Hello there, Arny.

Remember posting this a few days ago?

-----

"The Devil" wrote in message
newsm73ov48g3llumqbdtsfcn7mp1ht6uc3k0@rdmzrnewst xt.nz
On Mon, 6 Oct 2003 10:12:19 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

Research published recently discovered the worst place to store them
is in the dark, Mr Computer Expert.

Prove it! It would be genuinely interesting Graham if you weren't
lying your ass off this one time.

Now what did I say to you, you stupid, disgusting, putrescent piece of
**** leftover?

Some that comes out something like: "I, Graham am lying my ass off,
again".

If anyone else would like a link to the research, feel free to email
me. The only condition is that you don't tell Arnii.

translation: Graham is caught lying, again. He was much more
successful
publishing his pedophile fantasies on RAO. Middius and Singh loved
'em.

-----

Well, here is a link to the story. There is a link within the story to
the research.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/54/32593.html

Are you going to apologise now?

--
td

P.S. Well done on the lawsuit. I knew you'd come through for me.

P.P.S This is The Devil, by the way, just in case you were thinking of
an ignorance defense.

"The Stainless Steel Boob Orchestra" wrote in message
news:55pdov4is2ce4mrqsskc6e0l1v6tp97q4t@rdmzrnewst xt.nz...
Hello there, Arny.

Remember posting this a few days ago?

-----

"The Devil" wrote in message
newsm73ov48g3llumqbdtsfcn7mp1ht6uc3k0@rdmzrnewst xt.nz
On Mon, 6 Oct 2003 10:12:19 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

Research published recently discovered the worst place to store them
is in the dark, Mr Computer Expert.

Prove it! It would be genuinely interesting Graham if you weren't
lying your ass off this one time.

Now what did I say to you, you stupid, disgusting, putrescent piece of
**** leftover?

Some that comes out something like: "I, Graham am lying my ass off,
again".

If anyone else would like a link to the research, feel free to email
me. The only condition is that you don't tell Arnii.

translation: Graham is caught lying, again. He was much more
successful
publishing his pedophile fantasies on RAO. Middius and Singh loved
'em.

-----

Well, here is a link to the story. There is a link within the story to
the research.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/54/32593.html

Are you going to apologise now?

The "Devil" is correct in that the article does appear to say this.
However, it appears to be an example of sloppy journalism.
The results are reasonable. But it's an incorrect inference to conclude that
dark storage is worse than light storage.
IMHO, the correct interpretation is that poor quality CDs can degrade
quickly even in the dark.

It is still an authoritative contradiction of Arny's ignorant sound-off on
the subject of CD brand selection.

Bobo said:

It is still an authoritative contradiction of Arny's ignorant sound-off on
the subject of CD brand selection.

Did you notice that Obie has allowed Mr. **** to return to his good
graces? I assume you're still resisting the siren song of the sameness
religion. Maybe you need to see Dr. Phlox for some Kroo-radiation
blocker though. Just in case.

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


Bobo said:

It is still an authoritative contradiction of Arny's ignorant sound-off
on
the subject of CD brand selection.

Did you notice that Obie has allowed Mr. **** to return to his good
graces? I assume you're still resisting the siren song of the sameness
religion. Maybe you need to see Dr. Phlox for some Kroo-radiation
blocker though. Just in case.


Us nihilists are immune.

Robert Morein wrote:

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


Bobo said:


It is still an authoritative contradiction of Arny's ignorant sound-off

on

the subject of CD brand selection.

Did you notice that Obie has allowed Mr. **** to return to his good
graces? I assume you're still resisting the siren song of the sameness
religion. Maybe you need to see Dr. Phlox for some Kroo-radiation
blocker though. Just in case.



Us nihilists are immune.


George crusade has no limit. Like a kamikaze he is ready to eat his
balls to fight Krueger. ;-)

"Robert Morein" wrote in message


The "Devil" is correct in that the article does appear to say this.

Only for sloppy readers. The lead-off sentence says:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/54/32593.html

"Keeping data CDs in the dark for two years isn't a good idea."

