How many people have Mr. Krueger, et al 'converted'? [Archive]

Arny Krueger

March 13th 06, 12:21 AM

"ScottW" > wrote in message
news:dg2Rf.136372$0G.31877@dukeread10
> "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" >
> wrote in message
> oups.com...

>> I'm just curious. I just did a search of r.a.o. going
>> back at least eight years. Thousands and thousands of
>> 'objectivist' posts by Mr. Krueger, nob, and others.

How does one search for "objectivist" posts?

>> Have these thousands of posts, representing hundreds and
>> thousands of man hours, been to any effect?

The strongest effects of of my posts have been on me. I've had to put
together quite a bit of knowlege about audio, in order for me to make many
of those posts. In some cases these posts were made up of bits of audio that
I knew, but had not put together in a more logical way. In other cases, I
made posts by finding new bits of information, primarily by searching
google, and putting them together with what I already knew.

>> Has anyone ever actually changed their mind on how they
>> think about audio based on what they've read here?

I've certainly changed my thinking about audio based on what I've posted
here.

> Sometimes Arny would step into it with guys like JJ and Zelniker and
> there would be some things to learn about audio bantered back and forth.

Actually Zelniker never really posted here very much, and most of those few
posts were highly uniformative. I just did a quick search with google and
came up with under 200 hits for RAO posts by Zelnicker. In contrast a simple
search for RAO posts by "jj" came up with almost 9,000 posts.

> Some of those discussions were highly technical and
> difficult to always follow... but it was interesting and
> sometimes revealing.

Yup those were the days that there were actually posts about audio that had
relevant technical content. In contrast to those almost 9,000 posts by jj,
there are over 5,000 posts that mention "krooborg" and almost 9,000 posts
that mention "borg".

IOW RAO has been overrun with childish name-calling by the Middius and his
crowd.

> Those days are long gone.
>
> ScottW

Bret Ludwig

March 13th 06, 01:16 AM

I would say Krueger has on the whole made me more rather than less
subjectivist. He has to a good extent disproved his own case when his
statements are tested by listening.

Good example-hook any big solid state PA amp to an efficient speaker
in a quiet room and listen carefully. In a lot of cases, if you build
out an L-pad with series and parallel noininductive power resistors,
the sound improves! Two things happen when you do that, the damping
factor is less (it in fact goes to hell pretty quick) and moreover the
amplifier is working a lot harder as the energy goes into the
resistors. What I'm more-than-guessing is happening is the amp is being
forced into a much more linear region where it works fine. In pro
applications no one really gives a good goddamn what a 1000 watt amp
sounds like at 10 mW. Then people start talking about how bad these
products are, when they are good products, misapplied.

On the other hand the triode ****s and other coprophages are worse
than Arny. And their systems sound worse than his does, most probably.

IMO Arny needs to find another hobby where in his own estimation he
can do some good. Maybe he can build a better Segway or a better fuel
injection system for retrofit to old cars.

tubeguy

March 13th 06, 02:40 AM

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> I'm just curious. I just did a search of r.a.o. going back at least
> eight years. Thousands and thousands of 'objectivist' posts by Mr.
> Krueger, nob, and others.
>
> Have these thousands of posts, representing hundreds and thousands of
> man hours, been to any effect?
>
> Has anyone ever actually changed their mind on how they think about
> audio based on what they've read here?
>
> Just curious...

I visited AK a few years ago. I did his double-blind test and picked
everything out with 100% accuracy. I have a good ear, but the point is that
he has a good point about subjectivism vs. objectivism.

I was surprised at my aural acuity. However it stands to reason. Not that I
don't think that proper cabling and amplification would sound different, the
point of the exercise was to see if the difference in encoding schemes was
apparent, and it was, to the aforementioned 100% degree.

The question of the increasing importance of the smaller difference can only
be answered by experienced and moneyed listeners, which I am not, on both
counts. They have the years of listening and the wherewithal to audition
top-flight equipment, and I for one have not the time or money to be able to
listen to the best stuff. So it stands to reason that the people who do
reviews for a living would at least be taken seriously.

Now about comparisons: The scientific method is more about proving an
hypothesis wrong than anything else. If a person thinks a thing should sound
a certain way, it is their job to try and find out why it should *not* sound
that way. If the hypothesis can not be disproved, it becomes more robust.
After repeated testing and experimentation, the hypothesis can become more
robust, even to the point of being accepted as a law, even if it is not
necessarily a law, in strict terms.

Listen for yourself. That is the ultimate arbiter. I have found that the
clean, analog path is the path to audio nirvana (not perfection, which I
think is theoretically unattainable). If you hear more stuff you need to
hear with a certain setup, that is your peak performing system. What people
on the outside don't realize is that there is more at play in the audio
chain than simple cabinet equations and crossovers. Tone controls? Use them
sparingly. I sound like an Apple guy here, but I do think that there is a
place for tone controls for a distributed audience. Not for me, though, I
like flatness.

Everyone has different aural acuity, we all have different aural frequency
responses. This is a physical thing, not a mental one. Eardrums are pretty
resilient, but the inner ear system is somewhat fragile. So I would say the
tendency for manufacturers to tilt the treble up is understandable, because
lots of the target audience has diminished hearing in the 12k and up range.

So what is the point here....it is that you have to find what sounds good to
you, and you better be ready to spend some few hundred bucks at least to get
it- this is not some kid-friendly game here, this is about real, good, hi-fi
sound, most bang for your buck. Otherwise you can build your own system from
readily-available parts. Know how to solder? Great, discover Google. Get
into power supplies and transformers, get into all the minutia of Litz wire
and the physics that make it so good. Go nuts with routing and capacitive
coupling, go crazy with the very real effects of variable magnetic fields.

These are all concerns. Don't get me started on water cable.

Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!

March 13th 06, 03:51 AM

From: Arny Krueger
Date: Sun, Mar 12 2006 6:21 pm
Email: "Arny Krueger" >

>How does one search for "objectivist" posts?

One doesn't. I didn't say that I had. What I said was I looked at posts
going back over eight years and saw hundreds and thousands of posts
from you, nob, and others. The ones that I looked from you and nob at
were just like the ones I see today, Mr. Krueger: generally angry, all
promoting the 'objectivist' viewpoint, and many that seemed to bash
preference.

I had no idea that you and nob have had a history of over eight years
here, so I became curious about the effect reached.

>Yup those were the days that there were actually posts about audio that had
>relevant technical content. In contrast to those almost 9,000 posts by jj,
>there are over 5,000 posts that mention "krooborg" and almost 9,000 posts
>that mention "borg".

>IOW RAO has been overrun with childish name-calling by the Middius and his
>crowd.

Just now I ran three searches. One with 'Arny Krueger' one with 'Arnold
Krueger' and another with just 'Arny' as authors on r.a.o only. The
former came up with 44,300 posts; the latter 74,100. Under the 'Arnold
Krueger' search, another 500+ posts show up. You may have used other
variations or nicknames that I did not run. From what I could see, you
did make a high percentage of the posts posts under each of those
names.

There were some posts that appeared to be forgeries though. So I would
estimate that on the very low side you have made at least 45,000 posts
to r.a.o. I think probably it's more likely to be 60,000 or more.

I also looked up 'George Middius' as the author on r.a.o. That search
showed 52,600 posts. I could see no other variations that looked like
the posts were his.

Even assuming that you've made only 45,000 posts to r.a.o., the
difference in volume between you and Mr. Middius is hardly
'overrunning' rec.audio.opinion, especially in relationship to your
posting quantity. I'd guess you and he were running probably closer to
1-1, or even more likely that you post more than he does.

Just comnparing with both of your posts, it would be equally truthful
to say that you've overrun r.a.o. It would probably be more truthful to
say that neither of you has.

[email protected]

March 13th 06, 04:35 AM

Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! wrote:

> I'm just curious. I just did a search of r.a.o. going back at least
> eight years. Thousands and thousands of 'objectivist' posts by Mr.
> Krueger, nob, and others.
>
> Have these thousands of posts, representing hundreds and thousands of
> man hours, been to any effect?
>
> Has anyone ever actually changed their mind on how they think about
> audio based on what they've read here?
>
> Just curious...

I did. I used to read Arny back way back in the day, when I was just a
wee little lurker. I was a hard-boiled extremist objectivist. Even more
than Arny is. ABX was my religion, and I practiced it every day. You
couldn't convince me that ANYTHING sounded ANY different from ANYTHING
else in audio. Even loudspeakers all sounded the same, where I was
concerned. But after taking in a gutfull of Arny Krueger, he sickened
me so much, that I renounced the religion of objectivism, and smashed
my ABX comparator box with a mallet.

I even tore down my picture of sexy Dave Carlstrom, and today, as most
people know me, I'm an alternative audio guru. I always maintain an
even number of cd's in my collection, I cross out the bar codes in my
cd cases with a "specially treated" $150 red marker, and I park my car
in the same place and the same direction every day. All to ensure good
sound from my home audio. And I'm happy to report, the sound I'm
getting off my hifi kit has NEVER been better in all my days. So thank
you, Arny Krueger!

Robert Morein

March 13th 06, 05:22 AM

> wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! wrote:
>
>> I'm just curious. I just did a search of r.a.o. going back at least
>> eight years. Thousands and thousands of 'objectivist' posts by Mr.
>> Krueger, nob, and others.
>>
>> Have these thousands of posts, representing hundreds and thousands of
>> man hours, been to any effect?
>>
>> Has anyone ever actually changed their mind on how they think about
>> audio based on what they've read here?
>>
>> Just curious...
>
> I did. I used to read Arny back way back in the day, when I was just a
> wee little lurker. I was a hard-boiled extremist objectivist. Even more
> than Arny is.

Mr. Richard Graham, you have been discredited in this forum. You are a liar.

Clyde Slick

March 13th 06, 05:28 AM

"Bret Ludwig" > wrote in message
oups.com...

>
> IMO Arny needs to find another hobby where in his own estimation he
> can do some good. Maybe he can build a better Segway or a better fuel
> injection system for retrofit to old cars.
>

ASHTRAYS! He always has ashtrays.

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

[email protected]

March 13th 06, 06:24 AM

Signal wrote:
> " emitted :
>
> >Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! wrote:
> >> I'm just curious. I just did a search of r.a.o. going back at least
> >> eight years. Thousands and thousands of 'objectivist' posts by Mr.
> >> Krueger, nob, and others.
> >>
> >> Have these thousands of posts, representing hundreds and thousands of
> >> man hours, been to any effect?
> >>
> >> Has anyone ever actually changed their mind on how they think about
> >> audio based on what they've read here?
> >>
> >> Just curious...
> >
> >Impossible to calculate due to the unknown amount of lurkers.
>
> ABX converts are conspicuous by their absolute silence. When it comes
> to verbose proselytes, Belt's minions have redefined the benchimark.
>
>
>
Given the abuse the ones who admit to endorsing it take, why would
anyone want to come out from lurking to abused by the likes of RAO's
usual suspects?

Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!

March 13th 06, 06:52 AM

From:
Date: Mon, Mar 13 2006 12:24 am
Email: " >

>Given the abuse the ones who admit to endorsing it take, why would
>anyone want to come out from lurking to abused by the likes of RAO's
>usual suspects?

Convenient excuse. If it was me, I want to shove it to those rabid
subjectivists and say, 'Here I am, assholes!'

