Scott The Litigious Rides Again

[Arny Krueger]

Cross-posted from RAHE:

> wrote in message


> It is my impression that

> 1. objectivists believe that commercial CDs from their
> introduction to the market place to the present are
> audibly transparent transfers of the signal used to make
> them.

Whatever that means. Scott seems to be ignorant the details of how
recordings are transferred to a distribution format. There is often a need
for and execution of a process called "mastering" properly defined at
http://www.recaudiopro.net/faq/index.htm . If you understand the cited
document, then you can see the cans of worms this opens.

> 2. Objectivists blame any faults of commercial CD sound
> to the poor quality of the original recordings or bad
> choices made by mastering engineers but never blame the
> actual digital conversion or manufacturing of those CDs.

More specifically, they aren't due to the limitations of the CD format.

> 3. Objectivists believe that CDs in the cases that no
> tweaking has been done by the mastering engineers always
> present a more accurate sounding version of that master
> than any LP played back on any TT rig and thus will offer
> a more accurate representation of the artists/producer/
> engineer's intentions as well as a more accurate
> reproduction of the master.

Finally Scott gets something almost 100% right.

> 4. Objectivists believe the often cited preference for
> LPs to CDs when not a result of mastering differences is
> often the result of euphonic colorations inherent in LPs
> as a medium and that while some may like them they are
> never more accurate to the master tape or even the
> original sound of a live recording.

That makes 2! Good job (for you) Scott! The CD format is inherently
sonically accurate and the LP format is inherently sonically inaccurate.
That's the major reason why analog media has been scrapped wherever
possible.

A CD can be copied digitally and be indistinguishable from the original.

When a LP is copied to another LP by any means the results are almost always
a sonic insult. In in the best of times, the results may be mediocre.

> 5. Objectivists believe the primary source of preferences
> for LPs over CDs by vinyl enthusiasts is mostly a result
> of biases.

An inescapable conclusion, given the above - even Scott's kinda cloudy
version of it.

> Let me know if I am making any misrepresentations of
> objectivists beliefs on this subject.

If Scott were a real man he'd still post in RAO rather than hiding out in
the wossey world of RAHE. But he's a makeup artist - go figure!

[Jenn]

In article >,
"Arny Krueger" > wrote:

> Cross-posted from RAHE:
>
> > wrote in message
>
>
> > It is my impression that
>
> > 1. objectivists believe that commercial CDs from their
> > introduction to the market place to the present are
> > audibly transparent transfers of the signal used to make
> > them.
>
> Whatever that means. Scott seems to be ignorant the details of how
> recordings are transferred to a distribution format. There is often a need
> for and execution of a process called "mastering" properly defined at
> http://www.recaudiopro.net/faq/index.htm . If you understand the cited
> document, then you can see the cans of worms this opens.
>
> > 2. Objectivists blame any faults of commercial CD sound
> > to the poor quality of the original recordings or bad
> > choices made by mastering engineers but never blame the
> > actual digital conversion or manufacturing of those CDs.
>
> More specifically, they aren't due to the limitations of the CD format.
>
> > 3. Objectivists believe that CDs in the cases that no
> > tweaking has been done by the mastering engineers always
> > present a more accurate sounding version of that master
> > than any LP played back on any TT rig and thus will offer
> > a more accurate representation of the artists/producer/
> > engineer's intentions as well as a more accurate
> > reproduction of the master.
>
> Finally Scott gets something almost 100% right.
>
> > 4. Objectivists believe the often cited preference for
> > LPs to CDs when not a result of mastering differences is
> > often the result of euphonic colorations inherent in LPs
> > as a medium and that while some may like them they are
> > never more accurate to the master tape or even the
> > original sound of a live recording.
>
> That makes 2! Good job (for you) Scott! The CD format is inherently
> sonically accurate and the LP format is inherently sonically inaccurate.
> That's the major reason why analog media has been scrapped wherever
> possible.
>
> A CD can be copied digitally and be indistinguishable from the original.
>
> When a LP is copied to another LP by any means the results are almost always
> a sonic insult. In in the best of times, the results may be mediocre.
>
> > 5. Objectivists believe the primary source of preferences
> > for LPs over CDs by vinyl enthusiasts is mostly a result
> > of biases.
>
> An inescapable conclusion, given the above - even Scott's kinda cloudy
> version of it.
>
> > Let me know if I am making any misrepresentations of
> > objectivists beliefs on this subject.
>
> If Scott were a real man he'd still post in RAO rather than hiding out in
> the wossey world of RAHE. But he's a makeup artist - go figure!

And you are enough of a "real man" to make comments that the poster may
well never see and therefore have the opportunity to comment on.

[Arny Krueger]

"Jenn" > wrote in message

> In article >,
> "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
>
>> Cross-posted from RAHE:
>>
>> > wrote in message
>>
>>
>>> It is my impression that
>>
>>> 1. objectivists believe that commercial CDs from their
>>> introduction to the market place to the present are
>>> audibly transparent transfers of the signal used to make
>>> them.
>>
>> Whatever that means. Scott seems to be ignorant the
>> details of how recordings are transferred to a
>> distribution format. There is often a need for and
>> execution of a process called "mastering" properly
>> defined at http://www.recaudiopro.net/faq/index.htm . If
>> you understand the cited document, then you can see the
>> cans of worms this opens.
>>
>>> 2. Objectivists blame any faults of commercial CD sound
>>> to the poor quality of the original recordings or bad
>>> choices made by mastering engineers but never blame the
>>> actual digital conversion or manufacturing of those CDs.
>>
>> More specifically, they aren't due to the limitations of
>> the CD format.
>>
>>> 3. Objectivists believe that CDs in the cases that no
>>> tweaking has been done by the mastering engineers always
>>> present a more accurate sounding version of that master
>>> than any LP played back on any TT rig and thus will
>>> offer a more accurate representation of the
>>> artists/producer/ engineer's intentions as well as a
>>> more accurate reproduction of the master.
>>
>> Finally Scott gets something almost 100% right.
>>
>>> 4. Objectivists believe the often cited preference for
>>> LPs to CDs when not a result of mastering differences is
>>> often the result of euphonic colorations inherent in LPs
>>> as a medium and that while some may like them they are
>>> never more accurate to the master tape or even the
>>> original sound of a live recording.
>>
>> That makes 2! Good job (for you) Scott! The CD format is
>> inherently sonically accurate and the LP format is
>> inherently sonically inaccurate. That's the major reason
>> why analog media has been scrapped wherever possible.
>>
>> A CD can be copied digitally and be indistinguishable
>> from the original.
>>
>> When a LP is copied to another LP by any means the
>> results are almost always a sonic insult. In in the
>> best of times, the results may be mediocre.
>>
>>> 5. Objectivists believe the primary source of
>>> preferences for LPs over CDs by vinyl enthusiasts is
>>> mostly a result of biases.
>>
>> An inescapable conclusion, given the above - even
>> Scott's kinda cloudy version of it.
>>
>>> Let me know if I am making any misrepresentations of
>>> objectivists beliefs on this subject.
>>
>> If Scott were a real man he'd still post in RAO rather
>> than hiding out in the wossey world of RAHE. But he's a
>> makeup artist - go figure!
>
> And you are enough of a "real man" to make comments that
> the poster may well never see and therefore have the
> opportunity to comment on.

