Question for Arny

[Boon]

If you had "suggested" that JA had sent you the child pornography
during your debate at HE 2005, how do you think it would have been
received?

Boon

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Boon said:

> If you had "suggested" that JA had sent you the child pornography
> during your debate at HE 2005, how do you think it would have been
> received?

Arnii knows he would have received several rousing cheers from the
audience. That's because Arnii is certain that he is the unheralded
spokesborg for 100's and 1000's of timorous, Kroologic-loving individuals
who are ruthlessly bullied by Normals who think complete thoughts and speak
complete sentences, using real words and not made-up nonsensical-sounding
imitation words.

[TT]

"Boon" > wrote in message
...
> If you had "suggested" that JA had sent you the child pornography
> during your debate at HE 2005, how do you think it would have been
> received?
>
> Boon

Do you mean the photos of the young adults or the ones that didn't exist?
Which non-existent KP pics are you referring to?

Besides, at the great debate Arny was too busy abusing the staff and having
a bitch about his non-functional laptop to be distracted by keeping track of
his lies ;-)

Cheers TT

[Arny Krueger]

"Boon" > wrote in message


> If you had "suggested" that JA had sent you the child
> pornography during your debate at HE 2005, how do you
> think it would have been received?

I guess you weren't there to contribute your question about that, were you
Marc?

[Boon]

On Dec 19, 5:55�pm, "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
> "Boon" > wrote in message
>
>
>
> > If you had "suggested" that JA had sent you the child
> > pornography during your debate at HE 2005, how do you
> > think it would have been received?
>
> I guess you weren't there to contribute your question about that, were you
> Marc?

I guess you don't have an answer for that, Arny?

Boon

[Arny Krueger]

"Boon" > wrote in message

> On Dec 19, 5:55?pm, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>> "Boon" > wrote in message
>>
>>
>>
>>> If you had "suggested" that JA had sent you the child
>>> pornography during your debate at HE 2005, how do you
>>> think it would have been received?

>> I guess you weren't there to contribute your question
>> about that, were you Marc?

> I guess you don't have an answer for that, Arny?

I think its a nonsensical, speculative question Marc.

Why don't you ask John?

[Boon]

On Dec 19, 6:28�pm, "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
> "Boon" > wrote in message
>
>
>
> > On Dec 19, 5:55?pm, "Arny Krueger" >
> > wrote:
> >> "Boon" > wrote in message
>
>
>
> >>> If you had "suggested" that JA had sent you the child
> >>> pornography during your debate at HE 2005, how do you
> >>> think it would have been received?
> >> I guess you weren't there to contribute your question
> >> about that, were you Marc?
> > I guess you don't have an answer for that, Arny?
>
> I think its a nonsensical, speculative question Marc.

It's not. It asks you to think about your behavior here and how
unacceptable it is by real world standards.

>
> Why don't you ask John?

About what? The question wasn't directed at him, moron.

Boon

[Arny Krueger]

"Boon" > wrote in message

> On Dec 19, 6:28?pm, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>> "Boon" > wrote in message
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Dec 19, 5:55?pm, "Arny Krueger" >
>>> wrote:
>>>> "Boon" > wrote in message
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>> If you had "suggested" that JA had sent you the child
>>>>> pornography during your debate at HE 2005, how do you
>>>>> think it would have been received?
>>>> I guess you weren't there to contribute your question
>>>> about that, were you Marc?
>>> I guess you don't have an answer for that, Arny?
>>
>> I think its a nonsensical, speculative question Marc.
>
> It's not. It asks you to think about your behavior here

On RAO I have to deal with a bunch of screaming idiots like you Marc. The
only person I saw at HE2005 that I would put into the same category as the
Middiot Pose was Michael Fremer and maybe Harry Lavo. Now there are two very
tightly wound up little boys.

> and how unacceptable it is by real world standards.

Yes Marc, you are one confused puppy, comparing RAO to the real world.

Marc, let's talk about your behavior on RAO - where would that get you in
the real world?

Marc, your behavior on RAO reminds me of some of the crazy people that used
to run around downtown Detroit after they shut down all the asylums, and
before they got those poor unfortunates new places to stay. I think we did
have one guy who would get into people's faces and call them pedophiles.
They got him off the streets pretty quick.