Do you actually think that most people would be afraid of being called
'Krooborg' or 'nob' on a discussion group? People like that should not
be on the Usenet. Their delicate sensibilities might get upset. You act
like there's physical violence here. LOL!

They can post one message that just says, "I've been converted by posts
here from <enter name> to a different view" (if any people like that
actually exist) and then go back to lurking.

You'd think that after eight plus years and tens of thousands of posts
there'd be some people coming forward. I am beginning to suspect that
Signal is correct: lots of loud insistent demands, lots of preference
bashing, no real effect.

Fella

March 13th 06, 08:51 AM

wrote:
> Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! wrote:
>
>
>>I'm just curious. I just did a search of r.a.o. going back at least
>>eight years. Thousands and thousands of 'objectivist' posts by Mr.
>>Krueger, nob, and others.
>>
>>Have these thousands of posts, representing hundreds and thousands of
>>man hours, been to any effect?
>>
>>Has anyone ever actually changed their mind on how they think about
>>audio based on what they've read here?
>>
>>Just curious...
>
>
> I did. I used to read Arny back way back in the day, when I was just a
> wee little lurker. I was a hard-boiled extremist objectivist. Even more
> than Arny is. ABX was my religion, and I practiced it every day. You
> couldn't convince me that ANYTHING sounded ANY different from ANYTHING
> else in audio. Even loudspeakers all sounded the same, where I was
> concerned. But after taking in a gutfull of Arny Krueger, he sickened
> me so much, that I renounced the religion of objectivism, and smashed
> my ABX comparator box with a mallet.
>
> I even tore down my picture of sexy Dave Carlstrom, and today, as most
> people know me, I'm an alternative audio guru. I always maintain an
> even number of cd's in my collection, I cross out the bar codes in my
> cd cases with a "specially treated" $150 red marker, and I park my car
> in the same place and the same direction every day. All to ensure good
> sound from my home audio. And I'm happy to report, the sound I'm
> getting off my hifi kit has NEVER been better in all my days. So thank
> you, Arny Krueger!
>

Troll BE GONE!

This post is almost proof that this is some borg posing as an extreme
audio subjectivist crackpot. The message to be derived from the text
above: If you abandon the objectivist abxism religion you become a
pitiful silly subjectivist crackpot troll with a $200 green marker stuck
up your butt.

Arny Krueger

March 13th 06, 12:19 PM

"Signal" > wrote in message

> " emitted :
>
>> Given the abuse the ones who admit to endorsing it take,
>> why would anyone want to come out from lurking to abused
>> by the likes of RAO's usual suspects?

> Why do ABX endorsees lack the courage of their
> convictions, Mick?

Mike has it right Paul - expressing *any* rational opinon with respect to
audio on the currently highly-degraded form of radical subjectivst-dominated
RAO is an open invitation for extreme personal abuse by the usual list of
suspects, yourself included. There are virtually no benefits to doing so -
all of the benefits accrue offline.

Arny Krueger

March 13th 06, 12:29 PM

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" >
wrote in message
ups.com

> From: Arny Krueger
> Date: Sun, Mar 12 2006 6:21 pm
> Email: "Arny Krueger"

>> How does one search for "objectivist" posts?

> One doesn't. I didn't say that I had.

You implied that some kind of impartial study had taken place.

> What I said was I
> looked at posts going back over eight years and saw
> hundreds and thousands of posts from you, nob, and
> others.

False claim - google's highest estimate of how many posts I've made on RAO
is under 100,000.

> The ones that I looked from you and nob at were
> just like the ones I see today, Mr. Krueger: generally
> angry, all promoting the 'objectivist' viewpoint, and
> many that seemed to bash preference.

Inability to tell the difference between being angry and trying to hold a
bunch of abusers accountable for thieir childish behavior noted.

> I had no idea that you and nob have had a history of over
> eight years here, so I became curious about the effect
> reached.

All things considered, the most logical thing for a person who can see past
the tremendous volume so-called subjectivist lies and false claims on RAO is
to go someplace else to express one's opinions. Given that there are any
number of audio forums where the rampant subjectivist misbehavior common on
RAO is disallowed, people seem to have gravitated to those places.

>> Yup those were the days that there were actually posts
>> about audio that had relevant technical content. In
>> contrast to those almost 9,000 posts by jj, there are
>> over 5,000 posts that mention "krooborg" and almost
>> 9,000 posts that mention "borg".

>> IOW RAO has been overrun with childish name-calling by
>> the Middius and his crowd.

> Just now I ran three searches. One with 'Arny Krueger'
> one with 'Arnold Krueger' and another with just 'Arny' as
> authors on r.a.o only. The former came up with 44,300
> posts; the latter 74,100.

IOW, far less than the 100,000's you claimed above. Thanks for contradicting
yourself, again.

> Under the 'Arnold Krueger'
> search, another 500+ posts show up. You may have used
> other variations or nicknames that I did not run. From
> what I could see, you did make a high percentage of the
> posts posts under each of those names.

> There were some posts that appeared to be forgeries
> though. So I would estimate that on the very low side you
> have made at least 45,000 posts to r.a.o. I think
> probably it's more likely to be 60,000 or more.

> I also looked up 'George Middius' as the author on r.a.o.
> That search showed 52,600 posts. I could see no other
> variations that looked like the posts were his.

George used other nicknames including "Glanbrok". I can't remember them all
but in the early days they changed pretty frequently.

> Even assuming that you've made only 45,000 posts to
> r.a.o., the difference in volume between you and Mr.
> Middius is hardly 'overrunning' rec.audio.opinion,
> especially in relationship to your posting quantity. I'd
> guess you and he were running probably closer to 1-1, or
> even more likely that you post more than he does.

Let's put it this way - even his defenders can only remember a handful of
posts on RAO by Middius that could be called audio-related. Those 45,000 or
more posts by Middius were virtually all personal attacks. The vast
majority of those posts attacked me.

OTOH, my posts are predomiantely audio-related.

> Just comnparing with both of your posts, it would be
> equally truthful to say that you've overrun r.a.o. It
> would probably be more truthful to say that neither of
> you has.

It's true that I've overrun RAO with audio-related posts, which were
objectively true and based on orthodox audio technology. It's equally true
that Middius has overrun RAO with personal attacks.

March 13th 06, 04:36 PM

"George M. Middius" <cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net> wrote
in message ...
>
>
> Shhhh! said:
>
>> I'm just curious. I just did a search of r.a.o. going back at least
>> eight years. Thousands and thousands of 'objectivist' posts by Mr.
>> Krueger, nob, and others.
>>
>> Have these thousands of posts, representing hundreds and thousands of
>> man hours, been to any effect?
>>
>> Has anyone ever actually changed their mind on how they think about
>> audio based on what they've read here?
>>
>> Just curious...
>
> No effect in terms of assimilations. Krooger did succeed in spreading the
> news of his mental infirmities throughout the civilized world.
>
>
>
>
>
More accurately, you have tried to spread that lie, but then, that's what
you do, being the swine that you are.

March 13th 06, 04:37 PM

TWEEDLE DUM

> wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! wrote:
>
>> I'm just curious. I just did a search of r.a.o. going back at least
>> eight years. Thousands and thousands of 'objectivist' posts by Mr.
>> Krueger, nob, and others.
>>
>> Have these thousands of posts, representing hundreds and thousands of
>> man hours, been to any effect?
>>
>> Has anyone ever actually changed their mind on how they think about
>> audio based on what they've read here?
>>
>> Just curious...
>
> I did. I used to read Arny back way back in the day, when I was just a
> wee little lurker. I was a hard-boiled extremist objectivist. Even more
> than Arny is. ABX was my religion, and I practiced it every day. You
> couldn't convince me that ANYTHING sounded ANY different from ANYTHING
> else in audio. Even loudspeakers all sounded the same, where I was
> concerned. But after taking in a gutfull of Arny Krueger, he sickened
> me so much, that I renounced the religion of objectivism, and smashed
> my ABX comparator box with a mallet.
>
> I even tore down my picture of sexy Dave Carlstrom, and today, as most
> people know me, I'm an alternative audio guru. I always maintain an
> even number of cd's in my collection, I cross out the bar codes in my
> cd cases with a "specially treated" $150 red marker, and I park my car
> in the same place and the same direction every day. All to ensure good
> sound from my home audio. And I'm happy to report, the sound I'm
> getting off my hifi kit has NEVER been better in all my days. So thank
> you, Arny Krueger!
>

March 13th 06, 04:38 PM

TWEDDLE DUMMER

"Fella" > wrote in message
...
> wrote:
>> Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I'm just curious. I just did a search of r.a.o. going back at least
>>>eight years. Thousands and thousands of 'objectivist' posts by Mr.
>>>Krueger, nob, and others.
>>>
>>>Have these thousands of posts, representing hundreds and thousands of
>>>man hours, been to any effect?
>>>
>>>Has anyone ever actually changed their mind on how they think about
>>>audio based on what they've read here?
>>>
>>>Just curious...
>>
>>
>> I did. I used to read Arny back way back in the day, when I was just a
>> wee little lurker. I was a hard-boiled extremist objectivist. Even more
>> than Arny is. ABX was my religion, and I practiced it every day. You
>> couldn't convince me that ANYTHING sounded ANY different from ANYTHING
>> else in audio. Even loudspeakers all sounded the same, where I was
>> concerned. But after taking in a gutfull of Arny Krueger, he sickened
>> me so much, that I renounced the religion of objectivism, and smashed
>> my ABX comparator box with a mallet.
>>
>> I even tore down my picture of sexy Dave Carlstrom, and today, as most
>> people know me, I'm an alternative audio guru. I always maintain an
>> even number of cd's in my collection, I cross out the bar codes in my
>> cd cases with a "specially treated" $150 red marker, and I park my car
>> in the same place and the same direction every day. All to ensure good
>> sound from my home audio. And I'm happy to report, the sound I'm
>> getting off my hifi kit has NEVER been better in all my days. So thank
>> you, Arny Krueger!
>>
>
> Troll BE GONE!
>
> This post is almost proof that this is some borg posing as an extreme
> audio subjectivist crackpot. The message to be derived from the text
> above: If you abandon the objectivist abxism religion you become a pitiful
> silly subjectivist crackpot troll with a $200 green marker stuck up your
> butt.

Arny Krueger

March 13th 06, 04:51 PM

"Robert Morein" > wrote in message

> > wrote in message
> ups.com...
>>
>> Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! wrote:
>>
>>> I'm just curious. I just did a search of r.a.o. going
>>> back at least eight years. Thousands and thousands of
>>> 'objectivist' posts by Mr. Krueger, nob, and others.
>>>
>>> Have these thousands of posts, representing hundreds
>>> and thousands of man hours, been to any effect?
>>>
>>> Has anyone ever actually changed their mind on how they
>>> think about audio based on what they've read here?
>>>
>>> Just curious...
>>
>> I did. I used to read Arny back way back in the day,
>> when I was just a wee little lurker. I was a hard-boiled
>> extremist objectivist. Even more than Arny is.
>
> Mr. Richard Graham, you have been discredited in this
> forum. You are a liar.

I've reconsidered. I think that "liar" might be a little harsh. Let's go
with "fictionalist". ;-)

Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!

March 13th 06, 05:00 PM

From: Arny Krueger
Date: Mon, Mar 13 2006 6:29 am
Email: "Arny Krueger" >

>> What I said was I
>> looked at posts going back over eight years and saw
>> hundreds and thousands of posts from you, nob, and
>> others.