It doesn't say keeping data in the dark isn't a good idea, it says that
keeping it in the dark for two years isn't a good idea. Then the article
goes on to say something significantly different from that:

"According to the Dutch magazine PC Active some CD-Rs degrade in months,
even at room temperature without sunlight."

The word "some" is key. It says that these findings don't apply to all CDs,
but only some of them. Apparently some where some place there are CDs that
are so crappy that they can't be stored for as short as 2 years under good
conditions, without degrading unacceptably.

However, it appears to be an example of sloppy journalism.

You got that right!

The results are reasonable.

In the sense that some CDs are so crappy that even when stored in accordance
with accepted methodologies, they don't last two years.

But it's an incorrect inference to
conclude that dark storage is worse than light storage.

Agreed.

IMHO, the correct interpretation is that poor quality CDs can degrade
quickly even in the dark.

Agreed.

It is still an authoritative contradiction of Arny's ignorant
sound-off on the subject of CD brand selection.

Drop the word "ignorant", and I won't point out how much I had to beat on
you Bob, to get you to produce references that supported your claims.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Robert Morein" wrote in message


The "Devil" is correct in that the article does appear to say this.

Only for sloppy readers. The lead-off sentence says:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/54/32593.html

"Keeping data CDs in the dark for two years isn't a good idea."

It doesn't say keeping data in the dark isn't a good idea, it says that
keeping it in the dark for two years isn't a good idea. Then the article
goes on to say something significantly different from that:

"According to the Dutch magazine PC Active some CD-Rs degrade in months,
even at room temperature without sunlight."

The word "some" is key. It says that these findings don't apply to all
CDs,
but only some of them. Apparently some where some place there are CDs that
are so crappy that they can't be stored for as short as 2 years under good
conditions, without degrading unacceptably.

However, it appears to be an example of sloppy journalism.

You got that right!

The results are reasonable.

In the sense that some CDs are so crappy that even when stored in
accordance
with accepted methodologies, they don't last two years.

But it's an incorrect inference to
conclude that dark storage is worse than light storage.

Agreed.

IMHO, the correct interpretation is that poor quality CDs can degrade
quickly even in the dark.

Agreed.

It is still an authoritative contradiction of Arny's ignorant
sound-off on the subject of CD brand selection.

Drop the word "ignorant", and I won't point out how much I had to beat on
you Bob, to get you to produce references that supported your claims.

The word "ignorant" was very appropriately used on that occasion.
You, as a master of the debating trade, implicitly shifted the burden of
proof to your challenger, a devious and unjustified thing.

You made a statement, in your typical pontifical fashion, and got shot down.
Rather than openly admit your mistake (which would have actually made you
look good), you chose to attack your correctors.
Your mistake is very obvious to everyone except you. You share this personal
characteristic with Singh.

On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 14:54:04 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

The word "some" is key. It says that these findings don't apply to all CDs,
but only some of them.

s******

On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 15:04:58 -0400, "Robert Morein"
wrote:

You made a statement, in your typical pontifical fashion, and got shot down.
Rather than openly admit your mistake (which would have actually made you
look good), you chose to attack your correctors.

Well, yes. Arnold rarely admits his mistakes. Were you expecting
otherwise? Note the gobbledy gook that he spouted to try and obsfucate
the fact that he was wrong.

Just like the mistake he made when he talked about "prepackaged sets"
of Silver Flute drivers. Note the notable silence on this issue, note.

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
news

You share this personal
characteristic with Singh.


That's a two point penalty for a low blow.




----== 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 =---

Sockpuppet Yustabe said:

You share this personal characteristic with Singh.

That's a two point penalty for a low blow.

Kroo**** is still more odious than Gregipus, don't you think?

George M. Middius wrote:

Sockpuppet Yustabe said:


You share this personal characteristic with Singh.



That's a two point penalty for a low blow.


Kroo**** is still more odious than Gregipus, don't you think?


