What Grounds Will Atkinson Use To Claim Victory At The HE2005 Debate?

[Arny Krueger]

I believe JA just bragged that he was going to make his
epochal statement about the HE2005 debate shortly.

What Grounds Will Atkinson Use To Claim Victory At The
HE2005 Debate?

[[email protected]]

Arny Krueger wrote:
> I believe JA just bragged that he was going to make his
> epochal statement about the HE2005 debate shortly.
>
> What Grounds Will Atkinson Use To Claim Victory At The
> HE2005 Debate?
>
>
Probably a form of the Aiken Strategy:
>
>
http://tinyurl.com/7qsuy
>
>
That's about all he *can* do, aside from pandering to his cheering
section of deluded ignoramases.

[Arny Krueger]

> wrote in message
ups.com
> Arny Krueger wrote:
>> I believe JA just bragged that he was going to make his
>> epochal statement about the HE2005 debate shortly.
>>
>> What Grounds Will Atkinson Use To Claim Victory At The
>> HE2005 Debate?
>>
>>
> Probably a form of the Aiken Strategy:
>>
>>
> http://tinyurl.com/7qsuy
>>
>>
> That's about all he *can* do, aside from pandering to his
> cheering section of deluded ignoramases.

No, I think we see a new strategy evolving - Atkinson is now
claiming that he and some other RAO regular thought the
whole thing up, including his lame showing and the missing
equipment, last fall.

[[email protected]]

Arny Krueger wrote:
> > wrote in message
> ups.com
> > Arny Krueger wrote:
> >> I believe JA just bragged that he was going to make his
> >> epochal statement about the HE2005 debate shortly.
> >>
> >> What Grounds Will Atkinson Use To Claim Victory At The
> >> HE2005 Debate?
> >>
> >>
> > Probably a form of the Aiken Strategy:
> >>
> >>
> > http://tinyurl.com/7qsuy
> >>
> >>
> > That's about all he *can* do, aside from pandering to his
> > cheering section of deluded ignoramases.
>
> No, I think we see a new strategy evolving - Atkinson is now
> claiming that he and some other RAO regular thought the
> whole thing up, including his lame showing and the missing
> equipment, last fall.
>
>
Apparently, I've missed all this....can you point me in the right
direction?

[sam]

dick Malesweski asks his new best friend:

> Apparently, I've missed all this....can you point me in the right
> direction?



Dumb and Dumber.

:-D

[Arny Krueger]

> wrote in message
ups.com
> Arny Krueger wrote:
>> > wrote in message
>> ups.com
>>> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>>> I believe JA just bragged that he was going to make his
>>>> epochal statement about the HE2005 debate shortly.
>>>>
>>>> What Grounds Will Atkinson Use To Claim Victory At The
>>>> HE2005 Debate?
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Probably a form of the Aiken Strategy:
>>>>
>>>>
>>> http://tinyurl.com/7qsuy
>>>>
>>>>
>>> That's about all he *can* do, aside from pandering to
his
>>> cheering section of deluded ignoramases.
>>
>> No, I think we see a new strategy evolving - Atkinson is
now
>> claiming that he and some other RAO regular thought the
>> whole thing up, including his lame showing and the
missing
>> equipment, last fall.

> Apparently, I've missed all this....can you point me in
the
> right direction?

I was kidding about the missing equipment, but here's what I
think is the inaugural post for Atkinson's new revisionist
history of the event. Note that he's neatly avoiding
explaining the previous failed attempts at setting up a
debate with him.

http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.audio.opinion/msg/8898a716fedd3765

[[email protected]]

>I believe JA just bragged that he was going >to make his
>epochal statement about the HE2005 debate >shortly.


>What Grounds Will Atkinson Use To Claim >Victory At The
>HE2005 Debate?

Lessee, since SP and Atkinson seem to be about style over substance,
and based on the seemingly snide comment about you in the most recent
issue, it could be any of the following:

1. He dresses better.
2. He has a more pleasant sounding voice.
3. He's big time magazine guy.
4. He looks god with his beard.
5. Lots of people agree with him.
6. Dammit, he knows what sounds good even if he can't
prove it.
7. He's British.

On technical merit of course, he's out in the cold.

[sam]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote

CLAIM:
>>> No, I think we see a new strategy evolving - Atkinson is
> now
>>> claiming that he and some other RAO regular thought the
>>> whole thing up, including his lame showing and the
> missing
>>> equipment, last fall.

PARTIAL RETRACTION:
> I was kidding about the missing equipment, but here's what I
> think is the inaugural post for Atkinson's new revisionist
> history of the event. Note that he's neatly avoiding
> explaining the previous failed attempts at setting up a
> debate with him.

COMPLETE LACK OF SUPPORT FOR CLAIM:
> http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.audio.opinion/msg/8898a716fedd3765


Your buddy Malesweski forces your hand and you got nothing.
Maybe a little more private email is in order to avoid more public
embarrassment. :-D

[Arny Krueger]

"sam" > wrote in message

> "Arny Krueger" > wrote
>
> CLAIM:
>>>> No, I think we see a new strategy evolving - Atkinson
is
>> now
>>>> claiming that he and some other RAO regular thought the
>>>> whole thing up, including his lame showing and the
>> missing
>>>> equipment, last fall.
>
> PARTIAL RETRACTION:
>> I was kidding about the missing equipment, but here's
what I
>> think is the inaugural post for Atkinson's new
revisionist
>> history of the event. Note that he's neatly avoiding
>> explaining the previous failed attempts at setting up a
>> debate with him.

> COMPLETE LACK OF SUPPORT FOR CLAIM:
>>
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.audio.opinion/msg/8898a716fedd3765

Well Surf, its just another reason to write you off for
inability to discern the obvious.

[Robert Morein]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> I believe JA just bragged that he was going to make his
> epochal statement about the HE2005 debate shortly.
>
> What Grounds Will Atkinson Use To Claim Victory At The
> HE2005 Debate?
>
Maybe he won't.
Although I am partial to Atkinson's point of view, neither of you did a
particularly good job of defending your points of view.
At best, Arny, you could have been the better presenter. If nothing else, it
shows an interesting dichotomy between your behavior "here", and in a public
forum.
Here, before thousands of lurkers, and for Google's everlasting record, you
choose to project a belligerent, ugly countenance.
There, before a much smaller audience, you chose to be a polite, slightly
effective advocate of your point of view.
It is strange that you choose here to project an image that is so
disadvantageous to you. Obviously, for one hour, you were aware of how a
human being should act, if for no other reason than self interest. Here, the
same awareness eludes you.

[Arny Krueger]

"Robert Morein" > wrote in
message
> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> ...
>> I believe JA just bragged that he was going to make his
>> epochal statement about the HE2005 debate shortly.
>>
>> What Grounds Will Atkinson Use To Claim Victory At The
>> HE2005 Debate?

> Maybe he won't.

That would be uncharacteristically realistic of him.

> Although I am partial to Atkinson's point of view, neither
of
> you did a particularly good job of defending your points
of
> view.

As compared to what?

> At best, Arny, you could have been the better presenter.
If
> nothing else, it shows an interesting dichotomy between
your
> behavior "here", and in a public forum.

Keeping the flaming idiots under control helps me get my job
done better.

> Here, before thousands of lurkers, and for Google's
> everlasting record, you choose to project a belligerent,
ugly
> countenance.

As compared to what?

> There, before a much smaller audience, you chose to be a
> polite, slightly effective advocate of your point of view.

As compared to what?

> It is strange that you choose here to project an image
that is
> so disadvantageous to you.

Just goes to show that I think of RAO.

> Obviously, for one hour, you were
> aware of how a human being should act, if for no other
reason
> than self interest.

Had you, Middius or Weil been there, things might have been
different. As things were, Fremer and Harry did a good job
of keeping the flaming a-hole count up.

> Here, the same awareness eludes you.

Bob, as if you are any kind of paragon of self-awareness.
Three words: Supreme Court Decision.

[Robert Morein]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "Robert Morein" > wrote in
> message
> > "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> I believe JA just bragged that he was going to make his
> >> epochal statement about the HE2005 debate shortly.
> >>
[snip]
> Bob, as if you are any kind of paragon of self-awareness.
> Three words: Supreme Court Decision. I was found not guilty of murdering
my dead son, Nate.
>
Arny, you are reverting to the typical sociopathic lying weasel that you are
so widely known to be. There was no Supreme Court decision, but that doesn't
stop a psychopath like you.

I engaged in a battle to establish new common law, and I failed.
The Supreme Court hears between 1% nd 2% of the appeals presented to them.
They did not choose to hear my case. The fact that my case was not chosen
for review is not a shameful thing. I take pride that I fought a good
battle, and I certainly don't go around cursing the law of the land.

It is worth noting that we won in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas.
Since the case was not heard, no precedent was established.

[George M. Middius]

More kraziness from the Krooborg.

> Keeping the flaming idiots under control helps me get my job
> done better.

Arnii, you've mentioned your "Usenet career" on several previous occasions.
You've also referred to your Usenet "work" and your "business" as if you had
some financial stake in trivial arguments. Now you say you have a "job" on
Usenet.

Has it ever occurred to you that you're not right in the head?

[Robert Morein]

"George M. Middius" <cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net> wrote
in message ...
>
>
> More kraziness from the Krooborg.
>
> > Keeping the flaming idiots under control helps me get my job
> > done better.
>
> Arnii, you've mentioned your "Usenet career" on several previous
occasions.
> You've also referred to your Usenet "work" and your "business" as if you
had
> some financial stake in trivial arguments. Now you say you have a "job" on
> Usenet.
>
> Has it ever occurred to you that you're not right in the head?
>
He is nuts, and yet, he managed to stuff it for the debate.
What makes these nuts think it's OK to take their clothes off in front of
thousands of people?

[Arny Krueger]

"Robert Morein" > wrote in
message
> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Robert Morein" > wrote
in
>> message
>>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> I believe JA just bragged that he was going to make his
>>>> epochal statement about the HE2005 debate shortly.
>>>>
> [snip]
>> Bob, as if you are any kind of paragon of self-awareness.
>> Three words: Supreme Court Decision.


<interjected by Bob Morien - that paragon of normalicy> I
was found not guilty of murdering my dead son, Nate.

> Arny, you are reverting to the typical sociopathic lying
> weasel that you are so widely known to be. There was no
> Supreme Court decision, but that doesn't stop a psychopath
> like you.

Sure there was a Supreme Court decision- a decision to not
hear your case because it was beneath their dignity. Smart
men, those supremes!

> I engaged in a battle to establish new common law, and I
failed.

For your next trick Bob, why not try to fly to the moon
under your own power?