>> Why don't you ask John?

> About what? The question wasn't directed at him, moron.

Case in point. Marc, you're totally incapable of civilized conversation.
Point me to a forum where I can see you acting like an adult. You can see
me doing that on rec.audio.high-end.

[Boon]

On Dec 20, 2:42�am, "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
> "Boon" > wrote in message
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 19, 6:28?pm, "Arny Krueger" >
> > wrote:
> >> "Boon" > wrote in message
>
>
>
> >>> On Dec 19, 5:55?pm, "Arny Krueger" >
> >>> wrote:
> >>>> "Boon" > wrote in message
>
>
>
> >>>>> If you had "suggested" that JA had sent you the child
> >>>>> pornography during your debate at HE 2005, how do you
> >>>>> think it would have been received?
> >>>> I guess you weren't there to contribute your question
> >>>> about that, were you Marc?
> >>> I guess you don't have an answer for that, Arny?
>
> >> I think its a nonsensical, speculative question Marc.
>
> > It's not. �It asks you to think about your behavior here
>
> On RAO I have to deal with a bunch of screaming idiots like you Marc. The
> only person I saw at HE2005 that I would put into the same category as the
> Middiot Pose was Michael Fremer and maybe Harry Lavo. Now there are two very
> tightly wound up little boys.

So in the real world, you encounter the same criticisms as you do
here. Interesting.

>
> > and how unacceptable it is by real world standards.
>
> Yes Marc, you are one confused puppy, comparing RAO to the real world.

You just did that when you mentioned Fremer and Lavo.

>
> Marc, let's talk about your behavior on RAO - where would that get you in
> the real world?

I've received several paying writing gigs based upon what I've written
here.

>
> Marc, your behavior on RAO reminds me of some of the crazy people that used
> to run around downtown Detroit after they shut down all the asylums, and
> before they got those poor unfortunates new places to stay. I think we did
> have one guy who would get into people's faces and call them pedophiles.
> They got him off the streets pretty quick.

And that's why you spend all your time on Usenet?

>
> >> Why don't you ask John?
> > About what? �The question wasn't directed at him, moron.
>
> Case in point. Marc, you're totally incapable of civilized conversation.

I have civilized conversations here with Jenn, Stephen, Terry, JA,
Art, George and many others.

> Point me to a forum where I can see you acting like an adult. �You can see
> me doing that on rec.audio.high-end.-

I've seen you getting kicked around RAHE as well. Anyone can pretend
to act like an adult on a moderated newsgroup. It's how you act when
you're not supervised that counts. For instance, posting descriptions
of child pornography on an audio newsgroup is decidedly NOT adult
behavior.

Boon

[Arny Krueger]

"Boon" > wrote in message

> On Dec 20, 2:42?am, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>> "Boon" > wrote in message
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Dec 19, 6:28?pm, "Arny Krueger" >
>>> wrote:
>>>> "Boon" > wrote in message
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>> On Dec 19, 5:55?pm, "Arny Krueger" >
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> "Boon" > wrote in message
>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>>>>>> If you had "suggested" that JA had sent you the
>>>>>>> child pornography during your debate at HE 2005,
>>>>>>> how do you think it would have been received?
>>>>>> I guess you weren't there to contribute your question
>>>>>> about that, were you Marc?
>>>>> I guess you don't have an answer for that, Arny?
>>
>>>> I think its a nonsensical, speculative question Marc.
>>
>>> It's not. ?It asks you to think about your behavior here
>>
>> On RAO I have to deal with a bunch of screaming idiots
>> like you Marc. The only person I saw at HE2005 that I
>> would put into the same category as the Middiot Pose was
>> Michael Fremer and maybe Harry Lavo. Now there are two
>> very tightly wound up little boys.
>
> So in the real world, you encounter the same criticisms
> as you do here. Interesting.
>
>>
>>> and how unacceptable it is by real world standards.
>>
>> Yes Marc, you are one confused puppy, comparing RAO to
>> the real world.
>
> You just did that when you mentioned Fremer and Lavo.
>
>>
>> Marc, let's talk about your behavior on RAO - where
>> would that get you in the real world?