Please a top 10 Middius !
And as usual don't be modest. ;-)

Robert Morein wrote:

Your mistake is very obvious to everyone except you. You share this personal
characteristic with Singh.


Now that's just weird. I was right and you were wrong about my
speakers, if dave's opinion is to be trusted. I assume you were
planning to apologize. Can you hurry up, weiner?

dave weil wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 15:04:58 -0400, "Robert Morein"
wrote:


You made a statement, in your typical pontifical fashion, and got shot down.
Rather than openly admit your mistake (which would have actually made you
look good), you chose to attack your correctors.


Well, yes. Arnold rarely admits his mistakes. Were you expecting
otherwise? Note the gobbledy gook that he spouted to try and obsfucate
the fact that he was wrong.

Just like the mistake he made when he talked about "prepackaged sets"
of Silver Flute drivers. Note the notable silence on this issue, note.



"Devil's", too.

"trotsky" wrote in message
...


Robert Morein wrote:

Your mistake is very obvious to everyone except you. You share this
personal
characteristic with Singh.


Now that's just weird. I was right and you were wrong about my
speakers, if dave's opinion is to be trusted. I assume you were
planning to apologize. Can you hurry up, weiner?

Dave's review was cut short by your interference, and rightfully so.

George M. Middius wrote:


Sockpuppet Yustabe said:

You share this personal characteristic with Singh.

That's a two point penalty for a low blow.

Kroo**** is still more odious than Gregipus, don't you think?










Yes, but they have a tremendous number of similar personal traits. Lack of
credibility, arrogance, dishonesty, questionable contact with reality,
delusional thinking, and many more flaws.
Of course, they also both exhibit a lack of insight which has never been
matched on RAO. Whether they share the same paranoid conspiracy theories or
listen to the same voices telling them how to act and think is harder to tell.




Bruce J. Richman

"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message


writing about Krueger and Middius

Yes, but they have a tremendous number of similar personal traits.
Lack of credibility, arrogance, dishonesty, questionable contact with
reality, delusional thinking, and many more flaws.

Of course, they also both exhibit a lack of insight which has never
been matched on RAO. Whether they share the same paranoid conspiracy
theories or listen to the same voices telling them how to act and
think is harder to tell.

One thing about Richman, his reality has a lot to do with which way the wind
blows. Now that Middius is falling out of favor, Richman's eyes have been
magically opened!

"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message
...
George M. Middius wrote:


Sockpuppet Yustabe said:

You share this personal characteristic with Singh.

That's a two point penalty for a low blow.

Kroo**** is still more odious than Gregipus, don't you think?


Yes, but they have a tremendous number of similar personal traits. Lack
of
credibility, arrogance, dishonesty, questionable contact with reality,
delusional thinking, and many more flaws.
Of course, they also both exhibit a lack of insight which has never been
matched on RAO. Whether they share the same paranoid conspiracy theories
or
listen to the same voices telling them how to act and think is harder to
tell.

The similarities are marked. The principle difference, IMHO, is that Krueger
has a messiah complex, while Gregipus is a narcissist.
Each has a disconnect with what other people think about them, and their
activities.
In each case, the victim's self-esteem is confused with nonexistent esteem
they imagine to be given by others.

These individuals are extremely egotistical and extremely self-centered.
Their defects are made visible by a lack of social poise.

Krueger is more irritating because the messiah complex is a more powerful
social irritant than narcissism. If Gregipus wants to masturbate in front of
a mirror all day, it hardly bothers us. It's only when he posts "look how
beautiful I am to r.a.o." that he becomes a subject of amusement. Gregipus
also would like to be an irritant, because it makes him feel intelligent,
but he lacks Krueger's messianic desire to destroy other people's forms of
discrimination and appreciation.

Robert Morein wrote:
"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message
...

George M. Middius wrote:



Sockpuppet Yustabe said:


You share this personal characteristic with Singh.

That's a two point penalty for a low blow.

Kroo**** is still more odious than Gregipus, don't you think?