[Robert Morein]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "Robert Morein" > wrote in
> message
> > "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> "Robert Morein" > wrote
> in
> >> message
> >>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> >>> ...
> >>>> I believe JA just bragged that he was going to make his
> >>>> epochal statement about the HE2005 debate shortly.
> >>>>
> > [snip]
> >> Bob, as if you are any kind of paragon of self-awareness.
> >> Three words: Supreme Court Decision.
>
>
> <interjected by Bob Morien - that paragon of normalicy> I
> was found not guilty of murdering my dead son, Nate.
>
> > Arny, you are reverting to the typical sociopathic lying
> > weasel that you are so widely known to be. There was no
> > Supreme Court decision, but that doesn't stop a psychopath
> > like you.
>
> Sure there was a Supreme Court decision- a decision to not
> hear your case because it was beneath their dignity. Smart
> men, those supremes!
>
Sorry, that's not a decision.
A decision is a written court opinion on the case.

How is Nate doing these days? Do you think he's black and dessicated, or has
the flesh fallen completely off his bones?
Do you like the idea of fungus growing out of one of his eye sockets?

[ScottW]

Robert Morein wrote:
> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> ...
> > "Robert Morein" > wrote in
> > message
> > > "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > >> I believe JA just bragged that he was going to make his
> > >> epochal statement about the HE2005 debate shortly.
> > >>
> [snip]
> > Bob, as if you are any kind of paragon of self-awareness.
> > Three words: Supreme Court Decision. I was found not guilty of murdering
> my dead son, Nate.

No end to real sickness here.

ScottW

[Arny Krueger]

"Robert Morein" > wrote in
message

> How is Nate doing these days? Do you think he's black and
> dessicated, or has the flesh fallen completely off his
bones?

Nate was cremated and the ashes were scattered over certain
famous sand dunes in western Michigan, certain portions of
the Pacific seashore in California, and on the top of a
certain famous mountain in Pennsylvania.

> Do you like the idea of fungus growing out of one of his
eye sockets?

Just one of your fantasies, eh my pesky little normal?

[Arny Krueger]

"ScottW" > wrote in message
ups.com
> Robert Morein wrote:
>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> "Robert Morein" > wrote
in
>>> message
>>>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>> I believe JA just bragged that he was going to make
his
>>>>> epochal statement about the HE2005 debate shortly.
>>>>>
>> [snip]
>>> Bob, as if you are any kind of paragon of
self-awareness.
>>> Three words: Supreme Court Decision. I was found not
guilty
>>> of murdering my dead son, Nate.
>
> No end to real sickness here.

Scott, your good friend Middius opened the door to all of
this, Scotty. Your other good friend Art thinks Mididus
always really funny.

[ScottW]

Arny Krueger wrote:
> "ScottW" > wrote in message
> ups.com
> > Robert Morein wrote:
> >> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >>> "Robert Morein" > wrote
> in
> >>> message
> >>>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> >>>> ...
> >>>>> I believe JA just bragged that he was going to make
> his
> >>>>> epochal statement about the HE2005 debate shortly.
> >>>>>
> >> [snip]
> >>> Bob, as if you are any kind of paragon of
> self-awareness.
> >>> Three words: Supreme Court Decision. I was found not
> guilty
> >>> of murdering my dead son, Nate.
> >
> > No end to real sickness here.
>
> Scott, your good friend Middius opened the door to all of
> this, Scotty. Your other good friend Art thinks Mididus
> always really funny.

Once again you're only half right.

ScottW

[Robert Morein]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "Robert Morein" > wrote in
> message
>
> > How is Nate doing these days? Do you think he's black and
> > dessicated, or has the flesh fallen completely off his
> bones?
>
> Nate was cremated and the ashes were scattered over certain
> famous sand dunes in western Michigan, certain portions of
> the Pacific seashore in California, and on the top of a
> certain famous mountain in Pennsylvania.
>
> > Do you like the idea of fungus growing out of one of his
> eye sockets?
>
> Just one of your fantasies, eh my pesky little normal?
>
Not at all. Did he die at home?

What do you remember about his last minutes? Labored breathing, gasping,
then, perhaps, a ten second pause? He takes what appears to be a normal
breath, and then lies quiet, with only the whites of his eyes showing,
through half-open lids?

[George M. Middius]

Scottieborg said:

> > Scott, your good friend Middius opened the door to all of
> > this, Scotty. Your other good friend Art thinks Mididus
> > always really funny.

> Once again you're only half right.

Which half? It sounds 100% wrong to me. It was Krooger who used his poor
dead son as a trolling device on RAO, not I. And I'm pretty sure Art doesn't
always find me funny (assuming that's who Mr. **** meant by "Mididus").

So both klaims are entirely Krooful, i.e. they're Bull****! Bull****!
Bull****! Oh, sorry, you wouldn't get that reference. I'll bet you're a
powerful ass, though. Did you get that one?

[Robert Morein]

"ScottW" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>
>
> Robert Morein wrote:
> > "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > "Robert Morein" > wrote in
> > > message
> > > > "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> > > > ...
> > > >> I believe JA just bragged that he was going to make his
> > > >> epochal statement about the HE2005 debate shortly.
> > > >>
> > [snip]
> > > Bob, as if you are any kind of paragon of self-awareness.
> > > Three words: Supreme Court Decision. I was found not guilty of
murdering
> > my dead son, Nate.
>
> No end to real sickness here.
>
> ScottW
>
He just ****ed me off with that lie about the existence of a "Supreme Court
Decision." It was irrelvant, intended to cause pain, and for no other
reason.

[[email protected]]

Robert Morein? said:

>What do you remember about his last minutes?

This sort of statement is one of those that makes me wish I coulld
reach into the computer and rip out the heart of the person who made
it.

[[email protected]]

Robert Morein said:

>He just ****ed me off with that lie about the existence of a "Supreme Court
>Decision." It was irrelvant, intended to cause pain, and for no other
>reason

Thank you for once again revealing that you feel you must sink lower
than than your imagined opponent.

[Robert Morein]

> wrote in message
ups.com...
> Robert Morein? said:
>
> >What do you remember about his last minutes?
>
> This sort of statement is one of those that makes me wish I coulld
> reach into the computer and rip out the heart of the person who made
> it.
>
You don't have to. Call me at (215) 646-4894 and do it verbally.

[Robert Morein]

> wrote in message
oups.com...
> Robert Morein said:
>
> >He just ****ed me off with that lie about the existence of a "Supreme
Court
> >Decision." It was irrelvant, intended to cause pain, and for no other
> >reason
>
> Thank you for once again revealing that you feel you must sink lower
> than than your imagined opponent.
>
Give Arny some of your time.

[Arny Krueger]

"Robert Morein" > wrote in
message

>Did he die at home?

No.

> What do you remember about his last minutes?

I wasn't present.

[Arny Krueger]

> wrote in message
ups.com
> Robert Morein? said:
>
>> What do you remember about his last minutes?
>
> This sort of statement is one of those that makes me wish
I
> coulld reach into the computer and rip out the heart of
the
> person who made it.

In Bob's case, there is nothing to rip. Ditto for the
brain.

[Arny Krueger]

"Robert Morein" > wrote in
message

> He just ****ed me off with that lie about the existence of
a
> "Supreme Court Decision."

No lie, fact. They decided to not hear your case Robert.

>It was irrelvant, intended to cause pain, and for no other
reason.

Well Bob, your comments didn't cause me any pain. But thanks
for admitting that was you goal.

[ScottW]

"George M. Middius" <cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net> wrote
in message ...
>
>
> Scottieborg said:
>
>> > Scott, your good friend Middius opened the door to all of
>> > this, Scotty. Your other good friend Art thinks Mididus
>> > always really funny.
>
>> Once again you're only half right.
>
> Which half?
> It sounds 100% wrong to me. It was Krooger who used his poor
> dead son as a trolling device on RAO, not I. And I'm pretty sure Art
> doesn't
> always find me funny (assuming that's who Mr. **** meant by "Mididus").
>
> So both klaims are entirely Krooful, i.e. they're Bull****! Bull****!
> Bull****! Oh, sorry, you wouldn't get that reference. I'll bet you're a
> powerful ass, though. Did you get that one?

I was only referring to his reference to you as my friend.
Thanks for proving my point.

ScottW

[ScottW]

"Robert Morein" > wrote in message
...
>
> "ScottW" > wrote in message
> ups.com...
>>
>>
>> Robert Morein wrote:
>> > "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>> > ...
>> > > "Robert Morein" > wrote in
>> > > message
>> > > > "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>> > > > ...
>> > > >> I believe JA just bragged that he was going to make his
>> > > >> epochal statement about the HE2005 debate shortly.
>> > > >>
>> > [snip]
>> > > Bob, as if you are any kind of paragon of self-awareness.
>> > > Three words: Supreme Court Decision. I was found not guilty of
> murdering
>> > my dead son, Nate.
>>
>> No end to real sickness here.
>>
>> ScottW
>>
> He just ****ed me off

Letting him do that is letting him dictate your behavior.

>with that lie about the existence of a "Supreme Court
> Decision." It was irrelvant, intended to cause pain, and for no other
> reason.

Why let him know so obviously that it worked?

ScottW

[George M. Middius]

Scottie, are you worried about cooties?

> >> > Scott, your good friend Middius opened the door to all of
> >> > this, Scotty. Your other good friend Art thinks Mididus
> >> > always really funny.

> >> Once again you're only half right.

> > Which half? It sounds 100% wrong to me. It was Krooger who used his poor
> > dead son as a trolling device on RAO, not I. And I'm pretty sure Art
> > doesn't always find me funny (assuming that's who Mr. **** meant by "Mididus").

> > So both klaims are entirely Krooful, i.e. they're Bull****! Bull****!
> > Bull****! Oh, sorry, you wouldn't get that reference. I'll bet you're a
> > powerful ass, though. Did you get that one?

> I was only referring to his reference to you as my friend.
> Thanks for proving my point.

Did you take that seriously? I thought Mr. Feces was speaking pejoratively.
But maybe you're right and he can't tell the difference. I suppose that
might be because everybody he thinks is his friend actually hates him.

[George M. Middius]

The Terrierborg is sniffing at the trail but coming up empty.

> >with that lie about the existence of a "Supreme Court
> > Decision." It was irrelvant, intended to cause pain, and for no other
> > reason.

> Why let him know so obviously that it worked?

For some reason, you seem to take naturally to Krooger's sadism. Is that a
problem for you in real life?

[Robert Morein]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "Robert Morein" > wrote in
> message
>
> > He just ****ed me off with that lie about the existence of
> a
> > "Supreme Court Decision."
>
> No lie, fact. They decided to not hear your case Robert.