>False claim - google's highest estimate of how many posts I've made on RAO
>is under 100,000.

Please note the difference between 'hundreds and thousands' and
'hundreds of thousands.' They do not mean the same thing. It may help
you to see that I have made no 'false claim.'

>> The ones that I looked from you and nob at were
>> just like the ones I see today, Mr. Krueger: generally
>> angry, all promoting the 'objectivist' viewpoint, and
>> many that seemed to bash preference.

>Inability to tell the difference between being angry and trying to hold a
>bunch of abusers accountable for thieir childish behavior noted.

IMO, there's a definite 'tone' to the majority of 'objectivist' posts
here. While yours may not be as angry as nob's, they have a distinct
edge, especially if someone disagrees with you.

I didn't notice in the FAQ that there was anyone officially responsible
here for 'holding' people 'accountable.'

>> Just now I ran three searches. One with 'Arny Krueger'
>> one with 'Arnold Krueger' and another with just 'Arny' as
>> authors on r.a.o only. The former came up with 44,300
>> posts; the latter 74,100.

>IOW, far less than the 100,000's you claimed above. Thanks for contradicting
>yourself, again.

No, 44,300 is indeed 'hundreds and thousands' of posts. Inability to
understand plain English noted.

>> I also looked up 'George Middius' as the author on r.a.o.
>> That search showed 52,600 posts. I could see no other
>> variations that looked like the posts were his.

>George used other nicknames including "Glanbrok". I can't remember them all
>but in the early days they changed pretty frequently.

I'd have no way of knowing that. From what I see today, I'd put you and
nob among the highest-volume posters here.

>> Even assuming that you've made only 45,000 posts to
>> r.a.o., the difference in volume between you and Mr.
>> Middius is hardly 'overrunning' rec.audio.opinion,
>> especially in relationship to your posting quantity. I'd
>> guess you and he were running probably closer to 1-1, or
>> even more likely that you post more than he does.

>Let's put it this way - even his defenders can only remember a handful of
>posts on RAO by Middius that could be called audio-related. Those 45,000 or
>more posts by Middius were virtually all personal attacks. The vast
>majority of those posts attacked me.

>OTOH, my posts are predomiantely audio-related.

I don't doubt that. My question was not meant as a qualitative study on
posting content. My only question was if the massive volume of
audio-related posts from you, nob, and the other 'usual suspects' had
changed anyone's mind.

>> Just comnparing with both of your posts, it would be
>> equally truthful to say that you've overrun r.a.o. It
>> would probably be more truthful to say that neither of
>> you has.

>It's true that I've overrun RAO with audio-related posts, which were
>objectively true and based on orthodox audio technology. It's equally true
>that Middius has overrun RAO with personal attacks.

Have either of you changed anybody's mind?

Just curious.

March 13th 06, 05:03 PM

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> From: Arny Krueger
> Date: Sun, Mar 12 2006 6:21 pm
> Email: "Arny Krueger" >
>
>>How does one search for "objectivist" posts?
>
> One doesn't. I didn't say that I had. What I said was I looked at posts
> going back over eight years and saw hundreds and thousands of posts
> from you, nob, and others. The ones that I looked from you and nob at
> were just like the ones I see today, Mr. Krueger: generally angry, all
> promoting the 'objectivist' viewpoint, and many that seemed to bash
> preference.
>
> I had no idea that you and nob have had a history of over eight years
> here, so I became curious about the effect reached.
>
>>Yup those were the days that there were actually posts about audio that
>>had
>>relevant technical content. In contrast to those almost 9,000 posts by
>>jj,
>>there are over 5,000 posts that mention "krooborg" and almost 9,000 posts
>>that mention "borg".
>
>>IOW RAO has been overrun with childish name-calling by the Middius and his
>>crowd.
>
> Just now I ran three searches. One with 'Arny Krueger' one with 'Arnold
> Krueger' and another with just 'Arny' as authors on r.a.o only. The
> former came up with 44,300 posts; the latter 74,100. Under the 'Arnold
> Krueger' search, another 500+ posts show up. You may have used other
> variations or nicknames that I did not run. From what I could see, you
> did make a high percentage of the posts posts under each of those
> names.
>
> There were some posts that appeared to be forgeries though. So I would
> estimate that on the very low side you have made at least 45,000 posts
> to r.a.o. I think probably it's more likely to be 60,000 or more.
>
> I also looked up 'George Middius' as the author on r.a.o. That search
> showed 52,600 posts. I could see no other variations that looked like
> the posts were his.
>
But George has haunted other newsgroups as well and spread his swinish
behavior to them as well.
Any non-moderated audio group that Arny particpates in, will generally have
George's idiot contributions as well. These are newsgroups that are far
over George's head, and his main purpose for posting is to harrass Arny, or
anyone who agrees with him on anything.

George M. Middius

March 13th 06, 05:11 PM

Shhhh! said to ImmoralityBorg:

> Have either of you changed anybody's mind?

I never intended to change anybody's mind. I just make fun of the
self-appointed "scientists" who have no real knowledge of DBTs but are
blessed with a surfeit of class envy.

George M. Middius

March 13th 06, 05:17 PM

duh-Mikey shows why he's known far and wide as the stupidest Kroopologist in
the history of Usenet.

> his main purpose for posting is to harrass Arny, or
> anyone who agrees with him on anything.

Mickey, it's a proven fact that all of your ridiculous hangups about
"existence" and "reality" are complete nonsense. However, Krooger is much
more noxious than you are because he has a smattering of knowledge that
allows him to pollute many more threads than you do. If I had to choose just
one of you to drop dead tomorrow, it would be Arnii Kroofeces.

BTW, for about the millionth time, why is it none of you phoney Usenet
"scientists" has any first-hand knowledge of your beloved DBT rituals? We've
had some Real Audio Guys on RAO from time to time who do have genuine,
hands-on knowledge and experience with them. Two of them are Glenn Zelniker
and John Atkinson. Others may be Paul Bamborough and Paul Frindle, although
I can't remember with certainty. We Normals have great respect for all of
those guys, but you and the Krooborg hate and fear them. Just something for
you to think about, Mr. "scientist".

Arny Krueger

March 13th 06, 05:27 PM

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" >
wrote in message
ups.com
> From: Arny Krueger
> Date: Mon, Mar 13 2006 6:29 am
> Email: "Arny Krueger" >
>
>>> What I said was I
>>> looked at posts going back over eight years and saw
>>> hundreds and thousands of posts from you, nob, and
>>> others.

>> False claim - google's highest estimate of how many
>> posts I've made on RAO is under 100,000.

> Please note the difference between 'hundreds and
> thousands' and 'hundreds of thousands.' They do not mean
> the same thing. It may help you to see that I have made
> no 'false claim.'

Agreed - my error.

>>> The ones that I looked from you and nob at were
>>> just like the ones I see today, Mr. Krueger: generally
>>> angry, all promoting the 'objectivist' viewpoint, and
>>> many that seemed to bash preference.

The so-called preference card is mostly just a part of an old sucker's game
played with decks that have a few cards missing and a lot of jokers.

>> Inability to tell the difference between being angry and
>> trying to hold a bunch of abusers accountable for thieir
>> childish behavior noted.

> IMO, there's a definite 'tone' to the majority of
> 'objectivist' posts here. While yours may not be as angry
> as nob's, they have a distinct edge, especially if
> someone disagrees with you.

Inability to see that just about everybody who posts here has a *history*.
Given all the insults that have been directed Mike's way by the usual list
of self-professed subjectivists, its not like any of them have been giving
Mike the kid glove treatment.

> I didn't notice in the FAQ that there was anyone
> officially responsible here for 'holding' people
> 'accountable.'

See former comments about this place having a history.

>>> Just now I ran three searches. One with 'Arny Krueger'
>>> one with 'Arnold Krueger' and another with just 'Arny'
>>> as authors on r.a.o only. The former came up with 44,300
>>> posts; the latter 74,100.

>> IOW, far less than the 100,000's you claimed above.
>> Thanks for contradicting yourself, again.

> No, 44,300 is indeed 'hundreds and thousands' of posts.
> Inability to understand plain English noted.

Apology for error already offered once.

>>> I also looked up 'George Middius' as the author on
>>> r.a.o. That search showed 52,600 posts. I could see no
>>> other variations that looked like the posts were his.

>> George used other nicknames including "Glanbrok". I
>> can't remember them all but in the early days they
>> changed pretty frequently.

> I'd have no way of knowing that. From what I see today,
> I'd put you and nob among the highest-volume posters here.

I still only answer a fraction of the posts that respond to my posts or
mention me.

>>> Even assuming that you've made only 45,000 posts to
>>> r.a.o., the difference in volume between you and Mr.
>>> Middius is hardly 'overrunning' rec.audio.opinion,
>>> especially in relationship to your posting quantity. I'd
>>> guess you and he were running probably closer to 1-1, or
>>> even more likely that you post more than he does.

>> Let's put it this way - even his defenders can only
>> remember a handful of posts on RAO by Middius that could
>> be called audio-related. Those 45,000 or more posts by
>> Middius were virtually all personal attacks. The vast
>> majority of those posts attacked me.

>> OTOH, my posts are predomiantely audio-related.

> I don't doubt that. My question was not meant as a
> qualitative study on posting content. My only question
> was if the massive volume of audio-related posts from
> you, nob, and the other 'usual suspects' had changed
> anyone's mind.

It's a fair question, presuming that Mike or I had the intention of changing
anybody's mind. Nobody here has publicly changed their mind in years - even
in this century. Probabaly the most notable change of heart in the history
of RAO involved someone who posted under the handle of "gruvmeister" or some
such.

Besides, if someone goes away with a better understanding of audio on some
point of interest, is "conversion" even a valid criteria? Given all the
disinformation that the so-called subs around here posts, its a victory if
someone goes away a little bit less screwed up.

>>> Just comnparing with both of your posts, it would be
>>> equally truthful to say that you've overrun r.a.o. It
>>> would probably be more truthful to say that neither of
>>> you has.

>> It's true that I've overrun RAO with audio-related
>> posts, which were objectively true and based on orthodox
>> audio technology. It's equally true that Middius has
>> overrun RAO with personal attacks.

> Have either of you changed anybody's mind?

>Just curious.

I've never bothered to look for changed minds. Some say that most of the
minds that come through this portal are lurkers. By definition, we have no
idea what the lurker's opinons are, before, after or during their
experiences here.

Is Middius, Graham, Weil, or Atkinson going to post here one day that
anything they read here changed their mind? Highly unlikely. If it happened,
I wouldn't believe it was true until I watched their walk for a good part of
a year.

Arny Krueger

March 13th 06, 05:33 PM

> wrote in message

> But George has haunted other newsgroups as well and
> spread his swinish behavior to them as well.

George has stalked me to just a few groups. As I said before, he got shouted
down in several of them.

> Any non-moderated audio group that Arny particpates in,
> will generally have George's idiot contributions as well.

Only if georgeposts there under other names. I'm currently posting in about
18 groups, but only see George on RAO with any frequency.

> These are newsgroups that are far over George's head,

Even RAO is over George's head, except for the wasteland he's turned it
into.

If you consider carefully, when was the last time that Atkinson made a
technical post here?

> and his main purpose for posting is to harrass Arny, or
> anyone who agrees with him on anything.

The vigor and number of George's postings has fallen off a lot.

George's act has regressed from the 9th grade level to the 5th grade level
over the years.