Yes, but they have a tremendous number of similar personal traits. Lack

of

credibility, arrogance, dishonesty, questionable contact with reality,
delusional thinking, and many more flaws.
Of course, they also both exhibit a lack of insight which has never been
matched on RAO. Whether they share the same paranoid conspiracy theories

or

listen to the same voices telling them how to act and think is harder to

tell.

The similarities are marked. The principle difference, IMHO, is that Krueger
has a messiah complex, while Gregipus is a narcissist.
Each has a disconnect with what other people think about them, and their
activities.
In each case, the victim's self-esteem is confused with nonexistent esteem
they imagine to be given by others.

These individuals are extremely egotistical and extremely self-centered.
Their defects are made visible by a lack of social poise.

Krueger is more irritating because the messiah complex is a more powerful
social irritant than narcissism. If Gregipus wants to masturbate in front of
a mirror all day, it hardly bothers us. It's only when he posts "look how
beautiful I am to r.a.o." that he becomes a subject of amusement. Gregipus
also would like to be an irritant, because it makes him feel intelligent,
but he lacks Krueger's messianic desire to destroy other people's forms of
discrimination and appreciation.


Who is psychologist ? ;-)

Bobo said:

Krueger is more irritating because the messiah complex is a more powerful
social irritant than narcissism. If Gregipus wants to masturbate in front of
a mirror all day, it hardly bothers us.

If you ever say "Mommy****er", Krooger will accuse you of being my
sockpuppet. Or vice-versa.

"Lionel" wrote in message
...
Robert Morein wrote:
"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message
...

George M. Middius wrote:



Sockpuppet Yustabe said:


You share this personal characteristic with Singh.

That's a two point penalty for a low blow.

Kroo**** is still more odious than Gregipus, don't you think?


Yes, but they have a tremendous number of similar personal traits. Lack

of

credibility, arrogance, dishonesty, questionable contact with reality,
delusional thinking, and many more flaws.
Of course, they also both exhibit a lack of insight which has never been
matched on RAO. Whether they share the same paranoid conspiracy
theories

or

listen to the same voices telling them how to act and think is harder to

tell.

The similarities are marked. The principle difference, IMHO, is that
Krueger
has a messiah complex, while Gregipus is a narcissist.
Each has a disconnect with what other people think about them, and their
activities.
In each case, the victim's self-esteem is confused with nonexistent
esteem
they imagine to be given by others.

These individuals are extremely egotistical and extremely self-centered.
Their defects are made visible by a lack of social poise.

Krueger is more irritating because the messiah complex is a more
powerful
social irritant than narcissism. If Gregipus wants to masturbate in
front of
a mirror all day, it hardly bothers us. It's only when he posts "look
how
beautiful I am to r.a.o." that he becomes a subject of amusement.
Gregipus
also would like to be an irritant, because it makes him feel
intelligent,
but he lacks Krueger's messianic desire to destroy other people's forms
of
discrimination and appreciation.


Who is psychologist ? ;-)

Half of us are. We've become distracted from subjects of importance, like
crossover distortion .

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


Sockpuppet Yustabe said:

You share this personal characteristic with Singh.

That's a two point penalty for a low blow.

Kroo**** is still more odious than Gregipus, don't you think?


Absolutuely
Not even close




----== 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 =---

Sockpuppet Yustabe said:

Kroo**** is still more odious than Gregipus, don't you think?

Absolutuely
Not even close

It certainly is close.

Krueger's reading comprehension problems are displayed for RAO as follows:


"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message


writing about Krueger and Middius


Note that Krueger has deliberately deleted and distorted the post to which I
responded - which had NOTHING TO DO WITH similarities between Krueger and
Middius. What I had to say was as follows:

Message-id:

George M. Middius wrote:


Sockpuppet Yustabe said:

You share this personal characteristic with Singh.

That's a two point penalty for a low blow.

Kroo**** is still more odious than Gregipus, don't you think?










Yes, but they have a tremendous number of similar personal traits. Lack of
credibility, arrogance, dishonesty, questionable contact with reality,
delusional thinking, and many more flaws.
Of course, they also both exhibit a lack of insight which has never been
matched on RAO. Whether they share the same paranoid conspiracy theories or
listen to the same voices telling them how to act and think is harder to tell.