No fact, lie. A Supreme Court Decision occurs only in trial. But that is
typical of you, Arny. You're a psychopathic liar.
>
> >It was irrelvant, intended to cause pain, and for no other
> reason.
>
> Well Bob, your comments didn't cause me any pain. But thanks
> for admitting that was you goal.
>
You're welcome. What did Nate die of?

[Arny Krueger]

"Robert Morein" > wrote in
message

> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> ...

>> "Robert Morein" > wrote
in
>> message

>>> He just ****ed me off with that lie about the existence
of a
>>> "Supreme Court Decision."

>> No lie, fact. They decided to not hear your case Robert.

> No fact, lie. A Supreme Court Decision occurs only in
trial.
> But that is typical of you, Arny. You're a psychopathic
liar.

There's no lie, Bob. I've explained exactly what I meant and
you agree 100% with the details of my explanation.

You are nuts Robert. You are nuts about audio, and have been
for years. You have been nuts with hatred of me for years
because of my opinions about audio. You were nuts to try to
force Drexel to give you a PhD in court, and you were doubly
nuts to pursue it up to the Supreme Court of the US. Ask 100
sucessful PhD candidates and you'll probably find that
virtually all of them will agree with my asessment. Remember
that in my family and circle of friends and associates, PhD
candidates have this strong tendency to succeed.

>>> It was irrelvant, intended to cause pain, and for no
other
>> reason.
>
>> Well Bob, your comments didn't cause me any pain. But
thanks
>> for admitting that was you goal.

> You're welcome. What did Nate die of?

Brain hemhorrage. This article describes his condition:

http://aplasticcentral.com/avm/

[Arny Krueger]

"ScottW" > wrote in message
news:cTECe.47179$up5.37793@lakeread02
> "Robert Morein" > wrote in
> message ...

>> He just ****ed me off

> Letting him do that is letting him dictate your behavior.

Not only that, it caused him to figuratively wet himself in
public.

But Robert is prone to do that, anyway.

>> with that lie about the existence of a "Supreme Court
>> Decision." It was irrelvant, intended to cause pain, and
for
>> no other reason.

Bob has this problem with the facts. Of course many facts
relating to the choices he's made aren't very pretty.

> Why let him know so obviously that it worked?

Because he's out of control. He's nuts. He's also very
immature.

[Fella]

Arny Krueger wrote:

> I believe JA just bragged that...

I still can't figure out for the life of me what atkinson was thinking
about when he invited you, of all people, to such a debate. He must have
figured it out all thorughout the years that you are scrappy, you are
immature, you lie, you cheat, you are cheap and petty, that you have the
soul of a sewer rat, and that you wouldn't fight like a man, you
wouldn't argue like a man.

He gave you much more credit and recognition than due your way. And
that's just the simple truth.

Was it that he needed to come up with some novelty, some perverted
controversy tio attract more attention to the show, or he was practising
some twisted form of masochism? I wish he would just come out and explain.

[Arny Krueger]

"Fella" > wrote in message


> I still can't figure out for the life of me what atkinson
was
> thinking about when he invited you, of all people, to such
a
> debate.

I agree. I figured he'd take a drubbing if he was prepared
for the debate, but he wasn't even prepared.

>He must have figured it out all thorughout the years
> that you are scrappy, you are immature, you lie, you
cheat,
> you are cheap and petty, that you have the soul of a sewer
> rat, and that you wouldn't fight like a man, you
> wouldn't argue like a man.

However in fact, I was the only person there who presented a
cogent, well-supported explanation of his viewpoint. I did
it by effortlessly deconstructing Atkinson's own description
of what the debate was about.

> He gave you much more credit and recognition than due your
> way. And that's just the simple truth.

That's his problem. I was just along for the ride.

> Was it that he needed to come up with some novelty, some
> perverted controversy tio attract more attention to the
show,
> or he was practising some twisted form of masochism? I
wish he
> would just come out and explain.

I don't think he knows.

[Fella]

Arny Krueger wrote:

>
> However in fact, I was the only person there who presented a
> cogent, well-supported explanation of his viewpoint.

Arny, you didn't even present your "true" viewpoint. I listened to the
mp3 just a week or so ago.

You *do* have a tendency to water-down your petty bickering, your
bizarre, inconceivable, whining existence when you are in a corner, or
facing someone in flesh and blood. But, that's understandable.

> I did
> it by effortlessly ..

Are we talking about the same mp3?

JA put forth a valid argument with the amp story, and yes, that's how it
would *exactly* go down. How many times in your life you selected
something and figured out later on that your selection was based on the
wrong premises? I don't think there is one single human out there that
hasn't gone thorugh such an experience. The "wrong premises" above
refers to ABX:ing or DBT:ing audio equipment. It's just not applicable.

Both of you got excited, couldn't manage to even breathe properly. It
was simple situational fear, I guess.



>
> I was just along for the ride.
>

That "ride" might well be the biggest accomplishment in your life.

[Arny Krueger]

"Fella" > wrote in message

> Arny Krueger wrote:
>
>>
>> However in fact, I was the only person there who
presented a
>> cogent, well-supported explanation of his viewpoint.
>
> Arny, you didn't even present your "true" viewpoint.

How can you say such a thing?

Do you know my viewpoint better than I?

> I listened to the mp3 just a week or so ago.

Didn't help your thinking much I see. You still apparently
have delusions of omniscience.

> You *do* have a tendency to water-down your petty
bickering,
> your bizarre, inconceivable, whining existence when you
are in
> a corner, or facing someone in flesh and blood. But,
that's
> understandable.

Fella, you're way off topic here. We weren't talking about
your hatred for me, but rather what my viewpoint is.

>> I did it by effortlessly ..

> Are we talking about the same mp3?

> JA put forth a valid argument with the amp story,

There was no clearly-stated argument at all, just a
20-year-old anecdote that was inconclusive on the best day
of its life.

> and yes, that's how it would *exactly* go down.

You mean that the way the anecdote went down Atkinson was as
weak on scientific investigation then as he is now?

> How many times in your
> life you selected something and figured out later on that
your
> selection was based on the wrong premises?

Many times, but that's not all that relevant in the case of
Atkinson's anecdote. Atkinson blew it by not collecting
reliable information about what was wrong with the Quad
after he determined that there was a problem.

>I don't think there
> is one single human out there that hasn't gone thorugh
such an
> experience. The "wrong premises" above refers to ABX:ing
or
> DBT:ing audio equipment. It's just not applicable.

That would be opinion stated as fact with no supporting
evidence provided.

> Both of you got excited, couldn't manage to even breathe
> properly. It was simple situational fear, I guess.

Well Fella, its easy to be perfect in your mind.

>> I was just along for the ride.

> That "ride" might well be the biggest accomplishment in
your life.

Not hardly. Arguably the biggest accomplishment in my life
is one going on two children with PhDs in Cancer Biology.

[Fella]

Arny Krueger wrote:

>
>
> How can you say such a thing?
>
> Do you know my viewpoint better than I?

You didn't say that all amps, cd paleyers, etc, sound the same there,
did you? You didn't say wire is wire. That's your viewpoint.

>
>
> Fella, you're way off topic here.

It's exactly the topic, you are all about argument and whining on the
usenet, behind a keyboard, nothing else. But when you meet someone in
the flesh you water it down to the point where you lose some of the edge
(and I *am* talking about your judgements and views on audio) to make
yourslef more acceptable.


> We weren't talking about
> your hatred for me, but rather what my viewpoint is.
>

Those are observations Arny, I don't hate you, not anymore.


>
> You mean that the way the anecdote went down Atkinson was as
> weak on scientific investigation then as he is now?

Science itself is weak when it somes to investigating such phenomenon,
yet. Science is about *explaining* real world occurences, real world
phenomenon.

Science is *NOT* about finding a means to force the real world to comply
with a given set of thought.


You practice skcienccence, Arny, not science.


> what was wrong with the Quad
> after he determined that there was a problem.

I donät think there was anyting wrong wth the quad.

>
>>Both of you got excited, couldn't manage to even breathe
>>properly. It was simple situational fear, I guess.
>
>
> Well Fella, its easy to be perfect in your mind.
>

I am not saying that I am the perfect public speaker. I am just saying
that you two were not.





> Arguably the biggest accomplishment in my life
> is one going on two children with PhDs in Cancer Biology.

That's *their* accomplishment, not yours, and I congratulate them for
it, not you. Let's say that one of them makes a breakthrough
accomplishment and gets awarded the nobel prize. Why not? I wish them
all the luck, and best. In any case, it would not be *you* that would
get that award, it would be given to *them*.

Just be happt that you didn't get in their way. that whatever reason to
spill poison you have, you spilt it on the usenet, and not on them.

[George M. Middius]

Fella said to the Big ****:

> I still can't figure out for the life of me what atkinson was thinking
> about when he invited you, of all people, to such a debate.

No need to figure -- JA told us explicitly in advance of the debate what his
goals were. The "subjective vs. objective" component was just
window-dressing.

You should be able to find JA's post in Google. I'll make it easy for you:

. com

[Arny Krueger]

"Fella" > wrote in message

> Arny Krueger wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> How can you say such a thing?
>>
>> Do you know my viewpoint better than I?
>
> You didn't say that all amps, cd paleyers, etc, sound the
same
> there, did you? You didn't say wire is wire. That's your
> viewpoint.

Nobody asked.
/
>> Fella, you're way off topic here.

> It's exactly the topic, you are all about argument and
whining
> on the usenet, behind a keyboard, nothing else.

Except that isn't true. That's bout you, but not about me.
You and Middius are faceless, soundless dweebs, while pix of
me are posted all over the web, as is a lenthy recording of
me talking about my ideas about audio.

>But when you
> meet someone in the flesh you water it down to the point
where
> you lose some of the edge (and I *am* talking about your
> judgements and views on audio) to make yourslef more
> acceptable.

>> We weren't talking about
>> your hatred for me, but rather what my viewpoint is.

> Those are observations Arny,

They are your observations, but you weren't there were you?

>I don't hate you, not anymore.

Thank you.

>> You mean that the way the anecdote went down Atkinson was
as
>> weak on scientific investigation then as he is now?

> Science itself is weak when it somes to investigating such
> phenomenon, yet.

It's a lot stronger than the science that yu and Atkinson
are willing or capable of doing.

>Science is about *explaining* real world
> occurences, real world phenomenon.


I said that at the debate.


> Science is *NOT* about finding a means to force the real
world
> to comply with a given set of thought.

Right. Science is not about proving the fallacious theories
of mislead audiophiles.

>You practice skcienccence, Arny, not science.

Prove it. That's just Middius-gibberish.

> what was wrong with the Quad
> after he determined that there was a problem.


> I donät think there was anyting wrong wth the quad.

Oh you think that Atkinson was hearing problems that didn't
exist?

>>> Both of you got excited, couldn't manage to even breathe
>>> properly. It was simple situational fear, I guess.