Note that Jenn has no reasonable response to issues 1-5 above, but instead
is trying to turn it into a battle of personalities. Expect the other RAO
Golden Eared trolls to join in in a similar fashion.

[[email protected]]

Arny Krueger wrote:
> Cross-posted from RAHE:
>
> > wrote in message
>
>
> > It is my impression that
>
> > 1. objectivists believe that commercial CDs from their
> > introduction to the market place to the present are
> > audibly transparent transfers of the signal used to make
> > them.
>
> Whatever that means. Scott seems to be ignorant the details of how
> recordings are transferred to a distribution format. There is often a need
> for and execution of a process called "mastering" properly defined at
> http://www.recaudiopro.net/faq/index.htm . If you understand the cited
> document, then you can see the cans of worms this opens.
>
> > 2. Objectivists blame any faults of commercial CD sound
> > to the poor quality of the original recordings or bad
> > choices made by mastering engineers but never blame the
> > actual digital conversion or manufacturing of those CDs.
>
> More specifically, they aren't due to the limitations of the CD format.
>
> > 3. Objectivists believe that CDs in the cases that no
> > tweaking has been done by the mastering engineers always
> > present a more accurate sounding version of that master
> > than any LP played back on any TT rig and thus will offer
> > a more accurate representation of the artists/producer/
> > engineer's intentions as well as a more accurate
> > reproduction of the master.
>
> Finally Scott gets something almost 100% right.
>
> > 4. Objectivists believe the often cited preference for
> > LPs to CDs when not a result of mastering differences is
> > often the result of euphonic colorations inherent in LPs
> > as a medium and that while some may like them they are
> > never more accurate to the master tape or even the
> > original sound of a live recording.
>
> That makes 2! Good job (for you) Scott! The CD format is inherently
> sonically accurate and the LP format is inherently sonically inaccurate.
> That's the major reason why analog media has been scrapped wherever
> possible.
>
> A CD can be copied digitally and be indistinguishable from the original.
>
> When a LP is copied to another LP by any means the results are almost always
> a sonic insult. In in the best of times, the results may be mediocre.
>
> > 5. Objectivists believe the primary source of preferences
> > for LPs over CDs by vinyl enthusiasts is mostly a result
> > of biases.
>
> An inescapable conclusion, given the above - even Scott's kinda cloudy
> version of it.
>
> > Let me know if I am making any misrepresentations of
> > objectivists beliefs on this subject.
>
> If Scott were a real man he'd still post in RAO rather than hiding out in
> the wossey world of RAHE. But he's a makeup artist - go figure!


Note that last I checked there were only 2 responses to his post on
RAHE and nobody seemed willing to bother with it much, other than to
say they figured the objectivists had done the research to prove the
legitmate points about CD being more accurate.

Scott seems to want to argue to the death about his prefernce for LP in
spite of the massive amount of evidence showing that LP is essentially
crap if you want the most accurate presentation of what was recorded to
the master.

Perhaps he will follow the link I posted in the Alias thread and learn
from some real experts on digital audio, why virtually everything the
anti-CD folks have to say is crap, aside from their having a preference
for it. I even read a thing or 2 in the digital myth department, that
I had never heard before, such as the claim that listening to CD's will
damage your hearing. Sheesh!

Of course he'd have to read RAO for that.

[Harry Lavo]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "Jenn" > wrote in message
>
>> In article >,
>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
>>
>>> Cross-posted from RAHE:
>>>
>>> > wrote in message
>>>
>>>
>>>> It is my impression that
>>>
>>>> 1. objectivists believe that commercial CDs from their
>>>> introduction to the market place to the present are
>>>> audibly transparent transfers of the signal used to make
>>>> them.
>>>
>>> Whatever that means. Scott seems to be ignorant the
>>> details of how recordings are transferred to a
>>> distribution format. There is often a need for and
>>> execution of a process called "mastering" properly
>>> defined at http://www.recaudiopro.net/faq/index.htm . If
>>> you understand the cited document, then you can see the
>>> cans of worms this opens.
>>>
>>>> 2. Objectivists blame any faults of commercial CD sound
>>>> to the poor quality of the original recordings or bad
>>>> choices made by mastering engineers but never blame the
>>>> actual digital conversion or manufacturing of those CDs.
>>>
>>> More specifically, they aren't due to the limitations of
>>> the CD format.
>>>
>>>> 3. Objectivists believe that CDs in the cases that no
>>>> tweaking has been done by the mastering engineers always
>>>> present a more accurate sounding version of that master
>>>> than any LP played back on any TT rig and thus will
>>>> offer a more accurate representation of the
>>>> artists/producer/ engineer's intentions as well as a
>>>> more accurate reproduction of the master.
>>>
>>> Finally Scott gets something almost 100% right.
>>>
>>>> 4. Objectivists believe the often cited preference for
>>>> LPs to CDs when not a result of mastering differences is
>>>> often the result of euphonic colorations inherent in LPs
>>>> as a medium and that while some may like them they are
>>>> never more accurate to the master tape or even the
>>>> original sound of a live recording.
>>>
>>> That makes 2! Good job (for you) Scott! The CD format is
>>> inherently sonically accurate and the LP format is
>>> inherently sonically inaccurate. That's the major reason
>>> why analog media has been scrapped wherever possible.
>>>
>>> A CD can be copied digitally and be indistinguishable
>>> from the original.
>>>
>>> When a LP is copied to another LP by any means the
>>> results are almost always a sonic insult. In in the
>>> best of times, the results may be mediocre.
>>>
>>>> 5. Objectivists believe the primary source of
>>>> preferences for LPs over CDs by vinyl enthusiasts is
>>>> mostly a result of biases.
>>>
>>> An inescapable conclusion, given the above - even
>>> Scott's kinda cloudy version of it.
>>>
>>>> Let me know if I am making any misrepresentations of
>>>> objectivists beliefs on this subject.
>>>
>>> If Scott were a real man he'd still post in RAO rather
>>> than hiding out in the wossey world of RAHE. But he's a
>>> makeup artist - go figure!
>>
>> And you are enough of a "real man" to make comments that
>> the poster may well never see and therefore have the
>> opportunity to comment on.
>
> Note that Jenn has no reasonable response to issues 1-5 above, but instead
> is trying to turn it into a battle of personalities. Expect the other RAO
> Golden Eared trolls to join in in a similar fashion.

