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.

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.
;-)

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

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

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.

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

"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.......

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

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.

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

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.

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........

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

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?

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

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.

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? ;-)

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.

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???

"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.

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

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.

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.

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!

"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

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.

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.

"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.

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

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?

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.

;-)

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...???????????//