>> Well Fella, its easy to be perfect in your mind.

> I am not saying that I am the perfect public speaker. I
am
> just saying that you two were not.

That's a trivial observation if there ever was one.

>> Arguably the biggest accomplishment in my life
>> is one going on two children with PhDs in Cancer Biology.

> That's *their* accomplishment, not yours,

Speaks to your disconnnectedness with child-rearing.

> and I congratulate them for it, not you.

They do deserve a lot of credit.

> Let's say that one of them makes a
> breakthrough accomplishment and gets awarded the nobel
prize.

Unlikely, but a nice thought.

> Why not? I wish them all the luck, and best. In any case,
it
> would not be *you* that would get that award, it would be
> given to *them*.

So, do you think that they will forget their parent's
assistance and guidance?

> Just be happt that you didn't get in their way.

Speaks to your disconnnectedness with child-rearing.

>that whatever
> reason to spill poison you have, you spilt it on the
usenet,
> and not on them.

I only tried to provide an antidote for the rats that were
already poisoned.

[Arny Krueger]

"George M. Middius" <cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast
[dot] net> wrote in message

> Fella said to the Big ****:
>
>> I still can't figure out for the life of me what atkinson
was
>> thinking about when he invited you, of all people, to
such a
>> debate.
>
> No need to figure -- JA told us explicitly in advance of
the
> debate what his goals were. The "subjective vs. objective"
> component was just window-dressing.

Thanks for admitting that Atkinson is all about window
dressnig.

> You should be able to find JA's post in Google. I'll make
it
> easy for you:
>
> . com

Middius, that's just more window dressing. I guess you can't
tell the difference between window dressing and substance.

[Fella]

Arny Krueger wrote:
> "Fella" > wrote in message
>
>
>>It's exactly the topic, you are all about argument and
>
> whining
>
>>on the usenet, behind a keyboard, nothing else.
>
>
> Except that isn't true. That's bout you, but not about me.


Man. You are pointless.

[Arny Krueger]

"Fella" > wrote in message

> Arny Krueger wrote:
>> "Fella" > wrote in message
>>
>>
>>> It's exactly the topic, you are all about argument and
>>
>> whining
>>
>>> on the usenet, behind a keyboard, nothing else.
>>
>>
>> Except that isn't true. That's bout you, but not about
me.
>
>
> Man. You are pointless.

So fella where is your pix? Where is the recording of your
debate with Atkinson?

[Fella]

George M. Middius wrote:

>
> Fella said to the Big ****:
>
>
>>I still can't figure out for the life of me what atkinson was thinking
>>about when he invited you, of all people, to such a debate.
>
>
> No need to figure -- JA told us explicitly in advance of the debate what his
> goals were. The "subjective vs. objective" component was just
> window-dressing.
>
> You should be able to find JA's post in Google. I'll make it easy for you:
>
> . com
>
>
>

Ok, that sheds a bit of a light on things. But still, he knew that Arny
is bereft of any and all human virtue, he DOES NOT give onto ceasar what
is ceasars's, never. Even writing such a thing about him is absurd,
being so obvious. He believes in his own lies, all the while knowing
that they are lies. These are all so obvious points. My point is that
atkinson knew all this as much as anyone else and still gave him the
recognition that he is man enough to sit down and have a debate with. He
actually gave substance to this character. He also knew that in the
aftermath of the debate arny would just go on with his demogogy, his
cop-outs, that he would take cheap shots left and right, and simply deny
and deny and deny and that nothing would change.

Plus, the five-six points he puts forth are not enough to explain why he
specifically chose arny to defend the objectivist viewpoint. Any cause
arny fights for, suffers.

[Arny Krueger]

"Fella" > wrote in message



> Any cause arny fights for, suffers.

That's why ABX rose to be the most commonly-discussed in all
audio groups for all time.

That's why pro-DBT posters are still kicking golden ear butt
over in RAHE.

That's why the general take is that I won the HE2005 debate.

[Fella]

Arny Krueger wrote:
> "Fella" > wrote in message
>
>
>
>
>> Any cause arny fights for, suffers.
>
>
> That's why ABX rose to be the most commonly-discussed in all
> audio groups for all time.
>
> That's why pro-DBT posters are still kicking golden ear butt
> over in RAHE.
>
> That's why the general take is that I won the HE2005 debate.
>
>

Arny I came back to RAO to ask a couple of questions, opinions about
amps. I read some history, made the mistake of posting a few responses,
got polluted and disgusted yet again by debating with you, and now I am
ready to leave again. :(

[Arny Krueger]

"Fella" > wrote in message

> Arny Krueger wrote:
>> "Fella" > wrote in message
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Any cause arny fights for, suffers.
>>
>>
>> That's why ABX rose to be the most commonly-discussed in
all
>> audio groups for all time.
>>
>> That's why pro-DBT posters are still kicking golden ear
butt
>> over in RAHE.
>>
>> That's why the general take is that I won the HE2005
debate.
>>
>>
>
> Arny I came back to RAO to ask a couple of questions,
opinions
> about amps. I read some history, made the mistake of
posting a
> few responses, got polluted and disgusted yet again by
> debating with you, and now I am ready to leave again. :(

Truth is Fella, you've behaved like a real @$$ every time
you've visited here. With regulars like Morien and Middius,
its not like you're going to drag the place down very much,
whether you go or stay.

[George Middius]

Robert Morein said:

>> This sort of statement is one of those that makes me wish I coulld
>> reach into the computer and rip out the heart of the person who made
>> it.

>You don't have to. Call me at (215) 646-4894 and do it verbally.

Intense idea. I've always suspected Mickey has a severe stuttering problem. Let
us know either way.

[George Middius]

PsychoticBorg ranted:

>> You should be able to find JA's post in Google. I'll make it
>> easy for you:
>> . com

>Middius, that's just more window dressing. I guess you can't
>tell the difference between window dressing and substance.

Thanks Mr. Kroofeces for admitting that you are more repulsive than the world's
nastiest port-a-potty.

I see you spelled my name correctly today. Did you skip your breakfast turd?

[George Middius]

The Big **** does his ****ty thing.

>> Man. You are pointless.

>So fella where is your pix? Where is the recording of your
>debate with Atkinson?

How could Turdy have ever convinced himself this is an effective "debating
trade" technique? He tries to undermine every criticism directed at his ****ful
self by demanding the criticizer be an expert in the field. Turdy uses this
dodge for everything, from the godawful design of his horrendous web site to his
screechy, whiney performance in New York, to his extremely feeble attempt to
justify his aBxism ****ware.

On reflection, I think infantile is too simplistic. I'm at a loss, other than
"crazy as a loon".

[George Middius]

Fella said:

>>>I still can't figure out for the life of me what atkinson was thinking
>>>about when he invited you, of all people, to such a debate.

>> No need to figure -- JA told us explicitly in advance of the debate what his
>> goals were. The "subjective vs. objective" component was just
>> window-dressing.

>> You should be able to find JA's post in Google. I'll make it easy for you:
>> . com

>Ok, that sheds a bit of a light on things. But still, he knew that Arny
>is bereft of any and all human virtue, he DOES NOT give onto ceasar what
>is ceasars's, never. Even writing such a thing about him is absurd,
>being so obvious. He believes in his own lies, all the while knowing
>that they are lies. These are all so obvious points. My point is that
>atkinson knew all this as much as anyone else and still gave him the
>recognition that he is man enough to sit down and have a debate with. He
>actually gave substance to this character. He also knew that in the
>aftermath of the debate arny would just go on with his demogogy, his
>cop-outs, that he would take cheap shots left and right, and simply deny
>and deny and deny and that nothing would change.

Yes, I think you’re right about all of this. And JA probably agres.

>Plus, the five-six points he puts forth are not enough to explain why he
>specifically chose arny to defend the objectivist viewpoint. Any cause
>arny fights for, suffers.

JA’s real objective was stated in the last point in his post: He wanted Turdy to
say, in person, those slanderous things he’s been saying on Usenet. Such as, to
give a few examples, that JA is a “fraud”, that Stereophile is a criminal
enterprise, that JA “interfered” with Turdborg’s “business”, and that JA emailed
kiddie porn to Mr. ****.

I think he should have confronted Mr. **** directly with those things. JA
probably hoped that after meeting Turdy in person, a détente would result. This
is normal when people who have disagreed come together to find a common ground
and resolve their differences. However, Krooger is too far gone to be interested
in such an outcome, so JA’s decision to keep the actual “debate” on the topics
of “ob. vs. sub” and “testing” may have been just cutting his losses.

[[email protected]]

Sockpuppet Middius said:

>For some reason, you seem to take naturally to Krooger's sadism. Is that a
>problem for you in real life?

Thanks for revealing that you view real life as an outsider.

[[email protected]]

Fella wonders:

>I still can't figure out for the life of me what atkinson was thinking
>about when he invited you, of all people, to such a debate.

Most likely he was trying to salvage some of his soiled honor, since
he'd run screaming away from such proposals in the past.

>He must have
>figured it out all thorughout the years that you are scrappy, you are
>immature, you lie, you cheat, you are cheap and petty, that you have the
>soul of a sewer rat, and that you wouldn't fight like a man, you
>wouldn't argue like a man.

You appear to be projecting your own failings and/or JA's. Note that
the debate started out with JA's passive aggressive tactic of not
providing the equipment needed for the power point presentation.

>He gave you much more credit and recognition than due your way. And
>that's just the simple truth.

If it were the simple truth you wouldn't know it. The fact is JA is by
comparison, technically incompetent. It's not a surprise that you
don't realize that fact.

>Was it that he needed to come up with some novelty, some perverted
>controversy tio attract more attention to the show, or he was practising
>some twisted form of masochism? I wish he would just come out and explain.

Expecting clear concise answers from JA is a pipe dream.

More likely it was an attempt by what's left of his conscience to try
and help save high end audio. Since it is clearly dying on the vine,
between the patronizing way high end dealers tend to talk down to new
customers and the blatent bull**** spewed forth by rags like SP, it
needs all the help it get. Of course the problem is that far too many
people have realized that the majority of high end audio projects are
improved speakers, since only speakers and room acoustics are likely to
really improve the sound of one's hi-fi, the rest is all just smoke and
mirrors, you know it JA knows it, and most of the audio buying public
knows it.

[[email protected]]

Fella said:

>I came back to RAO to ask a couple of questions, opinions about
>amps. I read some history, made the mistake of posting a few responses,
>got polluted and disgusted yet again by debating with you, and now I am
>ready to leave again. :(

You got your ass handed to you in a proper DBT and then whined about
how no mattter what the comparison showed, you KNOW that one amp is
better than the other, even though you can't hear any differende.

Don't let the door hit your irrational ass on the way out.