Note the nonresponse to Jenn's critique.

>

[[email protected]]

Jenn wrote:
> In article >,
> "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
>
> > Cross-posted from RAHE:
> >
> > > wrote in message
> >
> >
> > > It is my impression that
> >
> > > 1. objectivists believe that commercial CDs from their
> > > introduction to the market place to the present are
> > > audibly transparent transfers of the signal used to make
> > > them.
> >
> > Whatever that means. Scott seems to be ignorant the details of how
> > recordings are transferred to a distribution format. There is often a need
> > for and execution of a process called "mastering" properly defined at
> > http://www.recaudiopro.net/faq/index.htm . If you understand the cited
> > document, then you can see the cans of worms this opens.
> >
> > > 2. Objectivists blame any faults of commercial CD sound
> > > to the poor quality of the original recordings or bad
> > > choices made by mastering engineers but never blame the
> > > actual digital conversion or manufacturing of those CDs.
> >
> > More specifically, they aren't due to the limitations of the CD format.
> >
> > > 3. Objectivists believe that CDs in the cases that no
> > > tweaking has been done by the mastering engineers always
> > > present a more accurate sounding version of that master
> > > than any LP played back on any TT rig and thus will offer
> > > a more accurate representation of the artists/producer/
> > > engineer's intentions as well as a more accurate
> > > reproduction of the master.
> >
> > Finally Scott gets something almost 100% right.
> >
> > > 4. Objectivists believe the often cited preference for
> > > LPs to CDs when not a result of mastering differences is
> > > often the result of euphonic colorations inherent in LPs
> > > as a medium and that while some may like them they are
> > > never more accurate to the master tape or even the
> > > original sound of a live recording.
> >
> > That makes 2! Good job (for you) Scott! The CD format is inherently
> > sonically accurate and the LP format is inherently sonically inaccurate.
> > That's the major reason why analog media has been scrapped wherever
> > possible.
> >
> > A CD can be copied digitally and be indistinguishable from the original.
> >
> > When a LP is copied to another LP by any means the results are almost always
> > a sonic insult. In in the best of times, the results may be mediocre.
> >
> > > 5. Objectivists believe the primary source of preferences
> > > for LPs over CDs by vinyl enthusiasts is mostly a result
> > > of biases.
> >
> > An inescapable conclusion, given the above - even Scott's kinda cloudy
> > version of it.
> >
> > > Let me know if I am making any misrepresentations of
> > > objectivists beliefs on this subject.
> >
> > If Scott were a real man he'd still post in RAO rather than hiding out in
> > the wossey world of RAHE. But he's a makeup artist - go figure!
>
> And you are enough of a "real man" to make comments that the poster may
> well never see and therefore have the opportunity to comment on.

There are people wo post to both RAO and to RAHE, so there's no reason
to think he won't know about it.

There's also no reason to think he will ever stop listening to and
preferring a medicore technology. Scott will give up his belief in LP
uber alles around the time Atkinson stsrts doing ABX tests in
Stereophile. :-)

[George M. Middius]

Jenn said:

> > If Scott were a real man he'd still post in RAO rather than hiding out in
> > the wossey[sic] world of RAHE. But he's a makeup artist - go figure!

> And you are enough of a "real man" to make comments that the poster may
> well never see and therefore have the opportunity to comment on.

Actually, this might be an occasion for pitying Krooger. The truth is that
Arnii was banned from RAHE permanently. This watershed event occurred less
than two years ago. Prior to that, of course, Mr. **** frequently boasted
about his "Usenet career" including umpty-ump thousands of RAHE posts. When
the RAHE moderators finally had enough of Turdy's antisocial behavior, they
banned him from posting there ever again. That decision precipitated some
major tantrums from Krooger, including attacks on the moderators'
intelligence, education, and families.

So Krooger is simply not capable of attacking people on RAHE. Pity the poor
dumb Beast.

[Arny Krueger]

> wrote in message
oups.com

> There's also no reason to think he will ever stop
> listening to and preferring a medicore technology. Scott
> will give up his belief in LP uber alles around the time
> Atkinson stsrts doing ABX tests in Stereophile. :-)

Good comparison. You could easily add Harry and Jenn to this list.

[Jenn]

In article . com>,
" > wrote:

> Jenn wrote:
> > In article >,
> > "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
> >
> > > Cross-posted from RAHE:
> > >
> > > > wrote in message
> > >
> > >
> > > > It is my impression that
> > >
> > > > 1. objectivists believe that commercial CDs from their
> > > > introduction to the market place to the present are
> > > > audibly transparent transfers of the signal used to make
> > > > them.
> > >
> > > Whatever that means. Scott seems to be ignorant the details of how
> > > recordings are transferred to a distribution format. There is often a
> > > need
> > > for and execution of a process called "mastering" properly defined at
> > > http://www.recaudiopro.net/faq/index.htm . If you understand the cited
> > > document, then you can see the cans of worms this opens.
> > >
> > > > 2. Objectivists blame any faults of commercial CD sound
> > > > to the poor quality of the original recordings or bad
> > > > choices made by mastering engineers but never blame the
> > > > actual digital conversion or manufacturing of those CDs.
> > >
> > > More specifically, they aren't due to the limitations of the CD format.
> > >
> > > > 3. Objectivists believe that CDs in the cases that no
> > > > tweaking has been done by the mastering engineers always
> > > > present a more accurate sounding version of that master
> > > > than any LP played back on any TT rig and thus will offer
> > > > a more accurate representation of the artists/producer/
> > > > engineer's intentions as well as a more accurate
> > > > reproduction of the master.
> > >
> > > Finally Scott gets something almost 100% right.
> > >
> > > > 4. Objectivists believe the often cited preference for
> > > > LPs to CDs when not a result of mastering differences is
> > > > often the result of euphonic colorations inherent in LPs
> > > > as a medium and that while some may like them they are
> > > > never more accurate to the master tape or even the
> > > > original sound of a live recording.
> > >
> > > That makes 2! Good job (for you) Scott! The CD format is inherently
> > > sonically accurate and the LP format is inherently sonically inaccurate.
> > > That's the major reason why analog media has been scrapped wherever
> > > possible.
> > >
> > > A CD can be copied digitally and be indistinguishable from the original.
> > >
> > > When a LP is copied to another LP by any means the results are almost
> > > always
> > > a sonic insult. In in the best of times, the results may be mediocre.
> > >
> > > > 5. Objectivists believe the primary source of preferences
> > > > for LPs over CDs by vinyl enthusiasts is mostly a result
> > > > of biases.
> > >
> > > An inescapable conclusion, given the above - even Scott's kinda cloudy
> > > version of it.
> > >
> > > > Let me know if I am making any misrepresentations of
> > > > objectivists beliefs on this subject.
> > >
> > > If Scott were a real man he'd still post in RAO rather than hiding out in
> > > the wossey world of RAHE. But he's a makeup artist - go figure!
> >
> > And you are enough of a "real man" to make comments that the poster may
> > well never see and therefore have the opportunity to comment on.
>
> There are people wo post to both RAO and to RAHE, so there's no reason
> to think he won't know about it.