> I've received several paying writing gigs based upon what
> I've written here.

I've received a number of technical gigs based on what I've written, but
since I post at a number of places, I'm not sure where. Heck, I even
received an all-expenses paid trip to HE2005 based on what I've written on
RAO - with thanks to the
Middiot and his Posse for convincing Atkinson that I wouldn't show if he
invided me. That was sweet on a number of different levels, including
watching Fremer melt down in person.



>> EAO reminds me of some of the
>> crazy people that used to run around downtown Detroit
>> after they shut down all the asylums, and before they
>> got those poor unfortunates new places to stay. I think
>> we did have one guy who would get into people's faces
>> and call them pedophiles. They got him off the streets
>> pretty quick.
>
> And that's why you spend all your time on Usenet?

That's another one of your delusions, Marc. I don't spend all my time on
Usenet. For the readers who are smart enough to know the difference between
Usenet and the Internet (obviously not you, Marc) I don't spend all my time
on the Internet.

Besides my regular work during the week, I also put in about 16 hours of
technical work for my church during the week. This weekend I will put in an
additional 16 hours of technical work for my church. The good news is that
I've only got one holiday party to go to this weekend, it was Friday night.

So there you go Marc - I post enough on Usenet so that in your hysteria and
delusion, you think I'm working Usnet 24/7. I also post on a number of
serious HTML-based technical forums. I also run a business, do up to 32
hours of charity work a week, and have a social life.

>>>> Why don't you ask John?
>>> About what? ?The question wasn't directed at him, moron.
>>
>> Case in point. Marc, you're totally incapable of
>> civilized conversation.
>
> I have civilized conversations here with Jenn, Stephen,
> Terry, JA, Art, George and many others.

You call that civilized?

Boy, are you hard up for action!!

>> Point me to a forum where I can see you acting like an
>> adult. ?You can see me doing that on rec.audio.high-end.-

> I've seen you getting kicked around RAHE as well.

Prove that I'm getting kicked around.

> Anyone can pretend to act like an adult on a moderated
> newsgroup.

Oh, so that's how you do it, Marc? Most of the time you act like you act on
your native turf - RAO?

> It's how you act when you're not supervised
> that counts. For instance, posting descriptions of child
> pornography on an audio newsgroup is decidedly NOT adult
> behavior.

Well Marc, you seem to be the one who is getting his rocks off doing that on
RAO. Why not show us you're a man and cut out all the kid stuff?

[John Atkinson[_2_]]

On Dec 21, 5:13 am, "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
> I even received an all-expenses paid trip to HE2005 based
> on what I've written on RAO - with thanks to the Middiot
>and his Posse for convincing Atkinson that I wouldn't show if
> he [invited] me.

As I did invite you, Mr. Krueger, and sent you an air ticket
and advertised your presentation at HE2005 heavily before
the event, your claim that I had been convinced you wouldn't
show is patently incorrect.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

[Arny Krueger]

"John Atkinson" > wrote in
message

> On Dec 21, 5:13 am, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>> I even received an all-expenses paid trip to HE2005 based
>> on what I've written on RAO - with thanks to the Middiot
>> and his Posse for convincing Atkinson that I wouldn't
>> show if he [invited] me.
>
> As I did invite you, Mr. Krueger, and sent you an air
> ticket and advertised your presentation at HE2005 heavily
> before the event, your claim that I had been convinced
> you wouldn't show is patently incorrect.

Bad logic.

Try to follow the time line, if you can:

You did all the things you said, *after* I accepted the invitation.

My comment speaks to your state of mind at the time you made the invitation,
which was of course, prior to that.

It is well known that you had been advised repeatedly by the Middiot that if
invited, I would not show up. I think you actually believe much of what the
Middiot says.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Dec 21, 7:22*am, "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
> "John Atkinson" > wrote in
>
>
> > On Dec 21, 5:13 am, "Arny Krueger" >
> > wrote:
> >> I even received an all-expenses paid trip to HE2005 based
> >> on what I've written on RAO - with thanks to the Middiot
> >> and his Posse for convincing Atkinson that I wouldn't
> >> show if he [invited] me.
>
> > As I did invite you, Mr. Krueger, and sent you an air
> > ticket and advertised your presentation at HE2005 heavily
> > before the event, your claim that I had been convinced
> > you wouldn't show is patently incorrect.
>
> Bad logic.
>
> Try to follow the time line, if you can:
>
> You did all the things you said, *after* I accepted the invitation.