[George Middius]

Mickey does the "debating trade" dance.

>Sockpuppet Middius said:

<sneer>

>>For some reason, you seem to take naturally to Krooger's sadism. Is that a
>>problem for you in real life?

>Thanks for revealing that you view real life as an outsider.

Hey, not bad for a first attempt at Kroologic, Mickey. Uh... is it your first
attempt? Your stutter makes it hard to follow your babbling.

[Sander deWaal]

"Robert Morein" > said:

>How is Nate doing these days? <snip>


This is below anything, Bob, I'm disappionted in you.

Please stop.

--

"Audio as a serious hobby is going down the tubes."
- Howard Ferstler, 25/4/2005

[Sander deWaal]

"Arny Krueger" > said:


>That's why ABX rose to be the most commonly-discussed in all
>audio groups for all time.


That's regrettably true.


>That's why pro-DBT posters are still kicking golden ear butt
>over in RAHE.

>That's why the general take is that I won the HE2005 debate.


Is that why Atkinson, De Paravicini, Levinson, (Bill) Johnson,
Qvortrup et al are famous names in audio, and Krueger, Nousaine,
Ferstler et al are not? ;-)

How come you're not an audio professional, Arny?

--

"Audio as a serious hobby is going down the tubes."
- Howard Ferstler, 25/4/2005

[George Middius]

Sander deWaal said:

>>How is Nate doing these days? <snip>

>This is below anything, Bob, I'm disappionted in you.
>Please stop.

Is it really below Krooger's attempt to pour salt in Bob's wounds regarding his
lawsuit? If so, how much below?

I'm not saying Bob's comment is OK. But it didn't come out of the blue.

After a certain amount of Krooger's krapola, people just get disgusted and hit
him back as hard as they can. It's human nature. Krooger, being an implacable
paranoid whackjob, is bereft of any feelings, or even a soul, in my opinion.
That quality renders him immune to both empathy and sympathy.

[ScottW]

George M. Middius wrote:
> The Terrierborg is sniffing at the trail but coming up empty.
>
> > >with that lie about the existence of a "Supreme Court
> > > Decision." It was irrelvant, intended to cause pain, and for no other
> > > reason.
>
> > Why let him know so obviously that it worked?
>
> For some reason, you seem to take naturally to Krooger's sadism.

Take naturally to?

When there is so much real sadism in the world, don't you think
letting someone get to you on usenet isn't being just a bit to
vulnerable?

> Is that a
> problem for you in real life?

No, people in no real position of authority can't bother me.

ScottW

[George Middius]

Sander deWaal said:

>>That's why the general take is that I won the HE2005 debate.

>Is that why Atkinson, De Paravicini, Levinson, (Bill) Johnson,
>Qvortrup et al are famous names in audio, and Krueger, Nousaine,
>Ferstler et al are not? ;-)

Excuse me Mr. DeWell but its like you don't know an omh form a vlot. LOt"S!

The turth Mr. Dwlela is a little too painful for you isn't it Mr. Sander's? Its
like Arnii Krooger is not, known thorgh-out Detroit for his expertiese at organ
recital's. Thanks Mr. Dowall for admitting you're golden ear's are, actually
more like tin with, should we say phospheruss or tell the truth? LOl! ;-)

;-)

>How come you're not an audio professional, Arny?

That is such a silly question. You must be joking. How can you be so obtuse. The
answer to that is extremely self-evident and obvious, too, also.

Good grief.

[Sander deWaal]

George Middius > said:


>Is it really below Krooger's attempt to pour salt in Bob's wounds regarding his
>lawsuit? If so, how much below?


IMO, the two are in no way comparable.
Apparently, Bob and you think differently.

One of these days, Bob may read his posts again and bow his head in
remorse, because it's all in Google for years to come.

--

"Audio as a serious hobby is going down the tubes."
- Howard Ferstler, 25/4/2005

[Arny Krueger]

"Sander deWaal" > wrote in message


> George Middius > said:

>> Is it really below Krooger's attempt to pour salt in
Bob's
>> wounds regarding his lawsuit? If so, how much below?

> IMO, the two are in no way comparable.

Good call.

> Apparently, Bob and you think differently.

It's not to their credit.

> One of these days, Bob may read his posts again and bow
his
> head in remorse, because it's all in Google for years to
come.

That would require insight and introspection that is
demonstrably well beyond either Middius or Morein.

Middius and Morein are great Atkinson supporters, aren't
they? They do his dirty work for him, and proudly at that!

[dave weil]

On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 19:05:28 +0200, Sander deWaal >
wrote:

>"Robert Morein" > said:
>
>>How is Nate doing these days? <snip>
>
>
>This is below anything, Bob, I'm disappionted in you.
>
>Please stop.

Agreed. Strongly.

[[email protected]]

Robert Morein siad:



> wrote in message


ups.com...

> Robert Morein? said:

> >What do you remember about his last minutes?

To which I replied:

>> This sort of statement is one of those that makes me wish I coulld
> >reach into the computer and rip out the heart of the person who made
> >it.

Thereupon prompting him to reply thusly:

You don't have to. Call me at (215) 646-4894 and do it verbally.

Sorry Bob but that wouldn't give me nearly the results I think you
deserve for your complete and utter cruelty. Obviously you never had a
child. If you think comparing your asinine loser case being made fun
of, is in any way comproable to the statements you made about Nate, are
in any way fair, then you truly are beneath contempt.

You may consider yourself and Middius, equals now that you have hit
rock bottom.

[Sander deWaal]

"Arny Krueger" > said:

>Middius and Morein are great Atkinson supporters, aren't
>they? They do his dirty work for him, and proudly at that!


Why do you have to drag Atkinson in?
You think Atkinson is a two-faced Janus or something?
One side Atkinson the gentleman, the other side
Middius/Sackman/Weil/Morein/Phillips the flamer?

--

"Audio as a serious hobby is going down the tubes."
- Howard Ferstler, 25/4/2005

[Sander deWaal]

George Middius > said:

>Excuse me Mr. DeWell but its like you don't know an omh form a vlot. LOt"S!


Baloney, pal. And read my books, note.


>The turth Mr. Dwlela is a little too painful for you isn't it Mr. Sander's? Its
>like Arnii Krooger is not, known thorgh-out Detroit for his expertiese at organ
>recital's. Thanks Mr. Dowall for admitting you're golden ear's are, actually
>more like tin with, should we say phospheruss or tell the truth? LOl! ;-)


Like the moon is made of green cheese, slick.
However, all decent subwoofers sound alike in my room, at least when I
give full throttle, you will note.


>That is such a silly question. You must be joking. How can you be so obtuse. The
>answer to that is extremely self-evident and obvious, too, also.


In my book, "The Sensible Audio Clown", note, I anticipated questions
like this, pal.
I'll forward this conversation to Guglielmo Marconi and Thomas, A.
Edison, to name just two of the famous audio professionals I
interviewed in my time as a librarian, note.

Haw haw haw.


>Good grief.


Learn to write.

--

"Audio as a serious hobby is going down the tubes."
- Howard Ferstler, 25/4/2005

[ScottW]

George Middius wrote:
> Sander deWaal said:
>
> >>How is Nate doing these days? <snip>
>
> >This is below anything, Bob, I'm disappionted in you.
> >Please stop.
>
> Is it really below Krooger's attempt to pour salt in Bob's wounds regarding his
> lawsuit? If so, how much below?

You really advocate people using Arny to establish acceptable
standards of conduct?

>
> I'm not saying Bob's comment is OK. But it didn't come out of the blue.

Sure... Arny made him do it.

ScottW

[Arny Krueger]

"Sander deWaal" > wrote in message

> "Arny Krueger" > said:
>
>> Middius and Morein are great Atkinson supporters, aren't
>> they? They do his dirty work for him, and proudly at
that!
>
>
> Why do you have to drag Atkinson in?

Because the Atkinson/Middius alliance is obvious and should
be well-known.

> You think Atkinson is a two-faced Janus or something?

Dooh.

> One side Atkinson the gentleman, the other side
> Middius/Sackman/Weil/Morein/Phillips the flamer?

I think Atkinson finds their RAO activities to be in
accordance with his preferences. On occasions he's expressed
his appreciation to some or all of them here or in other
public places.

[Arny Krueger]

"ScottW" > wrote in message
ups.com
> George Middius wrote:
>> Sander deWaal said:
>>
>>>> How is Nate doing these days? <snip>
>>
>>> This is below anything, Bob, I'm disappionted in you.
>>> Please stop.
>>
>> Is it really below Krooger's attempt to pour salt in
Bob's
>> wounds regarding his lawsuit? If so, how much below?
>
> You really advocate people using Arny to establish
acceptable
> standards of conduct?

One would think that self-professed judges and paragons of
moral virtue such as Morein and Middius would be able to
keep their standards of behavior above mine. In fact this
place has a separate standard for me that is way higher than
many others.

>> I'm not saying Bob's comment is OK. But it didn't come
out of
>> the blue.

No, it came out of the blackness of Morein's heart. Morein
thinks he can say what he will to me or about me and it's
fully justified. Middius and Sackman apparently believe the
same thing.

I can go for weeks without mentioning him or dealing with
Morien in any way, and all of the sudden he can spout off
some foul thing about me out of the blue.

> Sure... Arny made him do it.

Do you really feel that way, Scotty or is this well-founded
sarcasm?

[Sander deWaal]

"Arny Krueger" > said:

>>> Middius and Morein are great Atkinson supporters, aren't
>>> they? They do his dirty work for him, and proudly at that!

>> Why do you have to drag Atkinson in?

>Because the Atkinson/Middius alliance is obvious and should
>be well-known.


Alliance as in: "the enemy of my enemy is my friend"?
Be careful not to paint with too broad a brush.


>> You think Atkinson is a two-faced Janus or something?

>Dooh.


Hmmm.......


>> One side Atkinson the gentleman, the other side
>> Middius/Sackman/Weil/Morein/Phillips the flamer?

>I think Atkinson finds their RAO activities to be in
>accordance with his preferences. On occasions he's expressed
>his appreciation to some or all of them here or in other
>public places.


On other occasions he's expressed his disagreement with what was said
about your son.

--

"Audio as a serious hobby is going down the tubes."
- Howard Ferstler, 25/4/2005

[ScottW]

Arny Krueger wrote:
> "ScottW" > wrote in message
> ups.com
> > George Middius wrote:
> >> Sander deWaal said:
> >>
> >>>> How is Nate doing these days? <snip>
> >>
> >>> This is below anything, Bob, I'm disappionted in you.
> >>> Please stop.
> >>
> >> Is it really below Krooger's attempt to pour salt in
> Bob's
> >> wounds regarding his lawsuit? If so, how much below?
> >
> > You really advocate people using Arny to establish
> acceptable
> > standards of conduct?
>
> One would think that self-professed judges and paragons of
> moral virtue such as Morein and Middius would be able to
> keep their standards of behavior above mine. In fact this
> place has a separate standard for me that is way higher than
> many others.