I think that not even George is stupid enough to keep posting in the groups
where he's been nailed and nailed hard for being his *sweet* self.

Arny Krueger

March 13th 06, 05:44 PM

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

> BTW, for about the millionth time, why is it none of you
> phoney Usenet "scientists" has any first-hand knowledge
> of your beloved DBT rituals? We've had some Real Audio
> Guys on RAO from time to time who do have genuine,
> hands-on knowledge and experience with them. Two of them
> are Glenn Zelniker and John Atkinson.

Zelniker never posted here with any frequency. Furthermore he was deathly
afraid of me on the stated grounds that I was too good at "The Debating
Trade".

I've never seen a case where Atkinson actually got the DBT thing right from
start to finish. I suspect that he's congenitally incapable of doing a
proper DBT simply because just about any interesting DBT would expose his
beliefs in audio floobydust.

> Others may be Paul
> Bamborough and Paul Frindle, although I can't remember
> with certainty.

Paul "Bam Bam" Bamborough was a hoot - his all-time classic was his "expose"
of a an audio editing program now called "Audition" as being only a
destructive editor. Needless to say Audition's reputation as a
non-destructive editor vastly outlasted Bamborough's egregiously flawed
analysis.

Frindle never posted here with any frequency.

>We Normals have great respect for all of
> those guys, but you and the Krooborg hate and fear them.

Middius, its more like pity for the whole lot of you at this point. It must
really suck being you. If your stupidity doesn't kill you, the self-pity
and self-hate will.

March 13th 06, 06:24 PM

"Fella" > wrote in message
...
> wrote:
>> Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I'm just curious. I just did a search of r.a.o. going back at least
>>>eight years. Thousands and thousands of 'objectivist' posts by Mr.
>>>Krueger, nob, and others.
>>>
>>>Have these thousands of posts, representing hundreds and thousands of
>>>man hours, been to any effect?
>>>
>>>Has anyone ever actually changed their mind on how they think about
>>>audio based on what they've read here?
>>>
>>>Just curious...
>>
>>
>> I did. I used to read Arny back way back in the day, when I was just a
>> wee little lurker. I was a hard-boiled extremist objectivist. Even more
>> than Arny is. ABX was my religion, and I practiced it every day. You
>> couldn't convince me that ANYTHING sounded ANY different from ANYTHING
>> else in audio. Even loudspeakers all sounded the same, where I was
>> concerned. But after taking in a gutfull of Arny Krueger, he sickened
>> me so much, that I renounced the religion of objectivism, and smashed
>> my ABX comparator box with a mallet.
>>
>> I even tore down my picture of sexy Dave Carlstrom, and today, as most
>> people know me, I'm an alternative audio guru. I always maintain an
>> even number of cd's in my collection, I cross out the bar codes in my
>> cd cases with a "specially treated" $150 red marker, and I park my car
>> in the same place and the same direction every day. All to ensure good
>> sound from my home audio. And I'm happy to report, the sound I'm
>> getting off my hifi kit has NEVER been better in all my days. So thank
>> you, Arny Krueger!
>>
>
> Troll BE GONE!
>
> This post is almost proof that this is some borg posing as an extreme
> audio subjectivist crackpot. The message to be derived from the text
> above: If you abandon the objectivist abxism religion you become a pitiful
> silly subjectivist crackpot troll with a $200 green marker stuck up your
> butt.

March 13th 06, 06:25 PM

Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!

March 13th 06, 06:40 PM

From: Arny Krueger
Date: Mon, Mar 13 2006 11:27 am
Email: "Arny Krueger" >

<irrelevant parts snipped>

>>I have made no 'false claim.'

>Agreed - my error.

Thank you. I get a little touchy about being called a 'liar' here when
there is no cause for it. It seems to happen here with regularity.:-)

>The so-called preference card is mostly just a part of an old sucker's game
>played with decks that have a few cards missing and a lot of jokers.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this.

The mess hall where I was when I was deployed was run by the British.
One night we had the most beautiful steaks. They were about 2" thick
and good cuts. The British cooks smothered the top of the steak with
liver pate. The Brits preferred it that way. I, OTOH, thought they had
just destroyed a perfectly good steak.

This also does not address the night that they served haggis...

>Inability to see that just about everybody who posts here has a *history*.
>Given all the insults that have been directed Mike's way by the usual list
>of self-professed subjectivists, its not like any of them have been giving
>Mike the kid glove treatment.

I agree there is a history. I agree that I do not know about it. It
isn't a lack of ability. History implies that study is needed and I
simply have not done so.

I. too, have given nob my fair share of crap, but it has been mainly
about his political views, which I consider to be ill-advised and are
against what I deem is good for the country.

>It's a fair question, presuming that Mike or I had the intention of changing
>anybody's mind. Nobody here has publicly changed their mind in years - even
>in this century. Probabaly the most notable change of heart in the history
>of RAO involved someone who posted under the handle of "gruvmeister" or some
>such.

So it would seem that the acrimony is just a part of life here, and
that even discussing it not worthwhile.

I'll search when I have more time. So that would seem to be one so far.

>Besides, if someone goes away with a better understanding of audio on some
>point of interest, is "conversion" even a valid criteria? Given all the
>disinformation that the so-called subs around here posts, its a victory if
>someone goes away a little bit less screwed up.

I have no problem with that. The only problem I have is with
preference. I think that they're entirely valid for that person. I
don't think that it's fair to say that they are a place to 'hide' or
whatever. As I said, we'll just disagree on that.

>I've never bothered to look for changed minds. Some say that most of the
>minds that come through this portal are lurkers. By definition, we have no
>idea what the lurker's opinons are, before, after or during their
>experiences here.

>Is Middius, Graham, Weil, or Atkinson going to post here one day that
>anything they read here changed their mind? Highly unlikely. If it happened,
>I wouldn't believe it was true until I watched their walk for a good part of
>a year.

It would be equally interesting to see how many people have swung their
opinion that way as well.

I note that both you and Mr. Middius have stated that changing minds is
not your goal, so maybe the question is not a fair one.

Arny Krueger

March 13th 06, 08:01 PM

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" >
wrote in message
ups.com

> I have no problem with that. The only problem I have is
> with preference. I think that they're entirely valid for
> that person. I don't think that it's fair to say that
> they are a place to 'hide' or whatever. As I said, we'll
> just disagree on that.

For me the hang up is pure preference versus preference for a technical
reason.

If someone says "I like haggis", what's to say? After all, I like scrapple
and that's not exactly everybody's taste.

If someone says "I like CDs with a green pen line around them because it
improves dynamics" then I see something to discuss.

Walt

March 13th 06, 08:17 PM

Arny Krueger wrote:

> If someone says "I like haggis", what's to say? After all, I like scrapple
> and that's not exactly everybody's taste.

You can buy Scrapple in SE Michigan? Or do you have it imported?

Since I've never seen it in these parts I thought I was safe here (c:

//Walt

Arny Krueger

March 13th 06, 08:29 PM

"Walt" > wrote in message

> Arny Krueger wrote:

>> If someone says "I like haggis", what's to say? After
>> all, I like scrapple and that's not exactly everybody's
>> taste.

> You can buy Scrapple in SE Michigan?

Yes, we've even bought it in far-flung places like Flint, Agusta, and El
Paso.

> Or do you have it imported?

No. We've also been known to make our own using the recipie in the Joy of
Cooking.

> Since I've never seen it in these parts I thought I was
> safe here (c:

Clyde Slick

March 13th 06, 10:39 PM

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> I've reconsidered. I think that "liar" might be a little harsh. Let's go
> with "fictionalist". ;-)
>

true, he is not in your class.

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

Clyde Slick

March 13th 06, 10:42 PM

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" >
> wrote in message
> ups.com
>
>> I have no problem with that. The only problem I have is
>> with preference. I think that they're entirely valid for
>> that person. I don't think that it's fair to say that
>> they are a place to 'hide' or whatever. As I said, we'll
>> just disagree on that.
>
> For me the hang up is pure preference versus preference for a technical
> reason.
>
> If someone says "I like haggis", what's to say? After all, I like scrapple
> and that's not exactly everybody's taste.
>
> If someone says "I like CDs with a green pen line around them because it
> improves dynamics" then I see something to discuss.
>

I think that the green pen line around the haggis degrades it somewhat.
Unless its a particularly nasty haggis, then it helps.
Let's discuss this.

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

George M. Middius

March 13th 06, 11:32 PM

Clyde Slick said:

> > If someone says "I like CDs with a green pen line around them because it
> > improves dynamics" then I see something to discuss.

> I think that the green pen line around the haggis degrades it somewhat.
> Unless its a particularly nasty haggis, then it helps.
> Let's discuss this.

You're feeding the Beast's psychosis.

George M. Middius

March 14th 06, 03:33 AM

duh-Mikey shows why he's known far and wide as the stupidest Kroopologist
in the history of Usenet.

> his main purpose for posting is to harrass Arny, or
> anyone who agrees with him on anything.

Mickey, it's a proven fact that all of your ridiculous hangups about
"existence" and "reality" are complete nonsense. However, Krooger is much
more noxious than you are because he has a smattering of knowledge that
allows him to pollute many more threads than you do. If I had to choose
just one of you to drop dead tomorrow, it would be Arnii Kroofeces.

BTW, for about the millionth time, why is it none of you phoney Usenet
"scientists" has any first-hand knowledge of your beloved DBT rituals?
We've had some Real Audio Guys on RAO from time to time who do have
genuine, hands-on knowledge and experience with them. Two of them are
Glenn Zelniker and John Atkinson. Others may be Paul Bamborough and Paul
Frindle, although I can't remember with certainty. We Normals have great
respect for all of those guys, but you and the Krooborg hate and fear
them. Just something for you to think about, Mr. "scientist".

[email protected]

March 14th 06, 10:22 AM

Fella ranted:

> wrote:
> > Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! wrote:
> >
> >
> >>I'm just curious. I just did a search of r.a.o. going back at least
> >>eight years. Thousands and thousands of 'objectivist' posts by Mr.
> >>Krueger, nob, and others.
> >>
> >>Have these thousands of posts, representing hundreds and thousands of
> >>man hours, been to any effect?
> >>
> >>Has anyone ever actually changed their mind on how they think about
> >>audio based on what they've read here?
> >>
> >>Just curious...
> >
> >
> > I did. I used to read Arny back way back in the day, when I was just a
> > wee little lurker. I was a hard-boiled extremist objectivist. Even more
> > than Arny is. ABX was my religion, and I practiced it every day. You
> > couldn't convince me that ANYTHING sounded ANY different from ANYTHING
> > else in audio. Even loudspeakers all sounded the same, where I was
> > concerned. But after taking in a gutfull of Arny Krueger, he sickened
> > me so much, that I renounced the religion of objectivism, and smashed
> > my ABX comparator box with a mallet.
> >
> > I even tore down my picture of sexy Dave Carlstrom, and today, as most
> > people know me, I'm an alternative audio guru. I always maintain an
> > even number of cd's in my collection, I cross out the bar codes in my
> > cd cases with a "specially treated" $150 red marker, and I park my car
> > in the same place and the same direction every day. All to ensure good
> > sound from my home audio. And I'm happy to report, the sound I'm
> > getting off my hifi kit has NEVER been better in all my days. So thank
> > you, Arny Krueger!
> >
>
> Troll BE GONE!
>
> This post is almost proof that this is some borg posing as an extreme
> audio subjectivist crackpot. The message to be derived from the text
> above: If you abandon the objectivist abxism religion you become a
> pitiful silly subjectivist crackpot troll with a $200 green marker stuck
> up your butt.