LOL That's just about the most lame excuse that I've yet heard. Let's
see...there are probably people here who post to both RAO and
alt.cat.lovers, so we'll just feel free to post something about your
views on alt.cat.lovers and expect that you'll read it and be able to
respond. LOL
>
> There's also no reason to think he will ever stop listening to and
> preferring a medicore technology. Scott will give up his belief in LP
> uber alles around the time Atkinson stsrts doing ABX tests in
> Stereophile. :-)

So post your view where he will read it, like a "real man".

[Jenn]

In article >,
"Arny Krueger" > wrote:

> "Jenn" > wrote in message
>
> > In article >,
> > "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
> >
> >> Cross-posted from RAHE:
> >>
> >> > wrote in message
> >>
> >>
> >>> It is my impression that
> >>
> >>> 1. objectivists believe that commercial CDs from their
> >>> introduction to the market place to the present are
> >>> audibly transparent transfers of the signal used to make
> >>> them.
> >>
> >> Whatever that means. Scott seems to be ignorant the
> >> details of how recordings are transferred to a
> >> distribution format. There is often a need for and
> >> execution of a process called "mastering" properly
> >> defined at http://www.recaudiopro.net/faq/index.htm . If
> >> you understand the cited document, then you can see the
> >> cans of worms this opens.
> >>
> >>> 2. Objectivists blame any faults of commercial CD sound
> >>> to the poor quality of the original recordings or bad
> >>> choices made by mastering engineers but never blame the
> >>> actual digital conversion or manufacturing of those CDs.
> >>
> >> More specifically, they aren't due to the limitations of
> >> the CD format.
> >>
> >>> 3. Objectivists believe that CDs in the cases that no
> >>> tweaking has been done by the mastering engineers always
> >>> present a more accurate sounding version of that master
> >>> than any LP played back on any TT rig and thus will
> >>> offer a more accurate representation of the
> >>> artists/producer/ engineer's intentions as well as a
> >>> more accurate reproduction of the master.
> >>
> >> Finally Scott gets something almost 100% right.
> >>
> >>> 4. Objectivists believe the often cited preference for
> >>> LPs to CDs when not a result of mastering differences is
> >>> often the result of euphonic colorations inherent in LPs
> >>> as a medium and that while some may like them they are
> >>> never more accurate to the master tape or even the
> >>> original sound of a live recording.
> >>
> >> That makes 2! Good job (for you) Scott! The CD format is
> >> inherently sonically accurate and the LP format is
> >> inherently sonically inaccurate. That's the major reason
> >> why analog media has been scrapped wherever possible.
> >>
> >> A CD can be copied digitally and be indistinguishable
> >> from the original.
> >>
> >> When a LP is copied to another LP by any means the
> >> results are almost always a sonic insult. In in the
> >> best of times, the results may be mediocre.
> >>
> >>> 5. Objectivists believe the primary source of
> >>> preferences for LPs over CDs by vinyl enthusiasts is
> >>> mostly a result of biases.
> >>
> >> An inescapable conclusion, given the above - even
> >> Scott's kinda cloudy version of it.
> >>
> >>> Let me know if I am making any misrepresentations of
> >>> objectivists beliefs on this subject.
> >>
> >> If Scott were a real man he'd still post in RAO rather
> >> than hiding out in the wossey world of RAHE. But he's a
> >> makeup artist - go figure!
> >
> > And you are enough of a "real man" to make comments that
> > the poster may well never see and therefore have the
> > opportunity to comment on.
>
> Note that Jenn has no reasonable response to issues 1-5 above, but instead
> is trying to turn it into a battle of personalities.

Note that Arny questions Scott's "manhood" and then claims that **I**
turned the above into a battle of personalities.

[Jenn]

In article >,
George M. Middius <cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net>
wrote:

> Jenn said:
>
> > > If Scott were a real man he'd still post in RAO rather than hiding out in
> > > the wossey[sic] world of RAHE. But he's a makeup artist - go figure!
>
> > And you are enough of a "real man" to make comments that the poster may
> > well never see and therefore have the opportunity to comment on.
>
> Actually, this might be an occasion for pitying Krooger. The truth is that
> Arnii was banned from RAHE permanently. This watershed event occurred less
> than two years ago. Prior to that, of course, Mr. **** frequently boasted
> about his "Usenet career" including umpty-ump thousands of RAHE posts. When
> the RAHE moderators finally had enough of Turdy's antisocial behavior, they
> banned him from posting there ever again. That decision precipitated some
> major tantrums from Krooger, including attacks on the moderators'
> intelligence, education, and families.
>
> So Krooger is simply not capable of attacking people on RAHE. Pity the poor
> dumb Beast.

Wow, this must have happened a short time before I started reading that
group. It does explain a lot.

[Arny Krueger]