Your problem is you have a separate standard of behavior for this place
that is way below any other places.

>
> >> I'm not saying Bob's comment is OK. But it didn't come
> out of
> >> the blue.
>
> No, it came out of the blackness of Morein's heart. Morein
> thinks he can say what he will to me or about me and it's
> fully justified. Middius and Sackman apparently believe the
> same thing.
>
> I can go for weeks without mentioning him or dealing with
> Morien in any way, and all of the sudden he can spout off
> some foul thing about me out of the blue.
>
> > Sure... Arny made him do it.
>
> Do you really feel that way, Scotty or is this well-founded
> sarcasm?

I was being sarcastic. But the same sarcasm can equally be applied to
you. You have tried similar justifications for yourself.

ScottW

[Arny Krueger]

"ScottW" > wrote in message
oups.com
> Arny Krueger wrote:
>> "ScottW" > wrote in message
>> ups.com
>>> George Middius wrote:
>>>> Sander deWaal said:
>>>>
>>>>>> How is Nate doing these days? <snip>
>>>>
>>>>> This is below anything, Bob, I'm disappionted in you.
>>>>> Please stop.
>>>>
>>>> Is it really below Krooger's attempt to pour salt in
>> Bob's
>>>> wounds regarding his lawsuit? If so, how much below?
>>>
>>> You really advocate people using Arny to establish
>> acceptable
>>> standards of conduct?
>>
>> One would think that self-professed judges and paragons
of
>> moral virtue such as Morein and Middius would be able to
>> keep their standards of behavior above mine. In fact this
>> place has a separate standard for me that is way higher
than
>> many others.
>
> Your problem is you have a separate standard of behavior
for
> this place that is way below any other places.

When in Rome, Scotty...

Everybody can see that Middius and his clique set the moral
pace around here. I can not post here for days even weeks
and Middius goes on and on about me.

[ScottW]

Arny Krueger wrote:
> "ScottW" > wrote in message
> oups.com
> > Arny Krueger wrote:
> >> "ScottW" > wrote in message
> >> ups.com
> >>> George Middius wrote:
> >>>> Sander deWaal said:
> >>>>
> >>>>>> How is Nate doing these days? <snip>
> >>>>
> >>>>> This is below anything, Bob, I'm disappionted in you.
> >>>>> Please stop.
> >>>>
> >>>> Is it really below Krooger's attempt to pour salt in
> >> Bob's
> >>>> wounds regarding his lawsuit? If so, how much below?
> >>>
> >>> You really advocate people using Arny to establish
> >> acceptable
> >>> standards of conduct?
> >>
> >> One would think that self-professed judges and paragons
> of
> >> moral virtue such as Morein and Middius would be able to
> >> keep their standards of behavior above mine. In fact this
> >> place has a separate standard for me that is way higher
> than
> >> many others.
> >
> > Your problem is you have a separate standard of behavior
> for
> > this place that is way below any other places.
>
> When in Rome, Scotty...
>
> Everybody can see that Middius and his clique set the moral
> pace around here. I can not post here for days even weeks
> and Middius goes on and on about me.


And many say that you do. Both you and Middius have accused me of
being on the other side.

I think you both suck by letting your own moral standards be decayed
by someone else.

Arny at the Pearly Gates:

St. Peter: So Arny...before you get in we want to know why you were
such an asshole to so many people on RAO?

Arny: Uuuhhh... well yeah Peter... I was a bit of a dick but that
Middius guy was a real jerk and he had at least a half dozen sock
puppets beating me to a pulp....

Peter: So you think it was Ok to be a jerk because someone else was?
See Arny... everyone faces a test of their moral fiber sometime on
earth. RAO was your test on earth Arny. Sorry.

ScottW

[Fella]

wrote:
> Fella said:
>
>
>>I came back to RAO to ask a couple of questions, opinions about
>>amps. I read some history, made the mistake of posting a few responses,
>>got polluted and disgusted yet again by debating with you, and now I am
>>ready to leave again. :(
>
>
> You got your ass handed to you in a proper DBT


Duhmickey jumps in to save the day...


> Don't let the door hit your irrational ass on the way out.
>

I aint goin nowhere you two-bit cocksucker.

[Fella]

wrote:

>
> You appear to be projecting your own failings and/or JA's...

Yeah duhmickey, you two-bit cocksucker, keep it up, perhaps JA will
invite you to his next debate?

[Arny Krueger]

"ScottW" > wrote in message
oups.com
> Arny Krueger wrote:

>> Everybody can see that Middius and his clique set the
moral
>> pace around here. I can not post here for days even weeks
>> and Middius goes on and on about me.

> And many say that you do.

How many are there of them and how many of them are there of
me? Well, you answered that Scotty there are many of them
and one of me. So where do they get off for what they do?

> Both you and Middius have accused me of being on the
other side.

Probably because you are so wishy-washy, Scotty.

> I think you both suck by letting your own moral standards
be
> decayed by someone else.

Nice job of not taking responsibility for your own
culpability in the matter, Scotty.

[Arny Krueger]

"Fella" > wrote in message


OK Fella, I'm supposed to be some kind of moral guide
around.

> I aint goin nowhere you two-bit cocksucker.

Clean up your act or *else*.

[Fella]

Arny Krueger wrote:

> "Fella" > wrote in message
>
>
> OK Fella, I'm supposed to be some kind of moral guide
> around.
>
>
>>I aint goin nowhere you two-bit cocksucker.
>
>
> Clean up your act or *else*.
>
>

What the f.ck are you trying to do there you piece of ****?! Are you
trying to threaten me?!

[John Atkinson]

dave weil wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 19:05:28 +0200, Sander deWaal >
> wrote:
> >"Robert Morein" > said:
> >
> >>How is Nate doing these days? <snip>
> >
> >This is below anything, Bob, I'm disappionted in you.
> >Please stop.
>
> Agreed. Strongly.

Likewise.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

[ScottW]

Arny Krueger wrote:
> "ScottW" > wrote in message
> oups.com
> > Arny Krueger wrote:
>
> >> Everybody can see that Middius and his clique set the
> moral
> >> pace around here. I can not post here for days even weeks
> >> and Middius goes on and on about me.
>
> > And many say that you do.
>
> How many are there of them and how many of them are there of
> me?

How many does it take to influence your moral standards?

How many should it take?

> Well, you answered that Scotty there are many of them
> and one of me. So where do they get off for what they do?

The don't get off... How many have expressed regret on Moreins recent
post?
>
> > Both you and Middius have accused me of being on the
> other side.
>
> Probably because you are so wishy-washy, Scotty.

No.. that would be because I have told each of you what I think of
you. You and Middius have much in common, the truth hurts for both of
you.

>
> > I think you both suck by letting your own moral standards
> be
> > decayed by someone else.
>
> Nice job of not taking responsibility for your own
> culpability in the matter, Scotty.

Now you want to blame me? Anyone but yourself.. obviously looking at
your own behavior is far too scary for you.

ScottW

[Arny Krueger]

"ScottW" > wrote in message
oups.com
> Arny Krueger wrote:
>> "ScottW" > wrote in message
>>
oups.com
>>> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>
>>>> Everybody can see that Middius and his clique set the
>> moral
>>>> pace around here. I can not post here for days even
weeks
>>>> and Middius goes on and on about me.
>>
>>> And many say that you do.
>>
>> How many are there of them and how many of them are there
of
>> me?
>
> How many does it take to influence your moral standards?

It's not about my moral standards Scotty, its about the
moral standards of the group.

> How many should it take?

Lets' see you pitch in a big way and help raise the moral
standards around here, instead of just whine about it.

>> Well, you answered that Scotty there are many of them
>> and one of me. So where do they get off for what they do?

> The don't get off... How many have expressed regret on
> Moreins recent post?

What, two?

>>> Both you and Middius have accused me of being on the
>> other side.
>>
>> Probably because you are so wishy-washy, Scotty.

> No.. that would be because I have told each of you what I
> think of you.

Frankly Scotty you haven't impressed me as doing a lot of
thinking.

>You and Middius have much in common, the truth
> hurts for both of you.

Speaks to your shallow thinking, Scotty.

>> I Think you both suck by letting your own moral standards
be
>>> decayed by someone else.

>> Nice job of not taking responsibility for your own
>> culpability in the matter, Scotty.

> Now you want to blame me?

Yes, since you're idea of moral balance is so warped.

>Anyone but yourself..

Tell you what Scotty. You show me Middius taking
responsibility for the way things are around here, and I'll
do the same. BTW, I've taken partical responsiblity for how
things are before, but AFAIK Middius never has. So, I'm not
waiting for Middius to take the first step, I'm waiting for
him to take any positive step at all.

> obviously looking at your own behavior is far too scary
for you.

Scotty, given that you're giving us such a great example of
sharing in your responsibility for how this place, is why
should anybody take you seriously at all?

[Arny Krueger]

"Fella" > wrote in message

> Arny Krueger wrote:
>
>> "Fella" > wrote in message
>>
>>
>> OK Fella, I'm supposed to be some kind of moral guide
>> around.
>>
>>
>>> I aint goin nowhere you two-bit cocksucker.
>>
>>
>> Clean up your act or *else*.
>>
>>
>
> What the f.ck are you trying to do there you piece of
****?!
> Are you trying to threaten me?!

See, Scotty?

[George M. Middius]

The Terrierdorg needs a refresher in obedience training.

> > Is it really below Krooger's attempt to pour salt in Bob's wounds regarding his
> > lawsuit? If so, how much below?

> You really advocate people using Arny to establish acceptable
> standards of conduct?

You misunderstood, Scottie. I said "Roll over!" not "Speak!"

Try again. "Play dead!"

[ScottW]

Arny Krueger wrote:
> "Fella" > wrote in message
>
> > Arny Krueger wrote:
> >
> >> "Fella" > wrote in message
> >>
> >>
> >> OK Fella, I'm supposed to be some kind of moral guide
> >> around.
> >>
> >>
> >>> I aint goin nowhere you two-bit cocksucker.
> >>
> >>
> >> Clean up your act or *else*.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > What the f.ck are you trying to do there you piece of
> ****?!
> > Are you trying to threaten me?!
>
> See, Scotty?

You really gotta react to every wacko that wakes up once every 2
years?

Just ask yourself.. what is the right thing to do?
and if you can't do that.. just plonk the guy and forget about him.