LOL!

[John Atkinson[_2_]]

On Dec 21, 8:22 am, "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
> "John Atkinson" > wrote in
>
> > On Dec 21, 5:13 am, "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
> >> I even received an all-expenses paid trip to HE2005 based
> >> on what I've written on RAO - with thanks to the Middiot
> >> and his Posse for convincing Atkinson that I wouldn't
> >> show if he [invited] me.
>
> > As I did invite you, Mr. Krueger, and sent you an air
> > ticket and advertised your presentation at HE2005 heavily
> > before the event, your claim that I had been convinced
> > you wouldn't show is patently incorrect.
>
> ...My comment speaks to your state of mind at the time you
> made the invitation...

Ah, more of the famous Arny Krueger claim to be able to
read minds. With respect, Mr. Krueger, you have no idea
what I was thinking when i issued you the invitation on
r.a.o. in December 2004 to appear at HE2005. Occam's
Razor suggests that my invitation was sincere. Which
it was.

> It is well known that you had been advised repeatedly
> by the Middiot that if invited, I would not show up.

Yes, George Middius posted to that effect many times
on r.a.o. But as I get tired of pointing out to you, Mr.
Krueger, I am not him and he is not me, and I do not
consult George (or anyone else, for that matter) before
posting to r.a.o.

> I think you actually believe much of what the
> Middiot says.

ROFL. You _work_ those mind-reading skills, Mr. Krueger.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

[Boon]

On Dec 21, 2:13�am, "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
> "Boon" > wrote in message
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 20, 2:42?am, "Arny Krueger" >
> > wrote:
> >> "Boon" > wrote in message
>
>
>
> >>> On Dec 19, 6:28?pm, "Arny Krueger" >
> >>> wrote:
> >>>> "Boon" > wrote in message
>
>
>
> >>>>> On Dec 19, 5:55?pm, "Arny Krueger" >
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>> "Boon" > wrote in message
>
>
>
> >>>>>>> If you had "suggested" that JA had sent you the
> >>>>>>> child pornography during your debate at HE 2005,
> >>>>>>> how do you think it would have been received?
> >>>>>> I guess you weren't there to contribute your question
> >>>>>> about that, were you Marc?
> >>>>> I guess you don't have an answer for that, Arny?
>
> >>>> I think its a nonsensical, speculative question Marc.
>
> >>> It's not. ?It asks you to think about your behavior here
>
> >> On RAO I have to deal with a bunch of screaming idiots
> >> like you Marc. The only person I saw at HE2005 that I
> >> would put into the same category as the Middiot Pose was
> >> Michael Fremer and maybe Harry Lavo. Now there are two
> >> very tightly wound up little boys.
>
> > So in the real world, you encounter the same criticisms
> > as you do here. �Interesting.
>
> >>> and how unacceptable it is by real world standards.
>
> >> Yes Marc, you are one confused puppy, comparing RAO to
> >> the real world.
>
> > You just did that when you mentioned Fremer and Lavo.
>
> >> Marc, let's talk about your behavior on RAO - where
> >> would that get you in the real world?
> > I've received several paying writing gigs based upon what
> > I've written here.
>
> I've received a number of technical gigs based on what I've written, but
> since I post at a number of places, I'm not sure where.

That's a pretty evasive statement that doesn't even apply to the
current conversation.

Heck, I even
> received an all-expenses paid trip to HE2005 based on what I've written on
> RAO - with thanks to the
> Middiot and his Posse for convincing Atkinson that I wouldn't show if he
> invided me.

You were set up to be humiliated once and for all. You didn't
disappoint.

That was sweet on a number of different levels, including
> watching Fremer melt down in person.

That's your narcissistic personality disorder speaking. You were
humiliated, but you think it was some sort of victory.