"Jenn" > wrote in message

> In article
> . com>,
> " > wrote:
>
>> Jenn wrote:
>>> In article >,
>>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
>>>
>>>> Cross-posted from RAHE:
>>>>
>>>> > wrote in message
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> It is my impression that
>>>>
>>>>> 1. objectivists believe that commercial CDs from their
>>>>> introduction to the market place to the present are
>>>>> audibly transparent transfers of the signal used to
>>>>> make them.
>>>>
>>>> Whatever that means. Scott seems to be ignorant the
>>>> details of how recordings are transferred to a
>>>> distribution format. There is often a need
>>>> for and execution of a process called "mastering"
>>>> properly defined at
>>>> http://www.recaudiopro.net/faq/index.htm . If you
>>>> understand the cited document, then you can see the
>>>> cans of worms this opens.
>>>>
>>>>> 2. Objectivists blame any faults of commercial CD
>>>>> sound to the poor quality of the original recordings
>>>>> or bad choices made by mastering engineers but never
>>>>> blame the actual digital conversion or manufacturing
>>>>> of those CDs.
>>>>
>>>> More specifically, they aren't due to the limitations
>>>> of the CD format.
>>>>
>>>>> 3. Objectivists believe that CDs in the cases that no
>>>>> tweaking has been done by the mastering engineers
>>>>> always present a more accurate sounding version of
>>>>> that master than any LP played back on any TT rig and
>>>>> thus will offer a more accurate representation of the
>>>>> artists/producer/ engineer's intentions as well as a
>>>>> more accurate reproduction of the master.
>>>>
>>>> Finally Scott gets something almost 100% right.
>>>>
>>>>> 4. Objectivists believe the often cited preference for
>>>>> LPs to CDs when not a result of mastering differences
>>>>> is often the result of euphonic colorations inherent
>>>>> in LPs as a medium and that while some may like them
>>>>> they are never more accurate to the master tape or
>>>>> even the original sound of a live recording.
>>>>
>>>> That makes 2! Good job (for you) Scott! The CD format
>>>> is inherently sonically accurate and the LP format is
>>>> inherently sonically inaccurate. That's the major
>>>> reason why analog media has been scrapped wherever
>>>> possible.
>>>>
>>>> A CD can be copied digitally and be indistinguishable
>>>> from the original.
>>>>
>>>> When a LP is copied to another LP by any means the
>>>> results are almost always
>>>> a sonic insult. In in the best of times, the results
>>>> may be mediocre.
>>>>
>>>>> 5. Objectivists believe the primary source of
>>>>> preferences for LPs over CDs by vinyl enthusiasts is
>>>>> mostly a result of biases.
>>>>
>>>> An inescapable conclusion, given the above - even
>>>> Scott's kinda cloudy version of it.
>>>>
>>>>> Let me know if I am making any misrepresentations of
>>>>> objectivists beliefs on this subject.
>>>>
>>>> If Scott were a real man he'd still post in RAO rather
>>>> than hiding out in the wossey world of RAHE. But he's
>>>> a makeup artist - go figure!
>>>
>>> And you are enough of a "real man" to make comments
>>> that the poster may well never see and therefore have
>>> the opportunity to comment on.
>>
>> There are people wo post to both RAO and to RAHE, so
>> there's no reason to think he won't know about it.
>
> LOL That's just about the most lame excuse that I've yet
> heard. Let's see...there are probably people here who
> post to both RAO and alt.cat.lovers, so we'll just feel
> free to post something about your views on alt.cat.lovers
> and expect that you'll read it and be able to respond.
> LOL
>>
>> There's also no reason to think he will ever stop
>> listening to and preferring a medicore technology.
>> Scott will give up his belief in LP uber alles around
>> the time Atkinson stsrts doing ABX tests in Stereophile.
>> :-)

> So post your view where he will read it, like a "real
> man".

Within the realms of things that I can do, been there done that.

[Arny Krueger]

"Jenn" > wrote in message


>> So Krooger is simply not capable of attacking people on
>> RAHE. Pity the poor dumb Beast.
>
> Wow, this must have happened a short time before I
> started reading that group. It does explain a lot.

Yes, it explains why I'd need to smoke Scott out instead of addressing him
directly.

Scott left here after monumentally embarassing himself.

I was banned from RAHE for things I said about the moderators on RAO -
namely that they broke their own rules as they moderated, and were randomly
simply throwing away my posts rather then following their official
procedures.

RAHE is basically a place where golden ears like Harry can attack so-called
objectivists without fear of being called to be responsible for their acts.
Most of RAHE's moderators have quit in disgust.

[Arny Krueger]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message

>
> Note that Jenn has no reasonable response to issues 1-5
> above, but instead is trying to turn it into a battle of
> personalities. Expect the other RAO Golden Eared trolls
> to join in in a similar fashion.

Note that this has already happened, within just a few hours of my
prediction.

Do I know how to predict the behavior of these golden ears or what?

[Jenn]

In article >,
"Arny Krueger" > wrote:

> "Jenn" > wrote in message
>
>
> >> So Krooger is simply not capable of attacking people on
> >> RAHE. Pity the poor dumb Beast.
> >
> > Wow, this must have happened a short time before I
> > started reading that group. It does explain a lot.
>
> Yes, it explains why I'd need to smoke Scott out instead of addressing him
> directly.
>
> Scott left here after monumentally embarassing himself.
>
> I was banned from RAHE for things I said about the moderators on RAO -
> namely that they broke their own rules as they moderated, and were randomly
> simply throwing away my posts rather then following their official
> procedures.

I suspect, given your style here, that your objections weren't stated so
politely.

>
> RAHE is basically a place where golden ears like Harry can attack so-called
> objectivists without fear of being called to be responsible for their acts.
> Most of RAHE's moderators have quit in disgust.

Not my experience. Chung, for example, posts quite freely there.

"Jenn" > wrote in message
...
> In article . com>,
> " > wrote:
>
>> Jenn wrote:
>> > In article >,
>> > "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
>> >
>> > > Cross-posted from RAHE:
>> > >
>> > > > wrote in message
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > > It is my impression that
>> > >
>> > > > 1. objectivists believe that commercial CDs from their
>> > > > introduction to the market place to the present are
>> > > > audibly transparent transfers of the signal used to make
>> > > > them.
>> > >
>> > > Whatever that means. Scott seems to be ignorant the details of how
>> > > recordings are transferred to a distribution format. There is often a
>> > > need
>> > > for and execution of a process called "mastering" properly defined at
>> > > http://www.recaudiopro.net/faq/index.htm . If you understand the
>> > > cited
>> > > document, then you can see the cans of worms this opens.
>> > >
>> > > > 2. Objectivists blame any faults of commercial CD sound
>> > > > to the poor quality of the original recordings or bad
>> > > > choices made by mastering engineers but never blame the
>> > > > actual digital conversion or manufacturing of those CDs.
>> > >
>> > > More specifically, they aren't due to the limitations of the CD
>> > > format.
>> > >
>> > > > 3. Objectivists believe that CDs in the cases that no
>> > > > tweaking has been done by the mastering engineers always
>> > > > present a more accurate sounding version of that master
>> > > > than any LP played back on any TT rig and thus will offer
>> > > > a more accurate representation of the artists/producer/
>> > > > engineer's intentions as well as a more accurate
>> > > > reproduction of the master.
>> > >
>> > > Finally Scott gets something almost 100% right.
>> > >
>> > > > 4. Objectivists believe the often cited preference for
>> > > > LPs to CDs when not a result of mastering differences is
>> > > > often the result of euphonic colorations inherent in LPs
>> > > > as a medium and that while some may like them they are
>> > > > never more accurate to the master tape or even the
>> > > > original sound of a live recording.
>> > >
>> > > That makes 2! Good job (for you) Scott! The CD format is inherently
>> > > sonically accurate and the LP format is inherently sonically
>> > > inaccurate.
>> > > That's the major reason why analog media has been scrapped wherever
>> > > possible.
>> > >
>> > > A CD can be copied digitally and be indistinguishable from the
>> > > original.
>> > >
>> > > When a LP is copied to another LP by any means the results are almost
>> > > always
>> > > a sonic insult. In in the best of times, the results may be
>> > > mediocre.
>> > >
>> > > > 5. Objectivists believe the primary source of preferences
>> > > > for LPs over CDs by vinyl enthusiasts is mostly a result
>> > > > of biases.
>> > >
>> > > An inescapable conclusion, given the above - even Scott's kinda
>> > > cloudy
>> > > version of it.
>> > >
>> > > > Let me know if I am making any misrepresentations of
>> > > > objectivists beliefs on this subject.
>> > >
>> > > If Scott were a real man he'd still post in RAO rather than hiding
>> > > out in
>> > > the wossey world of RAHE. But he's a makeup artist - go figure!
>> >
>> > And you are enough of a "real man" to make comments that the poster may
>> > well never see and therefore have the opportunity to comment on.
>>
>> There are people wo post to both RAO and to RAHE, so there's no reason
>> to think he won't know about it.
>
> LOL That's just about the most lame excuse that I've yet heard. Let's
> see...there are probably people here who post to both RAO and
> alt.cat.lovers, so we'll just feel free to post something about your
> views on alt.cat.lovers and expect that you'll read it and be able to
> respond. LOL
>>
>> There's also no reason to think he will ever stop listening to and
>> preferring a medicore technology. Scott will give up his belief in LP
>> uber alles around the time Atkinson stsrts doing ABX tests in
>> Stereophile. :-)
>
> So post your view where he will read it, like a "real man".