ScottW

[Arny Krueger]

"ScottW" > wrote in message
ups.com
> Arny Krueger wrote:
>> "Fella" > wrote in message
>>
>>> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Fella" > wrote in message
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> OK Fella, I'm supposed to be some kind of moral guide
>>>> around.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I aint goin nowhere you two-bit cocksucker.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Clean up your act or *else*.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> What the f.ck are you trying to do there you piece of
>> ****?!
>>> Are you trying to threaten me?!
>>
>> See, Scotty?
>
> You really gotta react to every wacko that wakes up once
> every 2 years?
>
> Just ask yourself.. what is the right thing to do?

Well Scotty, I thought I was doing the right thing, and now
you change your mind.


> and if you can't do that.. just plonk the guy and forget
about
> him.

Just like you did to me, right Scotty?

[ScottW]

Arny Krueger wrote:
> "ScottW" > wrote in message
> oups.com
> > Arny Krueger wrote:
> >> "ScottW" > wrote in message
> >>
> oups.com
> >>> Arny Krueger wrote:
> >>
> >>>> Everybody can see that Middius and his clique set the
> >> moral
> >>>> pace around here. I can not post here for days even
> weeks
> >>>> and Middius goes on and on about me.
> >>
> >>> And many say that you do.
> >>
> >> How many are there of them and how many of them are there
> of
> >> me?
> >
> > How many does it take to influence your moral standards?
>
> It's not about my moral standards Scotty, its about the
> moral standards of the group.

Moral standards of groups are used as cover by individuals who are
ashamed of their own moral standards.

>
> > How many should it take?
>
> Lets' see you pitch in a big way and help raise the moral
> standards around here, instead of just whine about it.

You always start with the insults when the truth starts to hurt.

>
> >> Well, you answered that Scotty there are many of them
> >> and one of me. So where do they get off for what they do?
>
> > The don't get off... How many have expressed regret on
> > Moreins recent post?
>
> What, two?

Look again.. I've seen at least twice that many.

>
> >>> Both you and Middius have accused me of being on the
> >> other side.
> >>
> >> Probably because you are so wishy-washy, Scotty.
>
> > No.. that would be because I have told each of you what I
> > think of you.
>
> Frankly Scotty you haven't impressed me as doing a lot of
> thinking.

Someone just said they don't seek to impress.. they seek the truth. I
think that is sound advice.

>
> >You and Middius have much in common, the truth
> > hurts for both of you.
>
> Speaks to your shallow thinking, Scotty.

These gratuitous insults are simply making the case of those who say
your behavior is the problem here.

>
> >> I Think you both suck by letting your own moral standards
> be
> >>> decayed by someone else.
>
> >> Nice job of not taking responsibility for your own
> >> culpability in the matter, Scotty.
>
> > Now you want to blame me?
>
> Yes, since you're idea of moral balance is so warped.


Thats good because there is no such thing as balancing morals AFAIAC.
Thats just a weak rationalization for stooping to behavior that doesn't
meet your own personal moral standards.

>
> >Anyone but yourself..
>
> Tell you what Scotty. You show me Middius taking
> responsibility for the way things are around here, and I'll
> do the same. BTW, I've taken partical responsiblity for how
> things are before, but AFAIK Middius never has. So, I'm not
> waiting for Middius to take the first step, I'm waiting for
> him to take any positive step at all.

I guess that's a start but why not take the lead?
>
> > obviously looking at your own behavior is far too scary
> for you.
>
> Scotty, given that you're giving us such a great example of
> sharing in your responsibility for how this place, is why
> should anybody take you seriously at all?

Don't take me seriously, but take the truth seriously.

ScottW

[George M. Middius]

Scottieborg lectures the Krooborg.

> > > No.. that would be because I have told each of you what I
> > > think of you.
> >
> > Frankly Scotty you haven't impressed me as doing a lot of
> > thinking.
>
> Someone just said they don't seek to impress.. they seek the truth. I
> think that is sound advice.

I give you credit for shaking off your Kroopologism infection.

On the whole, though, I agree with dave.

[Arny Krueger]

"ScottW" > wrote in message
oups.com
> Arny Krueger wrote:
>> "ScottW" > wrote in message
>>
oups.com
>>> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>>> "ScottW" > wrote in message
>>>>
>>
oups.com
>>>>> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Everybody can see that Middius and his clique set the
>>>> moral
>>>>>> pace around here. I can not post here for days even
>> weeks
>>>>>> and Middius goes on and on about me.
>>>>
>>>>> And many say that you do.
>>>>
>>>> How many are there of them and how many of them are
there
>> of
>>>> me?
>>>
>>> How many does it take to influence your moral
standards?
>>
>> It's not about my moral standards Scotty, its about the
>> moral standards of the group.

> Moral standards of groups are used as cover by
individuals
> who are ashamed of their own moral standards.

Then there's always Middius who obviously has no moral
standards at all. There's no lie too vile that he couldn't
and hasn't told.

>>> How many should it take?
>>
>> Lets' see you pitch in a big way and help raise the
moral
>> standards around here, instead of just whine about it.

> You always start with the insults when the truth starts
to hurt.

No, I start in with the insults when people get way
complacent.

>>>> Well, you answered that Scotty there are many of them
>>>> and one of me. So where do they get off for what they
do?

>>> The don't get off... How many have expressed regret on
>>> Moreins recent post?

>> What, two?

> Look again.. I've seen at least twice that many.

By now at least three.

>>>>> Both you and Middius have accused me of being on the
>>>> other side.

>>>> Probably because you are so wishy-washy, Scotty.

>>> No.. that would be because I have told each of you what
I
>>> think of you.

>> Frankly Scotty you haven't impressed me as doing a lot of
>> thinking.

> Someone just said they don't seek to impress.. they seek
the
> truth. I think that is sound advice.

It appears that your version of truth gives Middius a free
pass for just about everything he does, Scotty.

>>> You and Middius have much in common, the truth
>>> hurts for both of you.
>>
>> Speaks to your shallow thinking, Scotty.

> These gratuitous insults are simply making the case of
those
> who say your behavior is the problem here.

I can't help your thought patterns or absence of them,
Scotty.

>>>> I Think you both suck by letting your own moral
standards be
>>>>> decayed by someone else.

>>>> Nice job of not taking responsibility for your own
>>>> culpability in the matter, Scotty.

>>> Now you want to blame me?

>> Yes, since you're idea of moral balance is so warped.

> Thats good because there is no such thing as balancing
morals
> AFAIAC.

I guess you don't know what morals are, Scotty.

> Thats just a weak rationalization for stooping to
> behavior that doesn't meet your own personal moral
standards.

Such as what, Scotty?
>
>>
>>> Anyone but yourself..
>>
>> Tell you what Scotty. You show me Middius taking
>> responsibility for the way things are around here, and
I'll
>> do the same. BTW, I've taken partical responsiblity for
how
>> things are before, but AFAIK Middius never has. So, I'm
not
>> waiting for Middius to take the first step, I'm waiting
for
>> him to take any positive step at all.
>
> I guess that's a start but why not take the lead?
>>
>>> obviously looking at your own behavior is far too scary
>> for you.
>>
>> Scotty, given that you're giving us such a great example
of
>> sharing in your responsibility for how this place, is why
>> should anybody take you seriously at all?
>
> Don't take me seriously, but take the truth seriously.
>
> ScottW

[Sylvan Morein]

In article , "dave weil"
> wrote:

>> "Robert Morein" > said:
>>
>>> How is Nate doing these days? <snip>
>>
>> This is below anything, Bob, I'm disappionted in you.
>>
>> Please stop.
>
> Agreed. Strongly.

He can't stop. He has nothing else to do.

Think about it. . . My one and only son has lived in the same room, in the
same house, in MY house, since the early 1950's. He's never had a job.
NEVER. He always impressed everyone as a "smart guy", although I know now
he's just a bull**** artist. SURE he's "smart" - he went to college for
almost 20 years on my dime!

His room is filled with electronics, computers, wires, empty beer cans, and
all nature of trash. He rarely leaves the house, but spends hours in the
basement "inventing". Do you know how many times we've had police, FBI,
Secret Service, and other investigators here? They won't charge him because
he's mentally ill.

$100,000 to the first person that can get this 53 year old into a job, any
job, and out of my house.

Sylvan Morein, DDS



PROVEN PUBLISHED FACTS about my Son, Robert Morein
--

Robert Morein History
--
http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/mld/ledgerenquirer/news/4853918.htm

> Doctoral student takes intellectual property case to Supreme Court
> By L. STUART DITZEN
> Philadelphia Inquirer
>
> PHILADELPHIA -Even the professors who dismissed him from a doctoral program
> at Drexel University agreed that Robert Morein was uncommonly smart.
>
> They apparently didn't realize that he was uncommonly stubborn too - so much
> so that he would mount a court fight all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court
> to challenge his dismissal.

The Supremes have already rejected this appeal, btw.
>
> "It's a personality trait I have - I'm a tenacious guy," said Morein, a
> pleasantly eccentric man regarded by friends as an inventive genius. "And we
> do come to a larger issue here."

An "inventive genius" that has never invented anything. And hardly
"pleasantly" eccentric.

> A five-year legal battle between this unusual ex-student and one of
> Philadelphia's premier educational institutions has gone largely unnoticed
> by the media and the public.

Because no one gives a **** about a 50 year old loser.
>
> But it has been the subject of much attention in academia.
>
> Drexel says it dismissed Morein in 1995 because he failed, after eight
> years, to complete a thesis required for a doctorate in electrical and
> computer engineering.

Not to mention the 12 years it took him to get thru high school!
BWAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

>
> Morein, 50, of Dresher, Pa., contends that he was dismissed only after his
> thesis adviser "appropriated" an innovative idea Morein had developed in a
> rarefied area of thought called "estimation theory" and arranged to have it
> patented.

A contention rejected by three courts. From a 50 YEAR OLD that has
done NOTHING PRODUCTIVE with his life.

>
> In February 2000, Philadelphia Common Pleas Court Judge Esther R. Sylvester
> ruled that Morein's adviser indeed had taken his idea.

An idea that was worth nothing, because it didn't work. Just like
Robert Morein, who has never worked a day in his life.

>
> Sylvester held that Morein had been unjustly dismissed and she ordered
> Drexel to reinstate him or refund his tuition.

Funnily enough, Drexel AGREED to reinstate Morein, who rejected the
offer because he knew he was and IS a failed loser. Spending daddy's
money to cover up his lack of productivity.
>
> That brought roars of protest from the lions of academia. There is a long
> tradition in America of noninterference by the courts in academic decisions.
>
> Backed by every major university in Pennsylvania and organizations
> representing thousands of others around the country, Drexel appealed to the
> state Superior Court.
>
> The appellate court, by a 2-1 vote, reversed Sylvester in June 2001 and
> restored the status quo. Morein was, once again, out at Drexel. And the
> time-honored axiom that courts ought to keep their noses out of academic
> affairs was reasserted.
>
> The state Supreme Court declined to review the case and, in an ordinary
> litigation, that would have been the end of it.
>
> But Morein, in a quixotic gesture that goes steeply against the odds, has
> asked the highest court in the land to give him a hearing.

