Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#402
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
Lionel wrote:
John Atkinson wrote: Arny Krueger wrote John Atkinson wrote And as I have also pointed out, as by your own admission you have not actually _read_ the article in the January 1986 issue of Hi-Fi News in which the results were presented, any specific comments you make regarding those results are suspect. I seem to recall that in middle-late 2002 someone provided me with a copy of it, and I read it. It may have been earlier, but it was no later than this. I don't remember too much about it because it was quite obviously ********. "Obviously ********"? Okay, Mr. Krueger, I know Tom Nousaine has a copy of this article. But without any help from Tom and without him sending you _his_ copy, what was the number of identifications of absolute polarity out of how many attempts listed at the foot of the first column on the second page? Since you are requesting evidences please don't forget to supply us with the evidence of Mr Krueger manipulation on his web site by the begining of January. Supply the evidence? You're a silly clown Lionel. The evidence being requested upon your heartthrob was in demand to substantiate the claim he made wrt to the "article" being ******** which, btw, remain elusive to this point... Don't forget that you said that you have a copy of the original screen on your hard disk... As usual, feel free to ignore this request. .... yet here you are, attempting to compare this dissimilar, irrelevant position to forcefully push an argument to press for consistency. This is not a reasonable request and there's no logical reason to comply unless you hero provide evidence to substatntiate his claim when he said that the said article was "********." If you wish to press for consistency, you must oblige and follow the Question-Answer rules in an open dialogue. |
#403
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
ScottW wrote:
John Atkinson wrote Lionel wrote John Atkinson wrote: Arny Krueger wrote I seem to recall that in middle-late 2002 someone provided me with a copy of it, and I read it. It may have been earlier, but it was no later than this. I don't remember too much about it because it was quite obviously ********. "Obviously ********"? Okay, Mr. Krueger, I know Tom Nousaine has a copy of this article. But without any help from Tom and without him sending you _his_ copy, what was the number of identifications of absolute polarity out of how many attempts listed at the foot of the first column on the second page? Since you are requesting evidences please don't forget to supply us with the evidence of Mr Krueger manipulation on his web site by the begining of January. Hi Lionel, it seems like a reasonable request for you to make. And I have no logical reason not to comply. But Lionel, if you insist (correctly) to demand proof of what they say from people like me, aren't you obliged also to demand the same of Mr. Krueger. No, he isn't. You're wrong about that. Unless your standards are no higher than Arny's. You might as well add Lionel' in there. Is that the case here John? You choose to set your standards based upon the actions of Arny? You too are engaging in a distraction using Arny's lack of personal standard as a "false analogy" in comparing dissimilar attribute to forcefully press for consistency. But more than that, you are grotesquely attempting to shift the burden of reply in order to accuse an opposer of failing to be consistent. Further, you puckishly uses the mechanism of circumstantial argument which is: failure to elevate oneself from arny's lack of standard-- just so you can shift the burden of reply (proof) towards the opposition. Shame on you. Pathetic crap people use to rationalize their own behavior. Hahah, swing away man. Admit you stepped into the swamp and Lionel called you on it. Admit that you step into a swamp and a clown trick you to it. Not a big deal, we've all made mistakes. But rationalizing a mistake will not lead you from the swamp, you will become the swamp. Rationalizing a mistake? Care to elaborate? In the past Arny Krueger has refused to substantiate a large number of offensive accusations he has made of me. For example, he has accused me of sending him child pornography; of encouraging people to make fun of the tragic death of his son Nate; of defaulting on a $150 payment he claims I owe him; and on and on. In every case, Mr. Krueger has refused either to provide substantiation or to withdraw the accusations when he was unable to do so. He has even claimed that his word that such things happened should be sufficient, that he is _not_ obliged to provide proof. For example, see message om where Mr. Krueger wrote: "I believe I've said that I will respond...or not in accordance with my own personal wishes. If I haven't said it before, this statement should suffice." Yeah, yeah, yeah, Arny's a ****head? What's your excuse? You want an excuse for wanting to level the playing field? No, no, it's you. What's your excuse? So, when Mr. Krueger either supplies proof for or withdraws these offensive and untrue accusations he has publicly made of me, then and only then will I consider sending you, for example, a screenshot supporting what I wrote about Mr. Krueger's jitter measurements. Arny isn't the only one reading your posts you know. Have you no concern about your own credibility? This is Krooglish, and therefore rejected. You appear to be at a crossroads here. Will you choose to hold yourself to a higher standard or will you let the abhorrent actions of Arny beget the same from you? Are you saying that one must be held accountable for Arny's abhorrent lack of standard? ScottW |
#404