IME, most people who post on one audio forum, read others, so I think it's
safe to say he'll find out.

I responded to his thread on RAHE already.

Why don't you post there anymore?

[Arny Krueger]

"Jenn" > wrote in message

> In article >,
> "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
>
>> "Jenn" > wrote in message
>>
>>
>>>> So Krooger is simply not capable of attacking people on
>>>> RAHE. Pity the poor dumb Beast.
>>>
>>> Wow, this must have happened a short time before I
>>> started reading that group. It does explain a lot.
>>
>> Yes, it explains why I'd need to smoke Scott out instead
>> of addressing him directly.
>>
>> Scott left here after monumentally embarassing himself.
>>
>> I was banned from RAHE for things I said about the
>> moderators on RAO - namely that they broke their own
>> rules as they moderated, and were randomly simply
>> throwing away my posts rather then following their
>> official procedures.
>
> I suspect, given your style here, that your objections
> weren't stated so politely.

They are in google.

>> RAHE is basically a place where golden ears like Harry
>> can attack so-called objectivists without fear of being
>> called to be responsible for their acts. Most of RAHE's
>> moderators have quit in disgust.

> Not my experience. Chung, for example, posts quite
> freely there.

Right, but he has to forgo holding people like Harry for their acts.

[Jenn]

In article et>,
> wrote:

> "Jenn" > wrote in message
> ...
> > In article . com>,
> > " > wrote:
> >
> >> Jenn wrote:
> >> > In article >,
> >> > "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Cross-posted from RAHE:
> >> > >
> >> > > > wrote in message
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > > It is my impression that
> >> > >
> >> > > > 1. objectivists believe that commercial CDs from their
> >> > > > introduction to the market place to the present are
> >> > > > audibly transparent transfers of the signal used to make
> >> > > > them.
> >> > >
> >> > > Whatever that means. Scott seems to be ignorant the details of how
> >> > > recordings are transferred to a distribution format. There is often a
> >> > > need
> >> > > for and execution of a process called "mastering" properly defined at
> >> > > http://www.recaudiopro.net/faq/index.htm . If you understand the
> >> > > cited
> >> > > document, then you can see the cans of worms this opens.
> >> > >
> >> > > > 2. Objectivists blame any faults of commercial CD sound
> >> > > > to the poor quality of the original recordings or bad
> >> > > > choices made by mastering engineers but never blame the
> >> > > > actual digital conversion or manufacturing of those CDs.
> >> > >
> >> > > More specifically, they aren't due to the limitations of the CD
> >> > > format.
> >> > >
> >> > > > 3. Objectivists believe that CDs in the cases that no
> >> > > > tweaking has been done by the mastering engineers always
> >> > > > present a more accurate sounding version of that master
> >> > > > than any LP played back on any TT rig and thus will offer
> >> > > > a more accurate representation of the artists/producer/
> >> > > > engineer's intentions as well as a more accurate
> >> > > > reproduction of the master.
> >> > >
> >> > > Finally Scott gets something almost 100% right.
> >> > >
> >> > > > 4. Objectivists believe the often cited preference for
> >> > > > LPs to CDs when not a result of mastering differences is
> >> > > > often the result of euphonic colorations inherent in LPs
> >> > > > as a medium and that while some may like them they are
> >> > > > never more accurate to the master tape or even the
> >> > > > original sound of a live recording.
> >> > >
> >> > > That makes 2! Good job (for you) Scott! The CD format is inherently
> >> > > sonically accurate and the LP format is inherently sonically
> >> > > inaccurate.
> >> > > That's the major reason why analog media has been scrapped wherever
> >> > > possible.
> >> > >
> >> > > A CD can be copied digitally and be indistinguishable from the
> >> > > original.
> >> > >
> >> > > When a LP is copied to another LP by any means the results are almost
> >> > > always
> >> > > a sonic insult. In in the best of times, the results may be
> >> > > mediocre.
> >> > >
> >> > > > 5. Objectivists believe the primary source of preferences
> >> > > > for LPs over CDs by vinyl enthusiasts is mostly a result
> >> > > > of biases.
> >> > >
> >> > > An inescapable conclusion, given the above - even Scott's kinda
> >> > > cloudy
> >> > > version of it.
> >> > >
> >> > > > Let me know if I am making any misrepresentations of
> >> > > > objectivists beliefs on this subject.
> >> > >
> >> > > If Scott were a real man he'd still post in RAO rather than hiding
> >> > > out in
> >> > > the wossey world of RAHE. But he's a makeup artist - go figure!
> >> >
> >> > And you are enough of a "real man" to make comments that the poster may
> >> > well never see and therefore have the opportunity to comment on.
> >>
> >> There are people wo post to both RAO and to RAHE, so there's no reason
> >> to think he won't know about it.
> >
> > LOL That's just about the most lame excuse that I've yet heard. Let's
> > see...there are probably people here who post to both RAO and
> > alt.cat.lovers, so we'll just feel free to post something about your
> > views on alt.cat.lovers and expect that you'll read it and be able to
> > respond. LOL
> >>
> >> There's also no reason to think he will ever stop listening to and
> >> preferring a medicore technology. Scott will give up his belief in LP
> >> uber alles around the time Atkinson stsrts doing ABX tests in
> >> Stereophile. :-)
> >
> > So post your view where he will read it, like a "real man".
>
> IME, most people who post on one audio forum, read others, so I think it's
> safe to say he'll find out.