>
> >> EAO reminds me of some of the
> >> crazy people that used to run around downtown Detroit
> >> after they shut down all the asylums, and before they
> >> got those poor unfortunates new places to stay. I think
> >> we did have one guy who would get into people's faces
> >> and call them pedophiles. They got him off the streets
> >> pretty quick.
>
> > And that's why you spend all your time on Usenet?
>
> That's another one of your delusions, Marc. I don't spend all my time on
> Usenet. For the readers who are smart enough to know the difference between
> Usenet and the Internet (obviously not you, Marc) �I don't spend all my time
> on the Internet.

I'm going off your Usenet posting habits, moron.

>
> Besides my regular work during the week, I also put in about 16 hours of
> technical work for my church during the week. This weekend I will put in an
> additional 16 hours of technical work for my church.

How does that pay?

The good news is that
> I've only got one holiday party to go to this weekend, it was Friday night.

[Harry Lavo]

"Boon" > wrote in message
...
On Dec 20, 2:42?am, "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
> "Boon" > wrote in message
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 19, 6:28?pm, "Arny Krueger" >
> > wrote:

>interesting<

>
> On RAO I have to deal with a bunch of screaming idiots like you Marc. The
> only person I saw at HE2005 that I would put into the same category as the
> Middiot Pose was Michael Fremer and maybe Harry Lavo. Now there are two
> very
> tightly wound up little boys.

Interesting, since I never said a word to you alone or raised my voice, but
simply repeated an argument that I had previously raised on RAHE and RAO
about the topic of audio testing, and directed it to John, to you, and to
the audience.

If that is what you consider "tightly wound" you have a very thin skin.

>snip<

[Arny Krueger]

"Boon" > wrote in message


> So you think it's childish to object to child pornography
> and necrophilia and incest?

Objecting to those things surely makes sense in the case of their
introduction onto RAO by you godd friends the Middiot and Devil. There was
your good friend Benchemol who went on and on about them for several weeks.

Of course I objected to them at the time that the Middiot, Devil and
Benchemol introduced or re-introduced them, and many times since. I also am
objecting to your recent introduction of them Marc.

[John Atkinson[_2_]]

On Dec 21, 1:18 pm, "Harry Lavo" > wrote:
> On Dec 20, 2:42?am, "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
> > On RAO I have to deal with a bunch of screaming idiots like you Marc.
> > The only person I saw at HE2005 that I would put into the same category
> > as the Middiot [Posse] was Michael Fremer and maybe Harry Lavo. Now
> > there are two very tightly wound up little boys.
>
> Interesting, since I never said a word to you alone or raised my voice, but
> simply repeated an argument that I had previously raised on RAHE and RAO
> about the topic of audio testing, and directed it to John, to you, and to the
> audience.

To forestall Mr. Krueger's demands for proof, this us exactly what
happened
as demonstrated by the recording available at http://www.stereophile.com/news/050905debate/
..

> If that is what you consider "tightly wound" you have a very thin skin.

Mr. Krueger has explained in the past that he regards any criticism of
his views or even plain disagreement with them, no matter how politely
expressed, as being equivalent to a personal attack. That attitude
seems perfectly defined by the phrase "thin skin."

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

John Atkinson said:

> Mr. Krueger has explained in the past that he regards any criticism of
> his views or even plain disagreement with them, no matter how politely
> expressed, as being equivalent to a personal attack. That attitude
> seems perfectly defined by the phrase "thin skin."

Typical of one of my dupes to, admit he is only interested in making savage
personal attack's on a great scientiffick mind.

[Boon]

On Dec 21, 10:25�am, "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
> "Boon" > wrote in message
>
>
>
> > So you think it's childish to object to child pornography
> > and necrophilia and incest?
>
> Objecting to those things surely makes sense in the case of their
> introduction onto RAO by you godd friends the Middiot and Devil. �There was
> your good friend Benchemol who went on and on about them for several weeks.
>
> Of course I objected to them at the time that the Middiot, Devil and
> Benchemol introduced or re-introduced them, and many times since. I also am
> objecting to your recent introduction of them Marc.

[Boon]

On Dec 21, 10:25�am, "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
> "Boon" > wrote in message
>
>
>
> > So you think it's childish to object to child pornography
> > and necrophilia and incest?
>
> Objecting to those things surely makes sense in the case of their
> introduction onto RAO by you godd friends the Middiot and Devil. �There was
> your good friend Benchemol who went on and on about them for several weeks.