Nice kook rant. So... are you going to ever back up any of your
********, or simply remain the ignorant twit that you so clearly are?

March 14th 06, 05:40 PM

"George M. Middius" <cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net> wrote
in message ...
>
>
> duh-Mikey shows why he's known far and wide as the stupidest Kroopologist
> in
> the history of Usenet.
>
>> his main purpose for posting is to harrass Arny, or
>> anyone who agrees with him on anything.
>
> Mickey, it's a proven fact that all of your ridiculous hangups about
> "existence" and "reality" are complete nonsense.

Proven by whom?

However, Krooger is much
> more noxious than you are because he has a smattering of knowledge that
> allows him to pollute many more threads than you do. If I had to choose
> just
> one of you to drop dead tomorrow, it would be Arnii Kroofeces.
>

And guess who I'd pick, swine?

> BTW, for about the millionth time, why is it none of you phoney Usenet
> "scientists" has any first-hand knowledge of your beloved DBT rituals?

Why is it that you think it is neccessary to have participated in something
in order to recognize it is valid?

We've
> had some Real Audio Guys on RAO from time to time who do have genuine,
> hands-on knowledge and experience with them. Two of them are Glenn
> Zelniker
> and John Atkinson. Others may be Paul Bamborough and Paul Frindle,
> although
> I can't remember with certainty. We Normals have great respect for all of
> those guys, but you and the Krooborg hate and fear them. Just something
> for
> you to think about, Mr. "scientist".
>
Of course you do, they are all dishonest and many of them completely looney
and/or vulgar.

You keep forgetting that the 2 most real and qualified guys on usenet aside
from Arny are Dick Pierce and JJ, both of who back up Arny about 99% of the
time.

Calling yourself "normal" is ridiculous in the extreme, since "normal"
people aren't stalkers, liars and swine.

Oh yeah, they are also not sockpuppets.

March 14th 06, 05:44 PM

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> From: >
> Date: Mon, Mar 13 2006 11:03 am
> Email: >
>
>>But George has haunted other newsgroups as well and spread his swinish
>>behavior to them as well.
>>Any non-moderated audio group that Arny particpates in, will generally
>>have
>>George's idiot contributions as well. These are newsgroups that are far
>>over George's head, and his main purpose for posting is to harrass Arny,
>>or
>>anyone who agrees with him on anything.
>
> Which has nothing to do with the question that I asked.
>
> Mr. Middius does seem to enjoy tweaking your noses.
>
> So do others.
>
> Who has had their mind changed regarding audio by either of you? My
> sense is 'no one.' If anybody's mind has changed, they can post here
> and say so.
>
> After several years, and hundreds and thousands of posts, day one
> tally: zero.
>
Bogus conclusion since you can't possibly know what effect there has been on
those who read but do not post.

March 14th 06, 05:45 PM

> wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Fella ranted:
>
>> wrote:
>> > Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >>I'm just curious. I just did a search of r.a.o. going back at least
>> >>eight years. Thousands and thousands of 'objectivist' posts by Mr.
>> >>Krueger, nob, and others.
>> >>
>> >>Have these thousands of posts, representing hundreds and thousands of
>> >>man hours, been to any effect?
>> >>
>> >>Has anyone ever actually changed their mind on how they think about
>> >>audio based on what they've read here?
>> >>
>> >>Just curious...
>> >
>> >
>> > I did. I used to read Arny back way back in the day, when I was just a
>> > wee little lurker. I was a hard-boiled extremist objectivist. Even more
>> > than Arny is. ABX was my religion, and I practiced it every day. You
>> > couldn't convince me that ANYTHING sounded ANY different from ANYTHING
>> > else in audio. Even loudspeakers all sounded the same, where I was
>> > concerned. But after taking in a gutfull of Arny Krueger, he sickened
>> > me so much, that I renounced the religion of objectivism, and smashed
>> > my ABX comparator box with a mallet.
>> >
>> > I even tore down my picture of sexy Dave Carlstrom, and today, as most
>> > people know me, I'm an alternative audio guru. I always maintain an
>> > even number of cd's in my collection, I cross out the bar codes in my
>> > cd cases with a "specially treated" $150 red marker, and I park my car
>> > in the same place and the same direction every day. All to ensure good
>> > sound from my home audio. And I'm happy to report, the sound I'm
>> > getting off my hifi kit has NEVER been better in all my days. So thank
>> > you, Arny Krueger!
>> >
>>
>> Troll BE GONE!
>>
>> This post is almost proof that this is some borg posing as an extreme
>> audio subjectivist crackpot. The message to be derived from the text
>> above: If you abandon the objectivist abxism religion you become a
>> pitiful silly subjectivist crackpot troll with a $200 green marker stuck
>> up your butt.
>
> Nice kook rant. So... are you going to ever back up any of your
> ********, or simply remain the ignorant twit that you so clearly are?
>
I vote for the second one.

George M. Middius

March 14th 06, 06:35 PM

Mr. McMickey, I'm calling you to account for your libelous accuasations
against legitimate professionals in the audio business.

> > We've had some Real Audio Guys on RAO from time to time who
> > do have genuine, hands-on knowledge and experience with them.
> > Two of them are Glenn Zelniker and John Atkinson. Others may be
> > Paul Bamborough and Paul Frindle, although I can't remember with
> > certainty. We Normals have great respect for all of those guys, but
> > you and the Krooborg hate and fear them.

> Of course you do, they are all dishonest and many of them completely looney
> and/or vulgar.

Please tell us exactly how each of them is "dishonest".

Glenn Zelniker:

John Atkinson:

Paul Bamborough:

Paul Frindle:

Remember, you said "they are all dishonest". Provide your evidence or
admit you committed libel.

After that, you can give specific reasons for saying at least 3 of them
are "completely looney".

We're waiting, McStupid.

March 14th 06, 06:48 PM

"Signal" > wrote in message
...
> " emitted :
>
>>Given the abuse the ones who admit to endorsing it take, why would
>>anyone want to come out from lurking to abused by the likes of RAO's
>>usual suspects?
>
> Why do ABX endorsees lack the courage of their convictions, Mick?
>
>
In what way? If you are referring to some not having actually taken an ABX
test, that's a straw man. All that's required is understanding that it is a
valid way to check for difference.

I understood the reason for doing ABX testing when I first heard of it and
way before I knew who Tom or Arny were, and before I even owned a computer.
It simply made sense to remove bias, particularly since I had been an audio
salesperson and used suggestion to help make sales, at least at first.
Eventually I came to realize that when the levels were close enough and the
switching quick enough, most people were not hearing any differences. This
was still before I had heard of ABX or Arny and Nousaine. It always made
sense to me to base audio decisions on one of 2 primary reasons, either a
difference in sound, or a matter of functions required for a given purpose.

I decided that if a customer heard no difference, they should simply pick
whatever met their function needs as well as their financial needs.

This caused me to become well trusted and got me a lot of repeat business,
since my customers realized that I wasn't trying to oversell them.

There were of course times when differences were very apparent, such as with
turntables and cartridges, or speakers, therefore I know it's not honest to
claim there are never any differences, since I have demonstrated them and
heard them myself.

I have no fear of participating in an ABX test, and would gladly do so if
the opportunity presented it self. Of course then someone would be
complaining that the outcome was due to my expectation bias, assuming I
heard no difference, so it's a no win situation, what would be gained?

Those that say the test is not valid, in spite of the fact that it used by
many audio researchers, won't take the test and those that do think it is
valid are accused of expectation bias. That only leaves people who have no
idea about the validity of the test, and I assume they are the ones sought
after by the researchers.

Or were you referring to some other lack of conviction?

March 14th 06, 07:07 PM

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> From:
> Date: Mon, Mar 13 2006 12:24 am
> Email: " >
>
>>Given the abuse the ones who admit to endorsing it take, why would
>>anyone want to come out from lurking to abused by the likes of RAO's
>>usual suspects?
>
> Convenient excuse. If it was me, I want to shove it to those rabid
> subjectivists and say, 'Here I am, assholes!'
>
Well we've already established that you play by your own set of rules.

> Do you actually think that most people would be afraid of being called
> 'Krooborg' or 'nob' on a discussion group?

I don't think any are now.

People like that should not
> be on the Usenet. Their delicate sensibilities might get upset. You act
> like there's physical violence here. LOL!
>
If given the opportunity, I simply prefer more reasoned discourse.

> They can post one message that just says, "I've been converted by posts
> here from <enter name> to a different view" (if any people like that
> actually exist) and then go back to lurking.
>
Why bother? There's only the possibility of derision and no possible gain
to be had by doing so. Any benefit comes from knowing that you spend your
money for real and audible improvements, not from admitting that you do so.

> You'd think that after eight plus years and tens of thousands of posts
> there'd be some people coming forward. I am beginning to suspect that
> Signal is correct: lots of loud insistent demands, lots of preference
> bashing, no real effect.
>
The only preference bashing I've seen is from the subjectivist side. They
are the ones who claim there must be something wrong if you can't hear how
much better some tweako piece of equipment is, or if you don't prefer the
sound of tubes, or how much better a certain kind of expensive amplifier is.
Observe "Fella," who took an ABX test between 2 amps he owns and even though
he could not reliably hear a difference, still insists that the reason for
that is the test and not the fact that the amps actually might just sound
enough alike that there was no difference to be perceived. Of coursed he
refuses to try and improve his listening skills and try again to see if he
can do better, and refuses to accept that there are knowns about what is
audible and what is not.

I think that most people, have read and understand what an ABX test is about
and can see that it makes sense to use only ears and not eyes to determine
difference. I also think that they get the fact that if 2 pieces of gear
have audible differences and then one is EQ'd to match the other, that it
will make it impossible to hear those differences afterwards. From that
they can understand that frequency response that is close enough and not
having anything driven to clipping will result in the inability to detect
any difference. They use this to help them save money by not buying
anything more than what they really need in terms of electronics and
concentrate on where the real differences are, in speakers and how they
interact with the room they are in.

At least that's what I hope people are learning, since that clearly, to me
at least is the wisest of choices. It doesn't mean that it is wrong to make
other choices, it just means there is very little, audible reason to do
other wise.

March 14th 06, 07:07 PM

"ScottW" > wrote in message
news:dg2Rf.136372$0G.31877@dukeread10...
>
> "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>> I'm just curious. I just did a search of r.a.o. going back at least
>> eight years. Thousands and thousands of 'objectivist' posts by Mr.
>> Krueger, nob, and others.
>>
>> Have these thousands of posts, representing hundreds and thousands of
>> man hours, been to any effect?
>>
>> Has anyone ever actually changed their mind on how they think about
>> audio based on what they've read here?
>
> Sometimes Arny would step into it with guys like JJ and Zelniker
> and there would be some things to learn about audio bantered
> back and forth.
> Some of those discussions were highly technical and
> difficult to always follow... but it was interesting and
> sometimes revealing.
>
> Those days are long gone.
>
>
And Middius is one of the main reasons.

George M. Middius

March 14th 06, 07:08 PM

Stupid is as stupid does.

> > Why do ABX endorsees lack the courage of their convictions, Mick?

> In what way? If you are referring to some not having actually taken an ABX
> test, that's a straw man. All that's required is understanding that it is a
> valid way to check for difference.

