John Atkinson wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
:
John Atkinson wrote:
dave weil wrote:
On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 11:14:37 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:
I know John is an two-faced prick.

I wonder what the Sunday choir would think about this.

I imagine they would assume that someone other than Arny wrote
that I was a "two-faced prick." As will Arny if this subject
comes up next Friday. :-)

No, Tom wrote what follows below, just as surely as I said:
"I'll try to be my usual sweet self, but you know how I can be
pompus to the point of being overbearning."

Actually, though Tom quoted you as saying that in message
, what you actually wrote was
"No doubt Mr. Atkinson will attempt to play cool, attempting to
wind me up as he is able to. I'm counting on him to be his usual
sweet self, which is to say pompus to the point of being
overbearning."

Which indeed seems to be you directing some abuse my way ahead of
your
debate on Friday. Tom merely seems to have turned your point on its
head.

Not at all. I turned Tom's forgery on its head by making it into abuse
of you, John.


The point is that Tom had lots of fun forging neat things for me
say
in his reply to my post. So since he obviously thinks this is
excellent form, I thought it would be appropriate to return the
honor.

But you didn't return it at Tom, you returned it to _me_, in
message , first by presenting
Tom
as apparently saying
I know John is an two-faced prick.

John, have you lost your mind? That was how I turned Tom's forgery on
its head!


With you then replying:
I've suspected as much, but thanks for the heads up

How is this humorous, Mr. Krueger, and how does it get back at
Tom?

Tom puts words I never said in my mouth, I put words that Tom never
said in his mouth. My words were far funnier, of course. Definately
got a rise out of you, didn't I? ;-)

Don't take it personally John.

Oh, that makes it all right then.

Well yes John, it makes it all right just like the fact that you
laugh yourself silly over all of Middius' and Roy's *humorous*
comments. Maybe I should write more about sodomizing dead boys and the
Kroobitch like they do? Would that improve your perceptions of the
humor in what I write? That's British humor for you, isn't it? ;-)

I guess your sense of humor ranks up there with Howard Ferstler's.
:-)

It's all matter of whose ox is gored, John. It's often a lot funnier
when someone you aren't in love with is the butt of the joke. I'm
sorry that you don't know this.

Incidentally, I note in another recent posting your saying that you
will be accompanied to Friday's debate by Tom Nousaine. Please
remember that I told you last December that this debate is between
the two of us. While Tom Nousaine is, of course, welcome to join
the audience, he is not free to make a presentation of his own.

Again John your paranoa and inability to read comes to light. Read
what I said, not what your paranoid mind creates. I said Nousaine is
coming along, not that he's going to speak. He may be in the audience
or he may have something more worthwhile to do at the time, like be
someplace else where's there's more intelligent life.

;-)

Howard Ferstler wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote:

Howard Ferstler wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote:

Just pulling your chain, John. ;-)

My discussion will be as technical as possible, given the
audience.

Arny, regarding that upcoming debate, I am depending on you
to hand this phony his head. Pull his chain a few times for
me, too, while you are at it.

No doubt Mr. Atkinson will attempt to play cool, attempting to wind
me up as he is able to. I'm counting on him to be his usual sweet
self, which is to say pompus to the point of being overbearning.

Remember that this guy is:

1) Trying to protect his magazine.

2) Trying to protect his job at that magazine.

He will perform as any con artist would when backed into a
corner. He has a LOT more to lose than either you or I, and
he is fully aware of this.

I agree with all of the above. I can't believe that he has been so
foolish as to do this.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

God has been good and some of all of the above has already taken
place. There have been some important organizational changes, there
are moves afoot to make some changes to the room, the SR system has
improved and may shortly be getting far better, and the recorder is
now a 20 track backed up with a CD-R recorder. I've learned a few
things along the way, too.



If God is so good, he should have fixed the crack in your foundation wall.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Clyde Slick said:

If God is so good, he should have fixed the crack in your foundation wall.

"foundation wall" -- nice euphemism.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...


. Maybe I should write more about sodomizing dead boys and the
Kroobitch like they do?

You tell me, should you?



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
Margaret von B. wrote:
"John Atkinson" wrote in message
oups.com...

Arny Krueger wrote:
Robert Morein wrote:
I seem to recall that Cory was dropped by Stereophile for similar
misconduct.

He wasn't dropped that hard bt SP - they still have articles on
their site that mention him favorably.

Corey Greenberg (not "burg") left Stereophile in 1994. He
wanted/needed more money/responsibility; I wasn't in the position
to
give him either. His final review was of the Snell Type C/V
loudspeaker in November 1994.

I thought that someone with deeper pockets hired him.

He left Stereophile to join Home Theater magazine, then Sound &
Vision, then Audio where he was the final editor in chief before
that
magazine's demise.

Regarding the question in your thread title, Mr. Krueger, the
answer
is "no." I have fired writers for behaving in this manner.

Really John? Who?

Great question - don't hold your breath for the answer!



I guess you're right. It is easy to make claims but much more difficult to
back them up. Shame on you, John!


Cheers,

MvB

Margaret von B. wrote:
It is easy to make claims but much more difficult to
back them up. Shame on you, John!

Margaret, I didn't think appropriate to give the writer's name.
But he doesn't work for Stereophile any longer. -- John

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

John Atkinson wrote:

Margaret von B. wrote:

It is easy to make claims but much more difficult to
back them up. Shame on you, John!