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
JBorg a écrit :
Lionel wrote: John Atkinson wrote: Arny Krueger wrote John Atkinson wrote And as I have also pointed out, as by your own admission you have not actually _read_ the article in the January 1986 issue of Hi-Fi News in which the results were presented, any specific comments you make regarding those results are suspect. I seem to recall that in middle-late 2002 someone provided me with a copy of it, and I read it. It may have been earlier, but it was no later than this. I don't remember too much about it because it was quite obviously ********. "Obviously ********"? Okay, Mr. Krueger, I know Tom Nousaine has a copy of this article. But without any help from Tom and without him sending you _his_ copy, what was the number of identifications of absolute polarity out of how many attempts listed at the foot of the first column on the second page? Since you are requesting evidences please don't forget to supply us with the evidence of Mr Krueger manipulation on his web site by the begining of January. Supply the evidence? You're a silly clown Lionel. Yes you're right. ;-) Is the dialogue open now ? |
#405
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
JBorg a écrit :
Supply the evidence? You're a silly clown Lionel. Yes you're right. Is the dialogue open now ? ;-) |
#406
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
... "John Atkinson" wrote in message . com In message Arny Krueger ) wrote: "John Atkinson" wrote: In message , Arny Krueger ) wrote: Considering for example the fact that [John Atkinson] couldn't find my PCAVTech web site last New Year's Eve, you have very little to complain about. I never wrote that I couldn't find his "PCAVTech website." That was another poster, Stephen McElroy ("MINe 109") in message . I never had problems accessing Mr. Krueger's website, complete with its broken links and missing graphics. I _did_ have difficulty accessing two specific pages on that website. This has all been explained to Atkinson recently and he chooses not to believe the explanations. You miss the point Mr. Krueger. You wrote that I "couldn't find [your] PCAVTech web site last New Year's Eve." I never said I couldn't find the site. That was someone else. As I wrote to "Lionel," you can't even admit you were wrong even when it was something as trivial as this. Sure I can. I was wrong when I said you couldn't find my entire web site, except I didn't say that you couldn't find my entire web site. Sigh. Thus Arny Krueger caps yet another waste of my time arguing, not with me but with himself! I point out that he was incorrect to state that I couldn't find his "PCAVTech website" and that even in such an inconsequential matter as this he was unable to admit his error. Arny Krueger responds by saying that "sure" he would admit his error, _except_ that he didn't say that I couldn't find his "entire web site" even though his exact text is quoted immediately above my own statement: "[John Atkinson] couldn't find my PCAVTech web site last New Year's Eve..." Go on, Mr. Krueger. Admit you were wrong, with no "ifs" and "buts." Admit that you had confused me with Stephen McElroy. Or are you once again going to retreat into the classic argument you expressed in message .com: "Had I said what I meant then I would be unquestionably correct." Unfortunately, in this instance you didn't say what you meant, Mr. Krueger. For you to continue to insist otherwise, by pretending that "entire website" means something different from the unmodified word "website" is simply more evidence that, as an audio engineer expressed to me at the recent CES, "Arny Krueger is simply insane." And you still haven't worked out why the table on your website doesn't say what you think it says. Here's a clue: You toss a coin 20 times and get 19 heads and 1 tail. Your table claims that result is 99.9% due to chance. Is the table correct, or it it, in your famous words, "lying to you." :-) John Atkinson Editor, Stereophile |
#407
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
|
#408
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
dave weil said: Arny Krueger responds by saying that "sure" he would admit his error, _except_ that he didn't say that I couldn't find his "entire web site" even though his exact text is quoted immediately above my own statement: "[John Atkinson] couldn't find my PCAVTech web site last New Year's Eve..." I think he's still hung over from the "downers" party that he went to this weekend. Maybe he needs to check himself in to rehab. Is there a treatment for malfunctioning nanites? ;-) |
#409
|
|||
|
|||
Question for Mr ****
PD said to ****-for-Brains: Why do you persist in erroneously referring to Mr Wheeler as a "sockpuppet"? I think it's part of Krooger's therapy. |
#410
|
|||
|
|||
Question for Mr ****
"Le Artiste" wrote in message ... "Arny Krueger" emitted : "S888Wheel" wrote in message I'll see if I can find a disk that I can sacrifice. Do you see why this would be counterintuitive though? If the velocity is constant but the distance travelled (sic) is reduced, it seems that the time between tics would also be reduced. What am I missing? The velocity speed is constant. You must have lied about the three semesters of Physics sockpuppet Why do you persist in erroneously referring to Mr Wheeler as a "sockpuppet"? Because he has delusions that a sockpuppet can't sue him for $25,000. ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Alpine CD Changer Ejecting Magazine | Car Audio | |||
Remove magazine from Sony CDX-656 changer | Car Audio | |||
- TAS magazine Website Updated - | Audio Opinions | |||
- TAS Magazine Website Updated - | General | |||
Car Audio Magazine back issues | Car Audio |