Several valid points have been made about the flaws of aBxism. You are
either too stupid to understand them or too far gone in your religion to
accept anything that undermines your blind faith.

It's not just me who calls you duh-Mikey, you know. Why don't you get a job
already and stop bleeding all over Usenet seven days a week?

March 14th 06, 07:08 PM

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> From: Arny Krueger
> Date: Mon, Mar 13 2006 6:29 am
> Email: "Arny Krueger" >
>
>>> What I said was I
>>> looked at posts going back over eight years and saw
>>> hundreds and thousands of posts from you, nob, and
>>> others.
>
>>False claim - google's highest estimate of how many posts I've made on RAO
>>is under 100,000.
>
> Please note the difference between 'hundreds and thousands' and
> 'hundreds of thousands.' They do not mean the same thing. It may help
> you to see that I have made no 'false claim.'
>
>>> The ones that I looked from you and nob at were
>>> just like the ones I see today, Mr. Krueger: generally
>>> angry, all promoting the 'objectivist' viewpoint, and
>>> many that seemed to bash preference.
>
>>Inability to tell the difference between being angry and trying to hold a
>>bunch of abusers accountable for thieir childish behavior noted.
>
> IMO, there's a definite 'tone' to the majority of 'objectivist' posts
> here. While yours may not be as angry as nob's, they have a distinct
> edge, especially if someone disagrees with you.
>
> I didn't notice in the FAQ that there was anyone officially responsible
> here for 'holding' people 'accountable.'
>
>>> Just now I ran three searches. One with 'Arny Krueger'
>>> one with 'Arnold Krueger' and another with just 'Arny' as
>>> authors on r.a.o only. The former came up with 44,300
>>> posts; the latter 74,100.
>
>>IOW, far less than the 100,000's you claimed above. Thanks for
>>contradicting
>>yourself, again.
>
> No, 44,300 is indeed 'hundreds and thousands' of posts. Inability to
> understand plain English noted.
>
>>> I also looked up 'George Middius' as the author on r.a.o.
>>> That search showed 52,600 posts. I could see no other
>>> variations that looked like the posts were his.
>
>>George used other nicknames including "Glanbrok". I can't remember them
>>all
>>but in the early days they changed pretty frequently.
>
> I'd have no way of knowing that. From what I see today, I'd put you and
> nob among the highest-volume posters here.
>
>>> Even assuming that you've made only 45,000 posts to
>>> r.a.o., the difference in volume between you and Mr.
>>> Middius is hardly 'overrunning' rec.audio.opinion,
>>> especially in relationship to your posting quantity. I'd
>>> guess you and he were running probably closer to 1-1, or
>>> even more likely that you post more than he does.
>
>>Let's put it this way - even his defenders can only remember a handful of
>>posts on RAO by Middius that could be called audio-related. Those 45,000
>>or
>>more posts by Middius were virtually all personal attacks. The vast
>>majority of those posts attacked me.
>
>>OTOH, my posts are predomiantely audio-related.
>
> I don't doubt that. My question was not meant as a qualitative study on
> posting content. My only question was if the massive volume of
> audio-related posts from you, nob, and the other 'usual suspects' had
> changed anyone's mind.
>
>>> Just comnparing with both of your posts, it would be
>>> equally truthful to say that you've overrun r.a.o. It
>>> would probably be more truthful to say that neither of
>>> you has.
>
>>It's true that I've overrun RAO with audio-related posts, which were
>>objectively true and based on orthodox audio technology. It's equally true
>>that Middius has overrun RAO with personal attacks.
>
> Have either of you changed anybody's mind?
>
> Just curious.
>
Not on RAO that I know of, but in real life, yes.

Arny Krueger

March 14th 06, 07:11 PM

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

> Please tell us exactly how each of them is "dishonest".

> Glenn Zelniker:

Distorted some truth and refused to tell or defend other truth.

> John Atkinson:

Read his ragazine. Do you seriously think that is all the truth?

> Paul Bamborough:

Guilty because of his many agenda-driven distortions of the truth - his
indictment of Adobe Audition (named Cool Edit Pro in the day) as being a
destructive editor is good example.

> Paul Frindle:

Irrelevant on the grounds of lack of sufficient postings to reach any
conclusions.

> Remember, you said "they are all dishonest". Provide your
> evidence or admit you committed libel.

> After that, you can give specific reasons for saying at
> least 3 of them are "completely looney".

In my experience:

Glenn Zelniker: - Looney over-the top profane posting.

John Atkinson: - Looney if he isn't lying. Can any well-informed person read
any issue of his ragazine without thinking that anybody who approves all
that weirdness has to be at least a little nuts?

Paul Bamborough - Looney twisting of the truth. Threw numerous fits of rage.

In Paul's case there was point in time after which there was a serious
degradation of the quality of his posts. It was almost like someone else
with a lot less brains and experience was forging Bamborough's name. A
stroke? Depression? It was very strange.

March 14th 06, 07:14 PM

"George M. Middius" <cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net> wrote
in message ...
>
>
>
> Shhhh! said to ImmoralityBorg:
>
>> Have either of you changed anybody's mind?
>
> I never intended to change anybody's mind. I just make fun of the
> self-appointed "scientists" who have no real knowledge of DBTs but are
> blessed with a surfeit of class envy.
>
>
Astounding! Once again the swine gets it all wrong. I don't claim to be a
scientist, I just claim to be able to understand that removing bias works
and that ears are all you need to evaluate audio equipment. The class envy
crapola is just that, I don't give a **** if somebody wants to spend
ridiculousamounts of money on their audio system, I just hope they
concentrate on what is most effective, speakers.

Theere does seem to be a fair amount of snobbery from some on the
subjectivist side who seem to always be claiming that someone doesn't have a
"revealing enough" system to hear the wonderous benfits of their 600 dollar
volume knob, or their 300 dollar per foot cable.

Clyde Slick

March 14th 06, 07:51 PM

> wrote in message
nk.net...
>
>
> Calling yourself "normal" is ridiculous in the extreme, since "normal"
> people aren't stalkers, liars and swine.
>
> Oh yeah, they are also not sockpuppets.
>

'Normal' people don't argue with sockpuppets.

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

Clyde Slick

March 14th 06, 07:53 PM

> wrote in message
nk.net...
>
> "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" > wrote in message
> ups.com...

>>
>> Have either of you changed anybody's mind?
>>
>> Just curious.
>>
> Not on RAO that I know of, but in real life, yes.
>

Real life doesn't count!!!

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

Clyde Slick

March 14th 06, 07:55 PM

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
. ..
> "George M. Middius" <cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast
> [dot] net> wrote in message
>
>
>> Please tell us exactly how each of them is "dishonest".
>
>> Glenn Zelniker:
>
> Distorted some truth and refused to tell or defend other truth.
>
>> John Atkinson:
>
> Read his ragazine. Do you seriously think that is all the truth?
>
>> Paul Bamborough:
>
> Guilty because of his many agenda-driven distortions of the truth - his
> indictment of Adobe Audition (named Cool Edit Pro in the day) as being a
> destructive editor is good example.
>
>> Paul Frindle:
>
> Irrelevant on the grounds of lack of sufficient postings to reach any
> conclusions.
>
>> Remember, you said "they are all dishonest". Provide your
>> evidence or admit you committed libel.
>
>> After that, you can give specific reasons for saying at
>> least 3 of them are "completely looney".
>
> In my experience:
>
> Glenn Zelniker: - Looney over-the top profane posting.
>
> John Atkinson: - Looney if he isn't lying. Can any well-informed person
> read any issue of his ragazine without thinking that anybody who approves
> all that weirdness has to be at least a little nuts?
>
> Paul Bamborough - Looney twisting of the truth. Threw numerous fits of
> rage.
>
> In Paul's case there was point in time after which there was a serious
> degradation of the quality of his posts. It was almost like someone else
> with a lot less brains and experience was forging Bamborough's name. A
> stroke? Depression? It was very strange.
>

if irony consulted a psychiatrist.

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

[email protected]

March 14th 06, 08:22 PM

George M. Middius wrote:
> Stupid is as stupid does.
>
> > > Why do ABX endorsees lack the courage of their convictions, Mick?
>
> > In what way? If you are referring to some not having actually taken an ABX
> > test, that's a straw man. All that's required is understanding that it is a
> > valid way to check for difference.
>
> Several valid points have been made about the flaws of aBxism.

No they have not. There have been several distortions and outright
lies about it and attempts to try and mke it sound like something it
isn'.

You are
> either too stupid to understand them or too far gone in your religion to
> accept anything that undermines your blind faith.
>

It is precisely the opposite of blnd faith, it is recognition of the
fact that ears are the only appropriate tool for evaluating the sound
of auido equipment.

> It's not just me who calls you duh-Mikey, you know. Why don't you get a job
> already and stop bleeding all over Usenet seven days a week?

If irony killed.

[email protected]

March 14th 06, 08:26 PM

George M. Middius wrote:
> Some plain talk from the Bug Eater.
>
> > > self-appointed "scientists" who have no real knowledge of DBTs
>
> > I don't claim to be a scientist
>
> Oh, that's a relief. It's not like anybody actually thought you were a real
> scientist who does real research in the real world, but still, it's big of
> you to clear that point up.
>
> What confused about what I said, McMoron? Do you know what self-appointed
> means? Do you know what a Normal person means when he puts a word in
> quotation marks?

Self appointed , as in the person calling himself George Middius, is
the self appointed monitor of what is appriopriate for discovering the
truth about audio?

>
> I know you're very stupid, but even an idiot can occasionally realize he
> messed up. Now's your chance to do just that.

I must have missed an opportunity to call you a swine, stalker and all
round pain in the ass, sack o ****.

[email protected]

March 14th 06, 08:29 PM

Clyde Slick wrote:
> > wrote in message
> nk.net...
> >
> >
> > Calling yourself "normal" is ridiculous in the extreme, since "normal"
> > people aren't stalkers, liars and swine.
> >
> > Oh yeah, they are also not sockpuppets.
> >
>
> 'Normal' people don't argue with sockpuppets.
>
>
>
What do you call Ssss****I'mlisteningtomyself****onRAO, or
soundhasatweakforyou?

Arny Krueger

March 14th 06, 08:30 PM

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

> Stupid is as stupid does.
>
>>> Why do ABX endorsees lack the courage of their
>>> convictions, Mick?
>
>> In what way? If you are referring to some not having
>> actually taken an ABX test, that's a straw man. All
>> that's required is understanding that it is a valid way
>> to check for difference.
>
> Several valid points have been made about the flaws of
> aBxism.

So much for ABXism, which is in fact a creation of one George Middius.

> Why
> don't you get a job already and stop bleeding all over
> Usenet seven days a week?

About that non-existent employment history of yours, Mr. Middius...

George M. Middius

March 14th 06, 08:53 PM

Clyde Slick said:

> 'Normal' people don't argue with sockpuppets.

Mickey is the only "person" I know of who eats the lice after he picks them
out of his roots.

March 14th 06, 09:21 PM

"George M. Middius" <cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net> wrote
in message ...
>
>
> Clyde Slick said:
>
>> 'Normal' people don't argue with sockpuppets.
>
> Mickey is the only "person" I know of who eats the lice after he picks
> them
> out of his roots.
>
>
You come by this knowledge the same way youcome by all the rest of the
prouncements you make here, you make them up.

Once a swine, always a swine.

How about you tell us something about your audio knowledge? Uh-oh
Kryptonite.