Margaret, I didn't think appropriate to give the writer's name.
But he doesn't work for Stereophile any longer. -- John

My guess is Jonathan Scull, for twofold reasons:
1. Bullying manufacturers for "permanent loan" of expensive
components for favorable reviews, and
2. The hatchet job on the Richard Grey Power Company
surge protectors.

A lack of denial will serve as confirmation. OK, John?


GeoSynch

GeoSynch wrote:
John Atkinson wrote:
I didn't think appropriate to give the writer's name.
But he doesn't work for Stereophile any longer.

My guess is Jonathan Scull...

No.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

John Atkinson said:

I didn't think appropriate to give the writer's name.
But he doesn't work for Stereophile any longer.

My guess is Jonathan Scull...

No.


Apocryphal stories don't need to be connected to actual events for their
import to be understood. (Take note, Harold.)

Arny Krueger wrote:

Howard Ferstler wrote:

Remember that this guy is:

1) Trying to protect his magazine.

2) Trying to protect his job at that magazine.

He will perform as any con artist would when backed into a
corner. He has a LOT more to lose than either you or I, and
he is fully aware of this.

I agree with all of the above. I can't believe that he has been so
foolish as to do this.

Yes, and because of this he will be desperate to defend his
turf and will become more desperate if things start to look
bad for him during the debate. A good debater will
capitalize on this and hit him in his weakest areas. Find
the weaknesses and then drive the spike home.

Remember, this guy, for all of his posturing about defending
high-end audio, defending his approach to DBT work,
defending his antipathy for you, and defending his magazine,
is more than anything else very, very interested in gaining
the esteem of the really big names in audio engineering.
That just has to mean a LOT to him.

He wants to be taken seriously by people who know a lot
about acoustics, electronics, and audio in general. Right
now, this is not the case, but he is working to improve him
image. He is in a very bad place to be, because he wants to
look like a hero to the tweakos, but he also wants to have
the respect of the experts. And that is IMPOSSIBLE to do in
this business. You need to make sure that this contrast is
very clear to the more intelligent and influential members
of the audio community.

Your job, "should you decide to take on the task, Mr.
Krueger" (with a nod to Mission Impossible), is to make him
look like a knowledge-ignoring propagandist for tweako
audio. No matter what, you need to get the members of the
engineering establishment in a position to sneer at this man
and what he stands for even more than they do now. That will
do him more harm than proving a few small points about ABX
or even putting his job at Stereophile at risk.

Howard Ferstler

John Atkinson wrote:

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
:

Don't take it personally John.

Oh, that makes it all right then. I guess your sense of humor
ranks up there with Howard Ferstler's. :-)

I certainly hope so.

Incidentally, I note in another recent posting your saying that you
will be accompanied to Friday's debate by Tom Nousaine. Please
remember that I told you last December that this debate is between
the two of us. While Tom Nousaine is, of course, welcome to join
the audience, he is not free to make a presentation of his own.

I am sure that Tom will be more than able to ask questions
after the debate that you will cause you to squirm a bit. He
does not need to do a presentation to do an "Emperor Has No
Clothes" operation on you, John.

I simply cannot believe that you have put yourself into a
position like this, where an outsider with essentially
nothing to lose will be in a position to cause you great
harm. I mean, a guy like you has to both want the esteem of
the tweakos and also want the esteem of the
audio-engineering establishment. You may make the tweakos
happy during this "debate," but your position with the
engineers is going to suffer in a big way. I mean, you are
actually going to have to come right out and say things that
real audio engineers consider to be a joke.

Howard Ferstler

Howard Ferstler wrote:

Your job, "should you decide to take on the task, Mr.
Krueger" (with a nod to Mission Impossible), is to make him
look like a knowledge-ignoring propagandist for tweako
audio.

I'll leave that to his own sweet self.

My plan is to implement the rule: "Keep it simple, stupid".

No matter what, you need to get the members of the
engineering establishment in a position to sneer at this man
and what he stands for even more than they do now.

They do that plenty, already. If that was my only goal, I'd be done
already.

That will do him more harm than proving a few small points about ABX
or even putting his job at Stereophile at risk.

I don't want to hurt him. If he does that to himself, so be it.

George "Betty Boop Middius wrote:

Apocryphal stories don't need to be connected to actual events for their
import to be understood. (Take note, Harold.)

Whaoooo !
What a conceited sententious discourse George!!!...
Are you sure that such simplistic point of view need so much pomp ?

:-D






----------
Sent via SPRACI - http://www.spraci.com/ - Parties,Raves,Clubs,Festivals

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...

Your job, "should you decide to take on the task, Mr.
Krueger" (with a nod to Mission Impossible),

It was nice, seeing your wrecking ball self destruct in thirty seconds.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Arny Krueger wrote:


Greenberg, an NBC contributor, confirmed
yesterday that he has received payments from Apple as well as Sony,
Hewlett-Packard, Seiko Epson, Creative Technology and Energizer
Holdings, charging $15,000 apiece to talk up their products on news
shows.


That's the essence of what Greenberg learned from Atkinson: money buys
good press, good reviews and "buzz". $tereopile launders the money they
take from manufacturers under the guise of "advertising revenue". The
quid pro quo, of course, is a good review and a place on the RCL.
Greenberg got lazy (or stupid) and omitted the laundering step, making
the payola aspect brutally obvious.