I don't know anyone named Benchemol.

>
> Of course I objected to them at the time that the Middiot, Devil and
> Benchemol introduced or re-introduced them, and many times since. I also am
> objecting to your recent introduction of them Marc.

I am objecting to your continual introduction of these subjects. It's
already been shown that you're the one who brings up the subject the
most.

Boon

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Boon said:

> I am objecting to your continual introduction of these subjects. It's
> already been shown that you're the one who brings up the subject the
> most.

Shovels ("Benchemol") was a real goat-tugger also. Maybe Arnii got his
crazy license from the same shop.

[Arny Krueger]

"Boon" > wrote in message

> On Dec 21, 10:25?am, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>> "Boon" > wrote in message
>>
>>
>>
>>> So you think it's childish to object to child
>>> pornography and necrophilia and incest?
>>
>> Objecting to those things surely makes sense in the case
>> of their introduction onto RAO by you godd friends the
>> Middiot and Devil. ?There was your good friend Benchemol
>> who went on and on about them for several weeks.

> I don't know anyone named Benchemol.

Interesting. On Dec 4 you said that you lacked his email address, and did
not deny that you know who he is.

>> Of course I objected to them at the time that the
>> Middiot, Devil and Benchemol introduced or re-introduced
>> them, and many times since. I also am objecting to your
>> recent introduction of them Marc.
>
> I am objecting to your continual introduction of these
> subjects.

Mrc, it is you who have been introducing them.

> It's already been shown that you're the one
> who brings up the subject the most.

That is a false claim. I only mention them when others bring them up.

[Boon]

On Dec 21, 6:31�pm, "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
> "Boon" > wrote in message
>
>
>
> > On Dec 21, 10:25?am, "Arny Krueger" >
> > wrote:
> >> "Boon" > wrote in message
>
>
>
> >>> So you think it's childish to object to child
> >>> pornography and necrophilia and incest?
>
> >> Objecting to those things surely makes sense in the case
> >> of their introduction onto RAO by you godd friends the
> >> Middiot and Devil. ?There was your good friend Benchemol
> >> who went on and on about them for several weeks.
> > I don't know anyone named Benchemol.
>
> Interesting. On Dec 4 you said that you lacked his email address, and did
> not deny that you know who he is.

Do you mean Jamie Benchimol?

>
> >> Of course I objected to them at the time that the
> >> Middiot, Devil and Benchemol introduced or re-introduced
> >> them, and many times since. I also am objecting to your
> >> recent introduction of them Marc.
>
> > I am objecting to your continual introduction of these
> > subjects.
>
> Mrc, it is you who have been introducing them.

Don't know this Mrc fellow either. Mrc Benchemol? Strange name.

>
> > It's already been shown that you're the one
> > who brings up the subject the most.
>
> That is a false claim. I only mention them when others bring them up.

Prove it.

Boon

[Signal[_2_]]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote:

>Michael Fremer and maybe Harry Lavo. Now there are two very tightly wound up little boys.







--
S i g n a l @ l i n e o n e . n e t

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Dec 23, 11:29*am, Signal > wrote:
> "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
> >Michael Fremer and maybe Harry Lavo. Now there are two very tightly wound up little boys.

GOIA is simply filled with a feeling of love for his fellow man.

It has to do with the season and ****.

[John Atkinson[_2_]]

On Dec 21, 1:35*pm, John Atkinson > wrote:
> Mr. Krueger has explained in the past that he regards any criticism of
> his views or even plain disagreement with them, no matter how politely
> expressed, as being equivalent to a personal attack. That attitude
> seems perfectly defined by the phrase "thin skin."

Paul Bamborough, who used to post to r.a.o., captured Arny
Krueger's personality perfectly with the phrase "sensitive tank."

Following is the relevant text form his 199 posting.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

Begin Quoted Message:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message >
From: Paul Bamborough )
Subject: Re: Atkinson enlightens his sheep
Newsgroups: rec.audio.opinion
Date: 1999/10/08
Arny Krueger wrote
> wrote
>> And one more point: why did you make what must be considered
>> an insulting change to the thread title in your response to
>> my posting? Don't you regard having done so as somewhat childish?
>
>Let's put it this way: When one has taken a certain number of
>inbound shells of a certain caliber, one hardly worries about
>sending a few back, or at who on the other side of the "battle
>line".

