately, George, is between "doesn't exist" and "rendered moot". Two subtle but different meanings. One leaves the door open to technical specs and an attack on that front. The other acknowledges that human hearing is inadequate to the task beyond a certain point.(so why waste your money on things only your dog can hear?) http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=rendered definition #11 is the one you are looking for. http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=moot Definition 2b at the bottom is the common useage when paired with the first word. |
#468
|
|||
|
|||
"Joseph Oberlander" wrote in message ink.net... The difference is - since you seem to be having comprehension problems lately, George, is between "doesn't exist" and "rendered moot". Two subtle but different meanings. One leaves the door open to technical specs and an attack on that front. The other acknowledges that human hearing is inadequate to the task beyond a certain point.(so why waste your money on things only your dog can hear?) Because George knows that if he keeps his sex partners happy, he gets better sex? http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=rendered definition #11 is the one you are looking for. http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=moot Definition 2b at the bottom is the common useage when paired with the first word. |
#469
|
|||
|
|||
Arny Krueger wrote: "Joseph Oberlander" wrote in message ink.net... The difference is - since you seem to be having comprehension problems lately, George, is between "doesn't exist" and "rendered moot". Two subtle but different meanings. One leaves the door open to technical specs and an attack on that front. The other acknowledges that human hearing is inadequate to the task beyond a certain point.(so why waste your money on things only your dog can hear?) Because George knows that if he keeps his sex partners happy, he gets better sex? Yikes! That gives a whole 'nother dimension to the idea of "a boy and his dog". :-O |
#470
|
|||
|
|||
In article , "Arny Krueger"
wrote: "Clyde Slick" wrote ... "Arny Krueger" wrote ... Atkinson's schtick works far less well on people who know the difference between ohms and volts. Your schtick works best on those who don't know the difference between music and two second sound snippets. It doesn't work at all on people who don't know the difference between a demonstration and a test. Please see Atkinson and Fremer for examples of such individuals. Based on his repeated loud proclamations that 5 trials constitutes a full scientific test, we find proof that Atkinson needs some education in elementary statistical analysis. Arny, would you please explain precisely what you think is the difference between a demonstration and a test? |
#471
|
|||
|
|||
John Corbett a écrit :
Arny, would you please explain precisely what you think is the difference between a demonstration and a test? A demonstration is midway between the scientifical experiment and the prestidigitation. ;-) |
#472
|
|||
|
|||
John Corbett wrote:
Arny, would you please explain precisely what you think is the difference between a demonstration and a test? Why should I John, when you obviously know the answer? And your answer is...???????????// |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
F.S. tons of studio/keyboard/rack gear | Pro Audio | |||
Powerful Argument in Favor of Agnosticism and Athetism | Audio Opinions | |||
Lots Of Great Tubes For Sale | Marketplace | |||
Lots Of Great Audio Tubes For Sale! | Marketplace |