Bruce J. Richman
------------------------------------------------------------

Note that the compulsive liar and fraudulent poster, Krueger, tried to delete
the above post to create the phony and false impression that I was talking
about him and Middius. As the above post clearly, illustrates, I was pointing
out the many obvious similarities between Krueger and Singh.














Yes, but they have a tremendous number of similar personal traits.
Lack of credibility, arrogance, dishonesty, questionable contact with
reality, delusional thinking, and many more flaws.

Of course, they also both exhibit a lack of insight which has never
been matched on RAO. Whether they share the same paranoid conspiracy
theories or listen to the same voices telling them how to act and
think is harder to tell.

One thing about Richman, his reality has a lot to do with which way the wind
blows. Now that Middius is falling out of favor, Richman's eyes have been
magically opened!


Krueger can always be counted on, as I've demonstrated above, to try and
misrepresent what I and many other people have actually written. Since he's
tried to build his career on fabrications and deliberate distortions of
whatever people have said, it's not surprising that his pathetiuc attempts to
fool the public are so quickly and easily exposed. When it comes to lack of
contact with reality, the above set of lies from Krueger is just the latest in
a long history of documented examples.



Bruce J. Richman

Robert Morein wrote:


Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message
...
George M. Middius wrote:


Sockpuppet Yustabe said:

You share this personal characteristic with Singh.

That's a two point penalty for a low blow.

Kroo**** is still more odious than Gregipus, don't you think?


Yes, but they have a tremendous number of similar personal traits. Lack
of
credibility, arrogance, dishonesty, questionable contact with reality,
delusional thinking, and many more flaws.
Of course, they also both exhibit a lack of insight which has never been
matched on RAO. Whether they share the same paranoid conspiracy theories
or
listen to the same voices telling them how to act and think is harder to
tell.

The similarities are marked. The principle difference, IMHO, is that Krueger
has a messiah complex, while Gregipus is a narcissist.

Yes, the similarities are quite striking. Of course, they both think their
"mission" in life is to impart their undisputed, unverifiable "knowledge" to
all the undereducated subjectivist hobbyists who have the audacity to engage in
individual preferences when auditioning products. The level of arrogance
exhibited by both is pretty despicable and laughable.


Each has a disconnect with what other people think about them, and their
activities.

For sure.


In each case, the victim's self-esteem is confused with nonexistent esteem
they imagine to be given by others.

These individuals are extremely egotistical and extremely self-centered.
Their defects are made visible by a lack of social poise.

Krueger is more irritating because the messiah complex is a more powerful
social irritant than narcissism. If Gregipus wants to masturbate in front of
a mirror all day, it hardly bothers us. It's only when he posts "look how
beautiful I am to r.a.o." that he becomes a subject of amusement. Gregipus
also would like to be an irritant, because it makes him feel intelligent,
but he lacks Krueger's messianic desire to destroy other people's forms of
discrimination and appreciation.






Bruce J. Richman

Bruce J. Richman said:

The similarities are marked. The principle difference, IMHO, is that Krueger
has a messiah complex, while Gregipus is a narcissist.

Yes, the similarities are quite striking. Of course, they both think their
"mission" in life is to impart their undisputed, unverifiable "knowledge" to
all the undereducated subjectivist hobbyists who have the audacity to engage in
individual preferences when auditioning products. The level of arrogance
exhibited by both is pretty despicable and laughable.

Indeed it is.

One point you might want to consider. Admittedly, comparing those two
is like discussing the relative merits of two kinds of mildew growing
on the shower curtain. Krooger indeed wants to believe himself the
great audio savior. His need for approbation is so great that he has
convinced himself he wins all of his "audio debates". Furthermore, his
frequent claims about the reasons for his presence on RAO are utterly
fatuous. Mr. **** claims to encourage "audio content" -- a total lie.
He also fraudulently claims that he "hangs around" RAO to help
newbies, even though he has condemned this group as hopeless. Nobody
is quicker than Krooger to attack a newbie for a "wrong opinion". The
levels of delusion Turdy has built up to protect his fantasies about
himself are both repugnant and perversely fascinating.