Clyde Slick

March 14th 06, 09:29 PM

> wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Clyde Slick wrote:
>> > wrote in message
>> nk.net...
>> >
>> >
>> > Calling yourself "normal" is ridiculous in the extreme, since "normal"
>> > people aren't stalkers, liars and swine.
>> >
>> > Oh yeah, they are also not sockpuppets.
>> >
>>
>> 'Normal' people don't argue with sockpuppets.
>>
>>
>>
> What do you call Ssss****I'mlisteningtomyself****onRAO, or
> soundhasatweakforyou?
>

Anonymous rats.
but not sockpuppets.
There is a difference.
A few (including Arny) say they have evidence that sound.....
is a sockpuppet of a known RAO guy, but I haven't seen any
such evidence, "at least" not yet. Arny could be right, but who knows.

Anyway, here are the sockpuppets, as I see them

Michael Conzo, is a Brian McCarty sockpuppet
Warm Blue Glow, is a Sound.....sockpuppet, but not well hidden,
I think its pretty obvious and WBG means it to be obvious,
so maybe it is more of an alias than a sockpuppet.
Yet, Sound... has the potential of turnng out to be a sockpuppet.
for now, he is anonymous.

Now, for aliases.
Clyde Slick is an alias of Art Sackman
NYOB is an alias of Mik McKelvy.

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

Arny Krueger

March 14th 06, 09:32 PM

"Clyde Slick" > wrote in message

> Now, for aliases.
> Clyde Slick is an alias of Art Sackman

If there ever was an Art Sackman who posted to RAO...

George M. Middius

March 14th 06, 10:43 PM

Out of lice already, Mickey?

> How about you tell us something about your audio knowledge?

I enjoy my systems. That's all I need to know.

(For all I know, I might enjoy hearing your system too, but I doubt
you'll pack it up and ship it to me, so that question will have to
remain academic.)

Clyde Slick

March 14th 06, 11:19 PM

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
>
>
>> Now, for aliases.
>> Clyde Slick is an alias of Art Sackman
>
> If there ever was an Art Sackman who posted to RAO...
>

here we go again!
No, Arny, I am not sending you my
credit card and bank account numbers.

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

Arny Krueger

March 14th 06, 11:20 PM

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

Prerequisite subjectivist childish name-calling:

> Out of lice already, Mickey?

>> How about you tell us something about your audio
>> knowledge?

> I enjoy my systems. That's all I need to know.

That might be true Middius, if you didn't try to sit in judgement over
people who need to know more.

Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!

March 15th 06, 12:10 AM

From:
Date: Tues, Mar 14 2006 2:29 pm
Email: " >

>What do you call Ssss****I'mlisteningtomyself****onRAO, or
>soundhasatweakforyou?

I call myself an 'anonymous poster.'

Given the rage you clearly display, would you really expect me to give
you my name and address?

And exactly how have I '**** on r.a.o.'? By questioning attacks on
people's preferences? By pointing out your bigoted and destructive
politics?

One man's anonymous poster is another man's 'sockpuppet' I suppose.

Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!

March 15th 06, 12:16 AM

From: Clyde Slick
Date: Tues, Mar 14 2006 3:29 pm
Email: "Clyde Slick" >

>Anyway, here are the sockpuppets, as I see them

>...Warm Blue Glow, is a Sound.....sockpuppet, but not well hidden, I think its pretty obvious
>and WBG means it to be obvious,

Actually not. Warm Blue Glow is me. I had set up two nicknames when I
set up my Google account, one for r.a.o. and one for r.a.t. and
forgotten about it. If I reply to a post in r.a.t. WBG shows up. Some
of the posts are cross-posted to both, so WBG shows up on r.a.o. if I
reply to a post in r.a.t. and it is cross-posted to r.a.o.

So this was not intended as a 'sockpuppet' but simply as a different
nickname for a different newsgroup.

Sorry for the confusion. (BTW, you'll see that the email address for
both nicknames is the same.)

Clyde Slick

March 15th 06, 01:25 AM

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> From: Clyde Slick
> Date: Tues, Mar 14 2006 3:29 pm
> Email: "Clyde Slick" >
>
>>Anyway, here are the sockpuppets, as I see them
>
>>...Warm Blue Glow, is a Sound.....sockpuppet, but not well hidden, I think
>>its pretty obvious
>>and WBG means it to be obvious,
>
> Actually not. Warm Blue Glow is me. I had set up two nicknames when I
> set up my Google account, one for r.a.o. and one for r.a.t. and
> forgotten about it. If I reply to a post in r.a.t. WBG shows up. Some
> of the posts are cross-posted to both, so WBG shows up on r.a.o. if I
> reply to a post in r.a.t. and it is cross-posted to r.a.o.
>
> So this was not intended as a 'sockpuppet' but simply as a different
> nickname for a different newsgroup.
>
> Sorry for the confusion. (BTW, you'll see that the email address for
> both nicknames is the same.)
>

okay, I'll classify WBG as an alias of an anonymous poster.

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

Clyde Slick

March 15th 06, 01:27 AM

"George M. Middius" <cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net> wrote
in message ...
>
>
> Shhhh! said to the Bug Eater:
>
>> And exactly how have I '**** on r.a.o.'? By questioning attacks on
>> people's preferences? By pointing out your bigoted and destructive
>> politics?
>
> Those naughty behaviors surely annoy Mickey, but your one big sin that
> dwarfs all the others was daring to confront the Krooborg. Mr. **** is
> to duh-Mikey as Marshall Applewhite, the leader of Heaven's Gate, was to
> his followers. No sacrifice too great, etc.
>

"At least" Applewhite departed with his flock, as
did Jim Jones. Will Arny have the same courage
when irony finally kills the Borgs?

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

March 15th 06, 01:29 AM

"George M. Middius" <cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net> wrote
in message ...
>
>
> Out of lice already, Mickey?
>
>> How about you tell us something about your audio knowledge?
>
> I enjoy my systems. That's all I need to know.
>
And don't try and teach you anything else.

And don't try and teach anybody else either.

I think that pretty much covers your input, so now you can go, you're done.

George M. Middius

March 15th 06, 01:44 AM

Mickey displays his slavish devotion to Kroopologism.

> > Out of lice already, Mickey?

<No answer from the Bug Eater, so I'll assume the answer is Yes.>

> >> How about you tell us something about your audio knowledge?

> > I enjoy my systems. That's all I need to know.

> And don't try and teach you anything else.

OK, I won't.

> And don't try and teach anybody else either.

OK, I won't do that either.

> I think that pretty much covers your input, so now you can go, you're done.

Why haven't you answered my question about your libels of the Real Audio
Guys? I've asked you twice now. Are you afraid to admit you have no
evidence to back up your lies?

Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!

March 15th 06, 02:17 AM

From: Clyde Slick
Date: Tues, Mar 14 2006 7:25 pm
Email: "Clyde Slick" >

>okay, I'll classify WBG as an alias of an anonymous poster.

We'll still have to address the fact that you think that I sound like
Soundhaspriority...

I disagree.:-)

March 15th 06, 05:30 AM

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> From: >
> Date: Tues, Mar 14 2006 1:07 pm
> Email: >
>
>>> Some of those discussions were highly technical and
>>> difficult to always follow... but it was interesting and
>>> sometimes revealing.
>
>>> Those days are long gone.
>
>>And Middius is one of the main reasons.
>
> There's one *powerful* person.
>
> He controls everybody.

More like he annoys everybody. and for no apparent reason.

He seems to pervade your thoughts every waking
> moment.

You are a wizard at overstatement. Once I leave his board, Inever think of
him.

He's also driven off what sounds to me like the most
> intelligent group of people here.
>
That much is true.

> Um, so why are you still here, nob?;-)

Why are you?

I left for a long while, but I decided that there was still stuff to be
learned even with the noise from the peanut gallery.

March 15th 06, 05:36 AM

"Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
.. .
>
> > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>>
>> Clyde Slick wrote:
>>> > wrote in message
>>> nk.net...
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Calling yourself "normal" is ridiculous in the extreme, since "normal"
>>> > people aren't stalkers, liars and swine.
>>> >
>>> > Oh yeah, they are also not sockpuppets.
>>>
Sure they are, that's why they hide.
>
>>>
>>> 'Normal' people don't argue with sockpuppets.
>>>
Normal people don't hang out here.
>>>
>> What do you call Ssss****I'mlisteningtomyself****onRAO, or
>> soundhasatweakforyou?
>>
>
> Anonymous rats.
> but not sockpuppets.

You say tomato.

> There is a difference.
> A few (including Arny) say they have evidence that sound.....
> is a sockpuppet of a known RAO guy, but I haven't seen any
> such evidence, "at least" not yet. Arny could be right, but who knows.
>
I guess we'll find out eventually.

>
> Anyway, here are the sockpuppets, as I see them
>
> Michael Conzo, is a Brian McCarty sockpuppet

Could be, but I'm not entirely sure.

> Warm Blue Glow, is a Sound.....sockpuppet, but not well hidden,
> I think its pretty obvious and WBG means it to be obvious,
> so maybe it is more of an alias than a sockpuppet.

> Yet, Sound... has the potential of turnng out to be a sockpuppet.
> for now, he is anonymous.
>
> Now, for aliases.
> Clyde Slick is an alias of Art Sackman
> NYOB is an alias of Mik McKelvy.
>
>
And Middius is a swine, no matter what else he may be.

March 15th 06, 05:38 AM

"George M. Middius" <cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net> wrote
in message ...
>
>
>
> Mr. McMickey, I'm calling you to account for your libelous accuasations
> against legitimate professionals in the audio business.
>
>> > We've had some Real Audio Guys on RAO from time to time who
>> > do have genuine, hands-on knowledge and experience with them.
>> > Two of them are Glenn Zelniker and John Atkinson. Others may be
>> > Paul Bamborough and Paul Frindle, although I can't remember with
>> > certainty. We Normals have great respect for all of those guys, but
>> > you and the Krooborg hate and fear them.
>
>> Of course you do, they are all dishonest and many of them completely
>> looney
>> and/or vulgar.
>
>
> Please tell us exactly how each of them is "dishonest".
>
> Glenn Zelniker:
>
> John Atkinson:
>
> Paul Bamborough:
>
> Paul Frindle:
>
> Remember, you said "they are all dishonest". Provide your evidence or
> admit you committed libel.
>
> After that, you can give specific reasons for saying at least 3 of them
> are "completely looney".
>
> We're waiting, McStupid.
>
>
Go ahead hold your breath.

There actions speak for themselves, just like yours.

March 15th 06, 05:45 AM

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> From:
> Date: Tues, Mar 14 2006 2:29 pm
> Email: " >
>
>>What do you call Ssss****I'mlisteningtomyself****onRAO, or
>>soundhasatweakforyou?
>
> I call myself an 'anonymous poster.'
>
> Given the rage you clearly display, would you really expect me to give
> you my name and address?
>
There's that overstatement again. I'm not in any kind of rage, it's more
disgust.

> And exactly how have I '**** on r.a.o.'?

You distort, you cheat,and you lie.

By questioning attacks on
> people's preferences?

From whom? I don't do that, so that's one of those lies I was just
mentioning.

By pointing out your bigoted and destructive
> politics?
>
I'm neither bigoted or destructive. I'm the least bigoted person I know.
What's destructive about thinking people ought not to be the victims of
force by the government?
What's destructive about wanting everyone to be free?