Justification for Arny's foul, IMO.
>
> I responded to his thread on RAHE already.

Cool, but not the point.
>
> Why don't you post there anymore?

I do, just not as often because I've been so active here.

[Jenn]

In article >,
"Arny Krueger" > wrote:

> "Jenn" > wrote in message
>
> > In article >,
> > "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
> >
> >> "Jenn" > wrote in message
> >>
> >>
> >>>> So Krooger is simply not capable of attacking people on
> >>>> RAHE. Pity the poor dumb Beast.
> >>>
> >>> Wow, this must have happened a short time before I
> >>> started reading that group. It does explain a lot.
> >>
> >> Yes, it explains why I'd need to smoke Scott out instead
> >> of addressing him directly.
> >>
> >> Scott left here after monumentally embarassing himself.
> >>
> >> I was banned from RAHE for things I said about the
> >> moderators on RAO - namely that they broke their own
> >> rules as they moderated, and were randomly simply
> >> throwing away my posts rather then following their
> >> official procedures.
> >
> > I suspect, given your style here, that your objections
> > weren't stated so politely.
>
> They are in google.
>
> >> RAHE is basically a place where golden ears like Harry
> >> can attack so-called objectivists without fear of being
> >> called to be responsible for their acts. Most of RAHE's
> >> moderators have quit in disgust.
>
> > Not my experience. Chung, for example, posts quite
> > freely there.
>
> Right, but he has to forgo holding people like Harry for their acts.

Not at all. He's even allowed to be a smarta** at times! :-)

[George M. Middius]

Jenn said:

> > RAHE is basically a place where golden ears like Harry can attack so-called
> > objectivists without fear of being called to be responsible for their acts.
> > Most of RAHE's moderators have quit in disgust.

> Not my experience. Chung, for example, posts quite freely there.

Krooger excuses his nasty conduct on RAO by klaiming that everybody else
did it first. You be the judge. ;-)

[Arny Krueger]

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

> Jenn said:
>
>>> RAHE is basically a place where golden ears like Harry
>>> can attack so-called objectivists without fear of being
>>> called to be responsible for their acts. Most of RAHE's
>>> moderators have quit in disgust.
>
>> Not my experience. Chung, for example, posts quite
>> freely there.
>
> Krooger excuses his nasty conduct on RAO by klaiming that
> everybody else did it first. You be the judge. ;-)

It's true that RAO was a nasty place before I posted here the first time,
but the ascent of Middius and his kind made it far nastier.

Right now RAO suffers not so much from being nasty, but from being dominated
by so many who are like Middius, just plain stupid and disinterested in
audio. Reading Middius is about as interesting as reading transcripts from a
High School girl's locker room.

[Robert Morein]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "George M. Middius" <cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast
> [dot] net> wrote in message
>
>> Jenn said:
>>
>>>> RAHE is basically a place where golden ears like Harry
>>>> can attack so-called objectivists without fear of being
>>>> called to be responsible for their acts. Most of RAHE's
>>>> moderators have quit in disgust.
>>
>>> Not my experience. Chung, for example, posts quite
>>> freely there.
>>
>> Krooger excuses his nasty conduct on RAO by klaiming that
>> everybody else did it first. You be the judge. ;-)
>
> It's true that RAO was a nasty place before I posted here the first time,
> but the ascent of Middius and his kind made it far nastier.
>
Let's not forget your recent, unprovoked adhomineum attack on me.
You seem to want to keep it going.

[Arny Krueger]

"Robert Morein" > wrote in message

> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "George M. Middius" <cmndr [underscore] george [at]
>> comcast [dot] net> wrote in message
>>
>>> Jenn said:
>>>
>>>>> RAHE is basically a place where golden ears like Harry
>>>>> can attack so-called objectivists without fear of
>>>>> being called to be responsible for their acts. Most
>>>>> of RAHE's moderators have quit in disgust.
>>>
>>>> Not my experience. Chung, for example, posts quite
>>>> freely there.
>>>
>>> Krooger excuses his nasty conduct on RAO by klaiming
>>> that everybody else did it first. You be the judge. ;-)
>>
>> It's true that RAO was a nasty place before I posted
>> here the first time, but the ascent of Middius and his
>> kind made it far nastier.
> Let's not forget your recent, unprovoked adhomineum
> attack on me. You seem to want to keep it going.

Drop:Bucket.

Get a life Morein. Do something besides listen to your ancient stereo.

[Clyde Slick]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
>>
>> And you are enough of a "real man" to make comments that
>> the poster may well never see and therefore have the
>> opportunity to comment on.
>
> Note that Jenn has no reasonable response to issues 1-5 above, but instead
> is trying to turn it into a battle of personalities. Expect the other RAO
> Golden Eared trolls to join in in a similar fashion.
>


Arnie first said
"If Scott were a real man he'd still post in RAO rather than hiding out in
the wossey world of RAHE. But he's a
makeup artist - go figure!"

so, YOU are the one starting a battle of personalities!



--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com<<<<<<------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

[Clyde Slick]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>
>>
>> Note that Jenn has no reasonable response to issues 1-5
>> above, but instead is trying to turn it into a battle of
>> personalities. Expect the other RAO Golden Eared trolls
>> to join in in a similar fashion.
>
> Note that this has already happened, within just a few hours of my
> prediction.
>
> Do I know how to predict the behavior of these golden ears or what?
>

So, you dump a load of ****, and then predict we will
lambast you for it.
quite the genius, ARnie.



--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com<<<<<<------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

[Clyde Slick]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...

> Reading Middius is about as interesting as reading transcripts from a High
> School girl's locker room.


Oh, the rest of us never read them, so, please, tell us what they say.
Did they ever catch you peeping in the window?
"At least" you were peeping into the right room.



--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com<<<<<<------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

[Harry Lavo]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "Jenn" > wrote in message
>
>
>>> So Krooger is simply not capable of attacking people on
>>> RAHE. Pity the poor dumb Beast.
>>
>> Wow, this must have happened a short time before I
>> started reading that group. It does explain a lot.
>
> Yes, it explains why I'd need to smoke Scott out instead of addressing him
> directly.
>
> Scott left here after monumentally embarassing himself.
>
> I was banned from RAHE for things I said about the moderators on RAO -
> namely that they broke their own rules as they moderated, and were
> randomly simply throwing away my posts rather then following their
> official procedures.
>
> RAHE is basically a place where golden ears like Harry can attack
> so-called objectivists without fear of being called to be responsible for
> their acts. Most of RAHE's moderators have quit in disgust.

LOL!