Dear Mr. Krueger,

This post is intended to be constructive. You may have trouble
accepting this, but I would request you to consider it on exactly
that basis.


I'm beginning to wonder if the the most important underlying reason
for your style of debate, and the reactions that it provokes, is
that you have an extreme insensitivity to how your words might seem
to other people, coupled with an equally extreme sensitivity to the
slightest possibility of insult. It's quite common, you know: one
well known phrase describing it is the "Sensitive Tank".


The Sensitive Tank rolls over the landscape, its treads grinding
and crushing, its cannon and machine guns firing wildly in all
directions. But let it perceive the presence, or even the
possibility of a critical glance being aimed in return, and it
draws its skirts around its ankles and complains bitterly about
being attacked.


It's not an exact analogy, because a tank typically has effective
weapons and good defences. But it will do.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Arny Krueger]

"John Atkinson" > wrote in
message


> On Dec 21, 1:35 pm, John Atkinson
> > wrote:
>> Mr. Krueger has explained in the past that he regards
>> any criticism of his views or even plain disagreement
>> with them, no matter how politely expressed, as being
>> equivalent to a personal attack.

This would be another one of Atkinson's little jokes.

>> That attitude seems
>> perfectly defined by the phrase "thin skin."

Count the Atkinson melt-downs on the topic of Arny Krueger, and reach your
own conclusions. For example, there is his infamous "Arny is Insane"
meltdown that I repost periodically, whenever John gets forgetful about his
past misdeeds.

> Paul Bamborough, who used to post to r.a.o., captured Arny
> Krueger's personality perfectly with the phrase
> "sensitive tank."

The irony is that if there ever was a "sensitive tank", it was
Bumblingborough. I suspect he picked it up from one of his therapists.

[Clyde Slick]

On 23 Dec, 14:53, John Atkinson > wrote:
> On Dec 21, 1:35*pm, John Atkinson > wrote:
>
> > Mr. Krueger has explained in the past that he regards any criticism of
> > his views or even plain disagreement with them, no matter how politely
> > expressed, as being equivalent to a personal attack. That attitude
> > seems perfectly defined by the phrase "thin skin."
>
> Paul Bamborough, who used to post to r.a.o., captured Arny
> Krueger's personality perfectly with the phrase "sensitive tank."
>
> Following is the relevant text form his 199 posting.
>
> John Atkinson
> Editor, Stereophile
>
> Begin Quoted Message:
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------*--------------------
> Message >
> From: Paul Bamborough )
> Subject: Re: Atkinson enlightens his sheep
> Newsgroups: rec.audio.opinion
> Date: 1999/10/08
> Arny Krueger wrote
>
> > wrote
> >> And one more point: why did you make what must be considered
> >> an insulting change to the thread title in your response to
> >> my posting? Don't you regard having done so as somewhat childish?
>
> >Let's put it this way: When one has taken a certain number of
> >inbound shells of a certain caliber, one hardly worries about
> >sending a few back, or at who on the other side of the "battle
> >line".
>
> Dear Mr. Krueger,
>
> This post is intended to be constructive. You may have trouble
> accepting this, but I would request you to consider it on exactly
> that basis.
>
> I'm beginning to wonder if the the most important underlying reason
> for your style of debate, and the reactions that it provokes, is
> that you have an extreme insensitivity to how your words might seem
> to other people, coupled with an equally extreme sensitivity to the
> slightest possibility of insult. It's quite common, you know: one
> well known phrase describing it is the "Sensitive Tank".
>
> The Sensitive Tank rolls over the landscape, its treads grinding
> and crushing, its cannon and machine guns firing wildly in all
> directions. But let it perceive the presence, or even the
> possibility of a critical glance being aimed in return, and it
> draws its skirts around its ankles and complains bitterly about
> being attacked.
>
> It's not an exact analogy, because a tank typically has effective
> weapons and good defences. But it will do.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------*--------------------

try this:
sensitive commode

[Boon]