Gregipus, however, doesn't even pretend to want to help others. Notice
how he goes out of his way to pick fights, even more aggressively than
Krooger does? Unlike Krooger, Gregipus doesn't want recognition for
his supposed generosity. What he wants is to be acknowledged by one
and all as the world's foremost authority on audio. He believes he
knows all there is to know about marketing by virtue of having toiled
on the front lines of audio retail. He believes he knows all there is
to know about designing speakers by virtue of his alleged E.E. degree
and his one week of research. He believes he has an unsurpassed
hearing acuity. Far from using the wondrous knowledge he believes he
possesses for the betterment of others, he wants to use it as a club.

So I agree with Bobo. Gregipus is far more narcissistic (albeit
delusionally) than he is messianic.

Le Sat, 11 Oct 2003 01:40:45 -0400, George M. Middius
,
a écrit :



Bruce J. Richman said:

The similarities are marked. The principle difference, IMHO, is that Krueger
has a messiah complex, while Gregipus is a narcissist.

Yes, the similarities are quite striking. Of course, they both think their
"mission" in life is to impart their undisputed, unverifiable "knowledge" to
all the undereducated subjectivist hobbyists who have the audacity to engage in
individual preferences when auditioning products. The level of arrogance
exhibited by both is pretty despicable and laughable.

Indeed it is.

One point you might want to consider. Admittedly, comparing those two
is like discussing the relative merits of two kinds of mildew growing
on the shower curtain. Krooger indeed wants to believe himself the
great audio savior. His need for approbation is so great that he has
convinced himself he wins all of his "audio debates". Furthermore, his
frequent claims about the reasons for his presence on RAO are utterly
fatuous. Mr. **** claims to encourage "audio content" -- a total lie.
He also fraudulently claims that he "hangs around" RAO to help
newbies, even though he has condemned this group as hopeless. Nobody
is quicker than Krooger to attack a newbie for a "wrong opinion". The
levels of delusion Turdy has built up to protect his fantasies about
himself are both repugnant and perversely fascinating.

Gregipus, however, doesn't even pretend to want to help others. Notice
how he goes out of his way to pick fights, even more aggressively than
Krooger does? Unlike Krooger, Gregipus doesn't want recognition for
his supposed generosity. What he wants is to be acknowledged by one
and all as the world's foremost authority on audio. He believes he
knows all there is to know about marketing by virtue of having toiled
on the front lines of audio retail. He believes he knows all there is
to know about designing speakers by virtue of his alleged E.E. degree
and his one week of research. He believes he has an unsurpassed
hearing acuity. Far from using the wondrous knowledge he believes he
possesses for the betterment of others, he wants to use it as a club.

So I agree with Bobo. Gregipus is far more narcissistic (albeit
delusionally) than he is messianic.


I'm totally agree with you George, you intelligently add this
interesting point to the debate.
Now I better understand that they both use RAO as an exutory to their
psychopathy.
....But your fascinating magistral course doesn't bring any information
and/or explanations about the reasons of your presence on RAO neither
gives us few clues about your potential (hypothetical ?) added value
the audio debate in general.
I know that you consider that I haven't more intelligence and witness
than a sheep but I have been involuntarily attracted by your
incommensurable charism and now you have to take care of me as a
disciple.
"The shepherd loves his ewes..."

Thank you for your interest.
Lionel

Robert Morein wrote:
"trotsky" wrote in message
...


Robert Morein wrote:


Your mistake is very obvious to everyone except you. You share this

personal

characteristic with Singh.


Now that's just weird. I was right and you were wrong about my
speakers, if dave's opinion is to be trusted. I assume you were
planning to apologize. Can you hurry up, weiner?


Dave's review was cut short by your interference, and rightfully so.


Oh, good, at least I was right about something! (?) Have you been
hitting the crack pipe again, Bob?