You were banned finally for riduculing and slandering the moderators here on
RAO and other places.

Your beef with the moderators was over several issues.
1) they insisted on enforcing the "no commerical" rule that prevented you
for shilling your ABX web site in nearly every post you made.
2) they insisted on enforcing the rule that banned the injection of
derogatory terms and baiting into discussions.
3) they insisted on enforcing the rule that allowed no introduction of dbt
"requirements" (e.g. "prove it") into every discussion involving anecdotal
impressions of the sound characteristics of equipment, media, etc. Only
when it was appropriate as per the topic.

All of us saw an increase in rejections and "send backs" as a result. You
couldn't live with these higher standards, assumed you were being singled
out, made derogatory remarks in this and other forums about RAHE and the
moderators, and as a result were thrown out along with one or two others who
felt they should be above the rules. This despite the fact that the
moderators were from the objectivist camp but simply tried to apply the
rules evenhandedly, which apparently hadn't always been the case previously.

[Arny Krueger]

"Harry Lavo" > wrote in message


> You were banned finally for riduculing and slandering the
> moderators here on RAO and other places.

Prove it.

> Your beef with the moderators was over several issues.
> 1) they insisted on enforcing the "no commerical" rule
> that prevented you for shilling your ABX web site in
> nearly every post you made.

Wrong.

> 2) they insisted on enforcing
> the rule that banned the injection of derogatory terms
> and baiting into discussions.

Wrong.

>3) they insisted on
> enforcing the rule that allowed no introduction of dbt
> "requirements" (e.g. "prove it") into every discussion
> involving anecdotal impressions of the sound
> characteristics of equipment, media, etc.


Actually, they rejected my posts in threads that had DBT in the title line
and/or where the OP mentioned DBTs.

> Only when it
> was appropriate as per the topic.

Like I said, they rejected many posts of mine for no reason and without
explanation, and when they they did explain, the explanations were ludicrous
as stated above.

> All of us saw an increase in rejections and "send backs"
> as a result.

However they had a special deal for me - dump the post with no reply.

>You couldn't live with these higher
> standards, assumed you were being singled out, made
> derogatory remarks in this and other forums about RAHE
> and the moderators, and as a result were thrown out along
> with one or two others who felt they should be above the
> rules.

All I did is point out my personal experiences, which are as I stated above.

> This despite the fact that the moderators were
> from the objectivist camp but simply tried to apply the
> rules evenhandedly, which apparently hadn't always been
> the case previously.

Golden Ears like you Harry have traditionally been given free passes for
lots of crap.

I really haven't been following RAHE very closely since I left, so I don't
know if things changed as the moderation staff changed.

I don't even know who the current moderators is/are.

Most of my complaints about explicit moderation relate to one moderator. For
all I know he was also the guy who was just dumping my posts with no
response.

Its possible that the unreasonable moderator left.

Whatever, its bad enough having to bother with the golden ears in RAO.

[George M. Middius]

Clyde Slick said:

> > School girl's locker room.

> Oh, the rest of us never read them, so, please, tell us what they say.
> Did they ever catch you peeping in the window?
> "At least" you were peeping into the right room.

He was probably looking for "firehoses". ;-)

[Steven Sullivan]

Arny Krueger > wrote:

> >> RAHE is basically a place where golden ears like Harry
> >> can attack so-called objectivists without fear of being
> >> called to be responsible for their acts. Most of RAHE's
> >> moderators have quit in disgust.

> > Not my experience. Chung, for example, posts quite
> > freely there.

> Right, but he has to forgo holding people like Harry for their acts.

Actually, he does so with some regularity, as do most
who haven't got Harry killfiled. ;>





--
-S
"If men were angels, no government would be necessary." - James Madison (1788)

[Steven Sullivan]

Arny Krueger > wrote:
> "George M. Middius" <cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast
> [dot] net> wrote in message
>
> > Jenn said:
> >
> >>> RAHE is basically a place where golden ears like Harry
> >>> can attack so-called objectivists without fear of being
> >>> called to be responsible for their acts. Most of RAHE's
> >>> moderators have quit in disgust.
> >
> >> Not my experience. Chung, for example, posts quite
> >> freely there.
> >
> > Krooger excuses his nasty conduct on RAO by klaiming that
> > everybody else did it first. You be the judge. ;-)

> It's true that RAO was a nasty place before I posted here the first time,
> but the ascent of Middius and his kind made it far nastier.

> Right now RAO suffers not so much from being nasty, but from being dominated
> by so many who are like Middius, just plain stupid and disinterested in
> audio. Reading Middius is about as interesting as reading transcripts from a
> High School girl's locker room.

Middius certainly dominates my RAO killfile. But afraid that's the
full extent of his domain, from my POV.






--
-S
"If men were angels, no government would be necessary." - James Madison (1788)

[Arny Krueger]

"Steven Sullivan" > wrote in message

> Arny Krueger > wrote:
>
>>>> RAHE is basically a place where golden ears like Harry
>>>> can attack so-called objectivists without fear of being
>>>> called to be responsible for their acts. Most of RAHE's
>>>> moderators have quit in disgust.
>
>>> Not my experience. Chung, for example, posts quite
>>> freely there.
>
>> Right, but he has to forgo holding people like Harry for
>> their acts.
>
> Actually, he does so with some regularity, as do most
> who haven't got Harry killfiled. ;>

If I had any doubts about Harry's weirdness, his rant at the HE2005 debate
settled them for all time. He will probably die believing that Stereophile
has it right.

I should just plead ignorance, as I have not spent any time in the past
serveral months looking at RAHE until just this morning.

Scott's post about digital actually showed a little promise, but it fared
about as badly on RAHE as it did here. Scott may have a problem, as he's
cutting too close to the chase for most of his golden-eared buds.

[Jenn]

In article >,
"Clyde Slick" > wrote:

> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> ...
> >>
> >> And you are enough of a "real man" to make comments that
> >> the poster may well never see and therefore have the
> >> opportunity to comment on.
> >
> > Note that Jenn has no reasonable response to issues 1-5 above, but instead
> > is trying to turn it into a battle of personalities. Expect the other RAO
> > Golden Eared trolls to join in in a similar fashion.
> >
>
>
> Arnie first said
> "If Scott were a real man he'd still post in RAO rather than hiding out in
> the wossey world of RAHE. But he's a
> makeup artist - go figure!"
>
> so, YOU are the one starting a battle of personalities!

Exactly.

[dizzy]

Jenn wrote:

>> RAHE is basically a place where golden ears like Harry can attack so-called
>> objectivists without fear of being called to be responsible for their acts.
>> Most of RAHE's moderators have quit in disgust.
>
>Not my experience. Chung, for example, posts quite freely there.

And Stewart P, as well.