On Dec 23, 3:07�pm, "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
> "John Atkinson" > wrote in
>
>
> > On Dec 21, 1:35 pm, John Atkinson
> > > wrote:
> >> Mr. Krueger has explained in the past that he regards
> >> any criticism of his views or even plain disagreement
> >> with them, no matter how politely expressed, as being
> >> equivalent to a personal attack.
>
> This would be another one of Atkinson's little jokes.
>
> >> That attitude seems
> >> perfectly defined by the phrase "thin skin."
>
> Count the Atkinson melt-downs on the topic of Arny Krueger, and reach your
> own conclusions. For example, there is his infamous "Arny is Insane"
> meltdown that I repost periodically, whenever John gets forgetful about his
> past misdeeds.
>
> > Paul Bamborough, who used to post to r.a.o., captured Arny
> > Krueger's personality perfectly with the phrase
> > "sensitive tank."
>
> The irony is that if there ever was a "sensitive tank", it was
> Bumblingborough. I suspect he picked it up from one of his therapists.

Feeble IKYABWAI noted.

Boon

[John Atkinson[_2_]]

On Dec 23, 6:07 pm, "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
> "John Atkinson" > wrote in
>
> > On Dec 21, 1:35 pm, John Atkinson
> > > wrote:
> >> Mr. Krueger has explained in the past that he regards
> >> any criticism of his views or even plain disagreement
> >> with them, no matter how politely expressed, as being
> >> equivalent to a personal attack.
>
> This would be another one of Atkinson's little jokes.

Your own words, Mr. Krueger. Glad you think they're amusing :-)

> > That attitude seems perfectly defined by the phrase "thin
> > skin."
>
> Count the Atkinson melt-downs on the topic of Arny Krueger...

Okay: one...er...that's it, in 11 years of posting to r.a.o.

> For example, there is his infamous "Arny is Insane"
> meltdown that I repost periodically...

Yup, that's the one, Mr. Krueger. Please note that it
doesn;t matter how many time _you_ repost it, it
still only counts as one.

> > Paul Bamborough, who used to post to r.a.o., captured
> > Arny Krueger's personality perfectly with the phrase
> > "sensitive tank."
>
> The irony is that if there ever was a "sensitive tank", it was
> Paul Bamborough...

I think you believe irony has a different meaning from the
one in the dictionaries, Mr. Krueger.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

[TT]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "John Atkinson" > wrote in
> message
>
>
>> On Dec 21, 1:35 pm, John Atkinson
>> > wrote:
>>> Mr. Krueger has explained in the past that he regards
>>> any criticism of his views or even plain disagreement
>>> with them, no matter how politely expressed, as being
>>> equivalent to a personal attack.
>
> This would be another one of Atkinson's little jokes.
>
>>> That attitude seems
>>> perfectly defined by the phrase "thin skin."
>
> Count the Atkinson melt-downs

I've just had a count and then a recount and it still comes
out at zero. So your point is?

> on the topic of Arny Krueger, and reach your own
> conclusions.

Yes I have. You are mentally disturbed.

> For example, there is his infamous "Arny is Insane"
> meltdown

"meltdown" ??????? But it is a fact!

> that I repost periodically, whenever John gets forgetful
> about his past misdeeds.
>
Count still at zero!

>> Paul Bamborough, who used to post to r.a.o., captured
>> Arny
>> Krueger's personality perfectly with the phrase
>> "sensitive tank."
>
I would have chosen "Insensitive brick"!

> The irony is that if there ever was a "sensitive tank", it
> was Bumblingborough. I suspect he picked it up from one of
> his therapists.
Irony is that you actually think you are so superior to
everyone, when in actual fact you are just a sad old
hypocrite!

Have a Merry Xmas Arny and may your deity of choice takes
pity on you.

TT

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Dec 23, 5:07*pm, "Arny Krueger" > wrote:

> Count the Atkinson melt-downs on the topic of Arny Krueger, and reach your
> own conclusions. For example, there is his infamous "Arny is Insane"
> meltdown that I repost periodically, whenever John gets forgetful about his
> past misdeeds.

But you are insane, GOIA. What's your point? Please make it soon if
you do claim to have one. TIA!