Bruce J. Richman wrote:
George M. Middius wrote:



Sockpuppet Yustabe said:


You share this personal characteristic with Singh.

That's a two point penalty for a low blow.

Kroo**** is still more odious than Gregipus, don't you think?











Yes, but they have a tremendous number of similar personal traits. Lack of
credibility, arrogance, dishonesty, questionable contact with reality,
delusional thinking, and many more flaws.



That's cool, now do George. Or admit you're a fraud--your choice.

George M. Middius wrote:

Sockpuppet Yustabe said:


Kroo**** is still more odious than Gregipus, don't you think?



Absolutuely
Not even close


It certainly is close.


You must really be desperate, to put Art on the spot in that way.
Didn't really work out for you, though.

George M. Middius wrote:

Bruce J. Richman said:


The similarities are marked. The principle difference, IMHO, is that Krueger
has a messiah complex, while Gregipus is a narcissist.



Yes, the similarities are quite striking. Of course, they both think their
"mission" in life is to impart their undisputed, unverifiable "knowledge" to
all the undereducated subjectivist hobbyists who have the audacity to engage in
individual preferences when auditioning products. The level of arrogance
exhibited by both is pretty despicable and laughable.


Indeed it is.

One point you might want to consider. Admittedly, comparing those two
is like discussing the relative merits of two kinds of mildew growing
on the shower curtain. Krooger indeed wants to believe himself the
great audio savior. His need for approbation is so great that he has
convinced himself he wins all of his "audio debates". Furthermore, his
frequent claims about the reasons for his presence on RAO are utterly
fatuous. Mr. **** claims to encourage "audio content" -- a total lie.
He also fraudulently claims that he "hangs around" RAO to help
newbies, even though he has condemned this group as hopeless. Nobody
is quicker than Krooger to attack a newbie for a "wrong opinion". The
levels of delusion Turdy has built up to protect his fantasies about
himself are both repugnant and perversely fascinating.

Gregipus, however, doesn't even pretend to want to help others.


Right, that's why I explained the truth on the subwoofer question. You
must really hate audio, George. Might go hand in hand with the
self-loathing, I guess.

Lionella la Salope said:

I'm totally agree with you George, you intelligently add this
interesting point to the debate.

You're still a pinhead sockpuppet.

exutory

You need a better dictionary.

trotsky said:

Kroo**** is still more odious than Gregipus, don't you think?

Absolutuely
Not even close

It certainly is close.

You must really be desperate, to put Art on the spot in that way.

Desperate? For what?

Didn't really work out for you, though.

What are you babbling about?

trotsky said:

Gregipus, however, doesn't even pretend to want to help others.

Right, that's why I explained the truth on the subwoofer question.

It is exactly right. Your "explanation" had nothing to do with
altruism or being helpful, and everything to do with your raging
inferiority complex.

George M. Middius wrote:

trotsky said:


Gregipus, however, doesn't even pretend to want to help others.



Right, that's why I explained the truth on the subwoofer question.


It is exactly right. Your "explanation" had nothing to do with
altruism or being helpful, and everything to do with your raging
inferiority complex.


George, I apologize. I baited you into talking about an audio topic so
you could make an ass of yourself.

trotsky wrote:


ruce J. Richman wrote:
George M. Middius wrote:



Sockpuppet Yustabe said:


You share this personal characteristic with Singh.

That's a two point penalty for a low blow.

Kroo**** is still more odious than Gregipus, don't you think?











Yes, but they have a tremendous number of similar personal traits. Lack of
credibility, arrogance, dishonesty, questionable contact with reality,
delusional thinking, and many more flaws.



That's cool, now do George. Or admit you're a fraud--your choice.








Lying through your teeth as usual. You are such a waste of subhuman matter.
Idiots like you deserve to be pitied as much as blamed.



Bruce J. Richman

George M. Middius wrote:


Lionella la Salope said:


I'm totally agree with you George, you intelligently add this
interesting point to the debate.

You're still a pinhead sockpuppet.