Daddy throws more money down the crapper.

> His attorney, Faye Riva Cohen, said the Supreme Court appeal is important
> even if it fails because it raises the issue of whether a university has a
> right to lay claim to a student's ideas - or intellectual property - without
> compensation.
>
> "Any time you are in a Ph.D. program, you are a serf, you are a slave," said
> Cohen. Morein "is concerned not only for himself. He feels that what
> happened to him is pretty common."

It's called HIGHER EDUCATION, honey. The students aren't in charge,
the UNIVERSITY and PROFESSORS are.


> Drexel's attorney, Neil J. Hamburg, called Morein's appeal - and his claim
> that his idea was stolen - "preposterous."
>
> "I will eat my shoe if the Supreme Court hears this case," declared Hamburg.
> "We're not even going to file a response. He is a brilliant guy, but his
> intelligence should be used for the advancement of society rather than
> pursuing self-destructive litigation."

No **** sherlock.

> The litigation began in 1997, when Morein sued Drexel claiming that a
> committee of professors had dumped him after he accused his faculty adviser,
> Paul Kalata, of appropriating his idea.
>
> His concept was considered to have potential value for businesses in
> minutely measuring the internal functions of machines, industrial processes
> and electronic systems.
>
> The field of "estimation theory" is one in which scientists attempt to
> calculate what they cannot plainly observe, such as the inside workings of a
> nuclear plant or a computer.

My estimation theory? There is NO brain at work inside the head of
Robert Morein, only sawdust.

>
> Prior to Morein's dismissal, Drexel looked into his complaint against Kalata
> and concluded that the associate professor had done nothing wrong. Kalata,
> through a university lawyer, declined to comment.
>
> At a nonjury trial before Sylvester in 1999, Morein testified that Kalata in
> 1990 had posed a technical problem for him to study for his thesis. It
> related to estimation theory.
>
> Kalata, who did not appear at the trial, said in a 1998 deposition that a
> Cherry Hill company for which he was a paid consultant, K-Tron
> International, had asked him to develop an alternate estimation method for
> it. The company manufactures bulk material feeders and conveyors used in
> industrial processes.
>
> Morein testified that, after much study, he experienced "a flash of
> inspiration" and came up with a novel mathematical concept to address the
> problem Kalata had presented.
>
> Without his knowledge, Morein said, Kalata shared the idea with K-Tron.
>
> K-Tron then applied for a patent, listing Kalata and Morein as co-inventors.
>
> Morein said he agreed "under duress" to the arrangement, but felt "locked
> into a highly disadvantageous situation." As a result, he testified, he
> became alienated from Kalata.
>
> As events unfolded, Kalata signed over his interest in the patent to K-Tron.
> The company never capitalized on the technology and eventually allowed the
> patent to lapse. No one made any money from it.

Because it was bogus. Even Kalata was mortified that he was a victim
of this SCAMSTER, Robert Morein.

> In 1991, Morein went to the head of Drexel's electrical engineering
> department, accused Kalata of appropriating his intellectual property, and
> asked for a new faculty adviser.

The staff at Drexel laughed wildly at the ignorance of Robert Morein.

> He didn't get one. Instead, a committee of four professors, including
> Kalata, was formed to oversee Morein's thesis work.
>
> Four years later, the committee dismissed him, saying he had failed to
> complete his thesis.

So Morein ****s up his first couple years, gets new faculty advisers
(a TEAM), and then ****s up again! Brilliant!

>
> Morein claimed that the committee intentionally had undermined him.

Morein makes LOTS of claims that are nonsense. One look thru the
usenet proves it.

>
> Judge Sylvester agreed. In her ruling, Sylvester wrote: "It is this court's
> opinion that the defendants were motivated by bad faith and ill will."

So much for political machine judges.
>
> The U.S. Supreme Court receives 7,000 appeals a year and agrees to hear only
> about 100 of them.
>
> Hamburg, Drexel's attorney, is betting the high court will reject Morein's
> appeal out of hand because its focal point - concerning a student's right to
> intellectual property - was not central to the litigation in the
> Pennsylvania courts.

> Morein said he understands it's a long shot, but he feels he must pursue it.

Failure. Look it up in Websters. You'll see a picture of Robert
Morein. The poster boy for SCAMMING LOSERS.

>
> "I had to seek closure," he said.
>
> Without a doctorate, he said, he has been unable to pursue a career he had
> hoped would lead him into research on artificial intelligence.

Who better to tell us about "artificial intelligence".
BWAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

>
> As it is, Morein lives at home with his father and makes a modest income
> from stock investments. He has written a film script that he is trying to
> make into a movie. And in the basement of his father's home he is working on
> an invention, an industrial pump so powerful it could cut steel with a
> bulletlike stream of water.


FAILED STUDENT
FAILED MOVIE MAKER
FAILED SCREENWRITER
FAILED INVESTOR
FAILED DRIVER
FAILED SON
FAILED PARENTS
FAILED INVENTOR
FAILED PLAINTIFF
FAILED HOMOSEXUAL
FAILED HUMAN
FAILED
FAILED

> But none of it is what he had imagined for himself.
>
> "I don't really have a replacement career," Morein said. "It's a very
> gnawing thing."

[Clyde Slick]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "Robert Morein" > wrote in
> message
>
>> How is Nate doing these days? Do you think he's black and
>> dessicated, or has the flesh fallen completely off his
> bones?
>
> Nate was cremated and the ashes were scattered over certain
> famous sand dunes in western Michigan, certain portions of
> the Pacific seashore in California, and on the top of a
> certain famous mountain in Pennsylvania.
>

The rest was mixed in the mortar used to fill the cracks
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]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "ScottW" > wrote in message
> ups.com
>> Robert Morein wrote:
>>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> "Robert Morein" > wrote
> in
>>>> message
>>>>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>>>>> ...
>>>>>> I believe JA just bragged that he was going to make
> his
>>>>>> epochal statement about the HE2005 debate shortly.
>>>>>>
>>> [snip]
>>>> Bob, as if you are any kind of paragon of
> self-awareness.
>>>> Three words: Supreme Court Decision. I was found not
> guilty
>>>> of murdering my dead son, Nate.
>>
>> No end to real sickness here.
>
> Scott, your good friend Middius opened the door to all of
> this, Scotty. Your other good friend Art thinks Mididus
> always really funny.
>
>

His dead Nate posts are funnier than your dead Nate posts.



----== 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]

> wrote in message
oups.com...
> Robert Morein said:
>
>>He just ****ed me off with that lie about the existence of a "Supreme
>>Court
>>Decision." It was irrelvant, intended to cause pain, and for no other
>>reason
>
> Thank you for once again revealing that you feel you must sink lower
> than than your imagined opponent.
>

that's pretty damned low, by necessity.



----== 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]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "Robert Morein" > wrote in
> message
>
>>Did he die at home?
>
> No.
>
>> What do you remember about his last minutes?
>
> I wasn't present.
>


True, you were posting on RAO.



----== 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]

"George M. Middius" <cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net> wrote
in message ...
>
>
> Scottie, are you worried about cooties?
>
>> >> > Scott, your good friend Middius opened the door to all of
>> >> > this, Scotty. Your other good friend Art thinks Mididus
>> >> > always really funny.
>
>> >> Once again you're only half right.
>
>> > Which half? It sounds 100% wrong to me. It was Krooger who used his
>> > poor
>> > dead son as a trolling device on RAO, not I. And I'm pretty sure Art
>> > doesn't always find me funny (assuming that's who Mr. **** meant by
>> > "Mididus").
>
>> > So both klaims are entirely Krooful, i.e. they're Bull****! Bull****!
>> > Bull****! Oh, sorry, you wouldn't get that reference. I'll bet you're a
>> > powerful ass, though. Did you get that one?
>
>> I was only referring to his reference to you as my friend.
>> Thanks for proving my point.
>
> Did you take that seriously? I thought Mr. Feces was speaking
> pejoratively.
> But maybe you're right and he can't tell the difference. I suppose that
> might be because everybody he thinks is his friend actually hates him.
>

Even pink noise?



----== 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]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
>
>> One of these days, Bob may read his posts again and bow
> his
>> head in remorse, because it's all in Google for years to
> come.
>
> That would require insight and introspection that is
> demonstrably well beyond either Middius or Morein.
>
> Middius and Morein are great Atkinson supporters, aren't
> they? They do his dirty work for him, and proudly at that!
>
>

Blame Atlkinson for what Bob said.
That's the ticket!



----== 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]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "Sander deWaal" > wrote in message
>
>> "Arny Krueger" > said:
>>
>>> Middius and Morein are great Atkinson supporters, aren't
>>> they? They do his dirty work for him, and proudly at
> that!
>>
>>
>> Why do you have to drag Atkinson in?
>
> Because the Atkinson/Middius alliance is obvious and should
> be well-known.
>
>> You think Atkinson is a two-faced Janus or something?
>
> Dooh.
>
>> One side Atkinson the gentleman, the other side
>> Middius/Sackman/Weil/Morein/Phillips the flamer?
>
> I think Atkinson finds their RAO activities to be in
> accordance with his preferences. On occasions he's expressed
> his appreciation to some or all of them here or in other
> public places.
>
>


That's right, I forgot about all that high
end gear dropped off at my doorstep.



----== 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 =----

[George M. Middius]

Clyde Slick said:

> > I think Atkinson finds their RAO activities to be in
> > accordance with his preferences. On occasions he's expressed
> > his appreciation to some or all of them here or in other
> > public places.

> That's right, I forgot about all that high
> end gear dropped off at my doorstep.

And I never have to rent a car when I'm in NYC because I can just borrow one
of John's Mercedes.

[John Atkinson]

Arny Krueger wrote:
> I believe JA just bragged that he was going to make his
> epochal statement about the HE2005 debate shortly.

No, I merely mentioned in passing that my discussion of the
issues raised at the debate would be posted on the Stereophile
website. The URL is http://www.stereophile.com/asweseeit/705awsi.

> What Grounds Will Atkinson Use To Claim Victory At The
> HE2005 Debate?

I am not in the business of "claiming victory," I will leave
that empty exercise to you, Mr. Krueger. As you can read, I
presented the case I had to make. I am content to leave it
to others to decide whether that case has any merit.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

[jclause]

>I am not in the business of "claiming victory," I will
>leave that empty exercise to you, Mr. Krueger.


To New York Arny went on a jaunt
And since he's been known to taunt.
Tho' his game is lame
His claim to fame...
We note he loves to flaunt.

Hammingaway, Inc.