Your a coward George. You're still quoting like a pig.
)


exutory


You need a better dictionary.


Come from the french "exutoire"
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=exutory
Ex*u"to*ry (?), n. [Cf. F. exutoire. See Exuve.] (Med.) An issue.

* Issue :
# noun: an opening that permits escape or release (Example: "The
canyon had only one issue")

Always happy to help you Middious.

Lionella la Salope said:

You're still a pinhead sockpuppet.

Your[sic] a coward George. You're still quoting like a pig[sic].

How, exactly, do pigs quote?


exutory

You need a better dictionary.

Come from the french "exutoire"
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=exutory
Ex*u"to*ry (?), n. [Cf. F. exutoire. See Exuve.] (Med.) An issue.

* Issue :
# noun: an opening that permits escape or release (Example: "The
canyon had only one issue")

You have successfully missed the point for about the 500th time.
Well done!


Always happy to help you Middious.

I don't need any help -- you show the group what a ninny you are
with or without replies from me.

George M. Middius wrote:


Lionella la Salope said:


You're still a pinhead sockpuppet.


Your[sic] a coward George. You're still quoting like a pig[sic].


How, exactly, do pigs quote?



exutory


You need a better dictionary.



Come from the french "exutoire"
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=exutory
Ex*u"to*ry (?), n. [Cf. F. exutoire. See Exuve.] (Med.) An issue.

* Issue :
# noun: an opening that permits escape or release (Example: "The
canyon had only one issue")


You have successfully missed the point for about the 500th time.
Well done!


It's not a problem for me, just for you.
You miss an occasion of shut up for the 50000th time.

(1)EXUTOIRE. n. m. T. de Médecine. Ulcère artificiel qui sert de dérivatif.
Il signifie figurément Dérivation donnée à ce qui gêne, embarrasse.
Cette discussion a servi d'exutoire à sa bile. Les lotissements dans la
banlieue de Paris sont une sorte d'exutoire du trop-plein de la population.

Middius you have proven many times that you have a lot of difficulties
to understand French... But if you could translate the above you will
see what you have missed. (lol!)
Are you speaking an other language than american-english ?
What is your level of study ?

Always happy to help you Middious.


I don't need any help -- you show the group what a ninny you are
with or without replies from me.

It's the big difference between you and me : I haven't anything to prove
to the group... This is just a way to barflying at low cost. ;-)

Lionel wrote:

George M. Middius wrote:


Lionella la Salope said:


You're still a pinhead sockpuppet.



Your[sic] a coward George. You're still quoting like a pig[sic].



How, exactly, do pigs quote?



exutory



You need a better dictionary.




Come from the french "exutoire"
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=exutory
Ex*u"to*ry (?), n. [Cf. F. exutoire. See Exuve.] (Med.) An issue.

* Issue :
# noun: an opening that permits escape or release (Example: "The
canyon had only one issue")



You have successfully missed the point for about the 500th time.
Well done!


It's not a problem for me, just for you.
You miss an occasion of shut up for the 50000th time.

(1)EXUTOIRE. n. m. T. de Médecine. Ulcère artificiel qui sert de dérivatif.
Il signifie figurément Dérivation donnée à ce qui gêne, embarrasse.
Cette discussion a servi d'exutoire à sa bile. Les lotissements dans la
banlieue de Paris sont une sorte d'exutoire du trop-plein de la population.

Middius you have proven many times that you have a lot of difficulties
to understand French... But if you could translate the above you will
see what you have missed. (lol!)
Are you speaking an other language than american-english ?
What is your level of study ?


Always happy to help you Middious.



I don't need any help -- you show the group what a ninny you are
with or without replies from me.

It's the big difference between you and me : I haven't anything to prove
to the group... This is just a way to barflying at low cost. ;-)


Ooops if I forget you will not understand :

Barfly (1987) is the only film written by American author and poet
Charles Bukowski, an autobiography of the part of his life spent
drinking in Los Angeles.

To barfly is a verb I have create for this special occasion... Just for
you Georgetta SMACK!