> One man's anonymous poster is another man's 'sockpuppet' I suppose.
>
Yawn.

March 15th 06, 05:47 AM

"George M. Middius" <cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net> wrote
in message ...
>
>
>
> Mickey displays his slavish devotion to Kroopologism.
>
>> > Out of lice already, Mickey?
>
> <No answer from the Bug Eater, so I'll assume the answer is Yes.>
>
>> >> How about you tell us something about your audio knowledge?
>
>> > I enjoy my systems. That's all I need to know.
>
>> And don't try and teach you anything else.
>
> OK, I won't.
>
>> And don't try and teach anybody else either.
>
> OK, I won't do that either.
>
>> I think that pretty much covers your input, so now you can go, you're
>> done.
>
> Why haven't you answered my question about your libels of the Real Audio
> Guys? I've asked you twice now. Are you afraid to admit you have no
> evidence to back up your lies?
>
>
I answered as well as I feel like it, I'm not surprised that you don't
recognize a lie when you se one.
But then you are a liar as well as a swine.

Clyde Slick

March 15th 06, 05:58 AM

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> From: Clyde Slick
> Date: Tues, Mar 14 2006 7:25 pm
> Email: "Clyde Slick" >
>
>>okay, I'll classify WBG as an alias of an anonymous poster.
>
> We'll still have to address the fact that you think that I sound like
> Soundhaspriority...
>
> I disagree.:-)
>

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

Clyde Slick

March 15th 06, 05:59 AM

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> From: Clyde Slick
> Date: Tues, Mar 14 2006 7:25 pm
> Email: "Clyde Slick" >
>
>>okay, I'll classify WBG as an alias of an anonymous poster.
>
> We'll still have to address the fact that you think that I sound like
> Soundhaspriority...
>
> I disagree.:-)

no, I just mixed up your names, not your voices.

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

Clyde Slick

March 15th 06, 05:59 AM

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> From: >
> Date: Tues, Mar 14 2006 1:07 pm
> Email: >
>
>>> Some of those discussions were highly technical and
>>> difficult to always follow... but it was interesting and
>>> sometimes revealing.
>
>>> Those days are long gone.
>
>>And Middius is one of the main reasons.
>
> There's one *powerful* person.
>
> He controls everybody. He seems to pervade your thoughts every waking
> moment. He's also driven off what sounds to me like the most
> intelligent group of people here.
>
> Um, so why are you still here, nob?;-)
>

and Arny!!

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

Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!

March 15th 06, 06:58 AM

From: >
Date: Tues, Mar 14 2006 11:30 pm
Email: >

>>>> Some of those discussions were highly technical and
>>>> difficult to always follow... but it was interesting and
>>>> sometimes revealing.

>>>> Those days are long gone.

>>>And Middius is one of the main reasons.

>> There's one *powerful* person.

>> He controls everybody.

>More like he annoys everybody. and for no apparent reason.

Aw, it looks to me as though he simply enjoys tweaking your noses. He's
pretty good at it. The funny thing to me is that you let him.

>>He seems to pervade your thoughts every waking moment.

>You are a wizard at overstatement. Once I leave his board, Inever think of
>him.

So he only pervades your thoughts obssessively when you're posting.

>>He's also driven off what sounds to me like
>>the most intelligent group of people here.

>That much is true.

>> Um, so why are you still here, nob?;-)

(Sometimes I crack myself up...)

>Why are you?

What? An 'IKYABWAI'? Nah, I don't think nob got the slam.

I'm having fun. Aren't you?

>I left for a long while, but I decided that there was still stuff to be
>learned even with the noise from the peanut gallery.

This is an incredibly inefficient way of learning anything. Why not
consider:

a) Identifying your shortcomings (i.e. 'what you need to learn') and
then,

b) research it?

That's what all the best colleges teach these days.

Fella

March 15th 06, 08:40 AM

wrote:

> > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>
>>Fella ranted:
>>
>>
wrote:
>>>
>>>>Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>I'm just curious. I just did a search of r.a.o. going back at least
>>>>>eight years. Thousands and thousands of 'objectivist' posts by Mr.
>>>>>Krueger, nob, and others.
>>>>>
>>>>>Have these thousands of posts, representing hundreds and thousands of
>>>>>man hours, been to any effect?
>>>>>
>>>>>Has anyone ever actually changed their mind on how they think about
>>>>>audio based on what they've read here?
>>>>>
>>>>>Just curious...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>I did. I used to read Arny back way back in the day, when I was just a
>>>>wee little lurker. I was a hard-boiled extremist objectivist. Even more
>>>>than Arny is. ABX was my religion, and I practiced it every day. You
>>>>couldn't convince me that ANYTHING sounded ANY different from ANYTHING
>>>>else in audio. Even loudspeakers all sounded the same, where I was
>>>>concerned. But after taking in a gutfull of Arny Krueger, he sickened
>>>>me so much, that I renounced the religion of objectivism, and smashed
>>>>my ABX comparator box with a mallet.
>>>>
>>>>I even tore down my picture of sexy Dave Carlstrom, and today, as most
>>>>people know me, I'm an alternative audio guru. I always maintain an
>>>>even number of cd's in my collection, I cross out the bar codes in my
>>>>cd cases with a "specially treated" $150 red marker, and I park my car
>>>>in the same place and the same direction every day. All to ensure good
>>>>sound from my home audio. And I'm happy to report, the sound I'm
>>>>getting off my hifi kit has NEVER been better in all my days. So thank
>>>>you, Arny Krueger!
>>>>
>>>
>>>Troll BE GONE!
>>>
>>>This post is almost proof that this is some borg posing as an extreme
>>>audio subjectivist crackpot. The message to be derived from the text
>>>above: If you abandon the objectivist abxism religion you become a
>>>pitiful silly subjectivist crackpot troll with a $200 green marker stuck
>>>up your butt.
>>
>>Nice kook rant. So... are you going to ever back up any of your
>>********, or simply remain the ignorant twit that you so clearly are?
>>
>
> I vote for the second one.
>
>

Yet another piece of proof that shp is a piece of twisted borg;
duh!mikey aligns himself with him against me. :(

Fella

March 15th 06, 12:26 PM

wrote:

> "George M. Middius" <cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net> wrote
> in message ...
>
>>
>>
>>Mr. McMickey, I'm calling you to account for your libelous accuasations
>>against legitimate professionals in the audio business.
>>
>>
>>>>We've had some Real Audio Guys on RAO from time to time who
>>>>do have genuine, hands-on knowledge and experience with them.
>>>>Two of them are Glenn Zelniker and John Atkinson. Others may be
>>>>Paul Bamborough and Paul Frindle, although I can't remember with
>>>>certainty. We Normals have great respect for all of those guys, but
>>>>you and the Krooborg hate and fear them.
>>
>>>Of course you do, they are all dishonest and many of them completely
>>>looney
>>>and/or vulgar.
>>
>>
>>Please tell us exactly how each of them is "dishonest".
>>
>>Glenn Zelniker:
>>
>>John Atkinson:
>>
>>Paul Bamborough:
>>
>>Paul Frindle:
>>
>>Remember, you said "they are all dishonest". Provide your evidence or
>>admit you committed libel.
>>
>>After that, you can give specific reasons for saying at least 3 of them
>>are "completely looney".
>>
>>We're waiting, McStupid.
>>
>>
>
> Go ahead hold your breath.
>
> There actions speak for themselves, just like yours.
>

There actions, there there, actions..

I suppose duh!mickey knows the difference between "their" and "there"
(though they do sound the same! Hence duh!mickmickey's confusion) but it
was a "typo" I guess, yes. :)

Arny Krueger

March 15th 06, 01:41 PM

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" >
wrote in message
oups.com
> From: >
> Date: Tues, Mar 14 2006 1:07 pm
> Email: >
>
>>> Some of those discussions were highly technical and
>>> difficult to always follow... but it was interesting and
>>> sometimes revealing.
>
>>> Those days are long gone.
>
>> And Middius is one of the main reasons.
>
> There's one *powerful* person.

The *secret* of the Middius success at destroying RAO as a positive force in
audio is that it usually takes a lot less effort to destroy than create.

George M. Middius

March 15th 06, 02:57 PM

Shhhh! said:

> >And Middius is one of the main reasons.

> There's one *powerful* person.

And I don't even get paid for all this control I wield.

> He controls everybody. He seems to pervade your thoughts every waking
> moment. He's also driven off what sounds to me like the most
> intelligent group of people here.

The 'borgs have also blamed me for the existence of Alan Derrida, for
the harassment Phoebe Johnston suffered at her workplace, and for the
continued profitability of Stereophile. Apparently I have powers I'm not
even aware of.

George M. Middius

March 15th 06, 03:53 PM

Finally, the Bug Eater comes clean.

> > Why haven't you answered my question about your libels of the Real Audio
> > Guys? I've asked you twice now. Are you afraid to admit you have no
> > evidence to back up your lies?

> I'm not surprised that you don't recognize a lie when you se one.

Good job, Mickey. This admission puts you a big step ahead of the
Krooborg, who has never taken responsibility for his thousands upon
thousands of lies.

Arny Krueger

March 15th 06, 04:25 PM

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

> The 'borgs have also blamed me for the existence of Alan
> Derrida,

As close as reality ever came to that were suggestions that you had a common
source.

> for the harassment Phoebe Johnston suffered at
> her workplace,

As I recall, said harrasment was composed of a good laugh by several folks
at AT&T labs at Middius' expense.

> and for the continued profitability of Stereophile.

No, we blame P.T. Barnum for that.

>Apparently I have powers I'm not even aware of.

More to the point Middius - these false claims show that you have a very
self-centered view of the universe. But we've known that for a long time.

Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!

March 15th 06, 09:49 PM

From: >
Date: Tues, Mar 14 2006 11:36 pm
Email: >

>And Middius is a swine, no matter what else he may be.

Have you considered getting help with your obssession?

You don't think that Mr. Middius is a real person, yet he seems to
dominate your thoughts.

That doesn't even begin to address the fact that you think insulting
behaviour and sniping have 'ruined' r.a.o., yet you yourself engage in
it as much as anybody here.

I think you'll have to work out your former problem before you can
address the latter.

March 16th 06, 04:56 AM

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> From: >
> Date: Tues, Mar 14 2006 11:36 pm
> Email: >
>
>>And Middius is a swine, no matter what else he may be.
>
> Have you considered getting help with your obssession?
>
Good sounding hi-fi?

> You don't think that Mr. Middius is a real person, yet he seems to
> dominate your thoughts.
>
He tries to dominate this NG, he doesn't dominate thoughts, he's just there
like a pesky fly.

> That doesn't even begin to address the fact that you think insulting
> behaviour and sniping have 'ruined' r.a.o., yet you yourself engage in
> it as much as anybody here.
>

I generally try to converse in a civil manner with anyone willing to do the
same. I gave on that prospect with the Miidius persona, since it's
pointless, he doesn't care to. He only wants to be a pest.

> I think you'll have to work out your former problem before you can
> address the latter.
>
I think you should tend to your own problems and quit pretending to be some
sort of altruistic, concerned citizen, or whatever it is you think you're
doing.

March 16th 06, 04:56 AM

"George M. Middius" <cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net> wrote
in message ...
>
>
>
> Finally, the Bug Eater comes clean.
>
>> > Why haven't you answered my question about your libels of the Real
>> > Audio
>> > Guys? I've asked you twice now. Are you afraid to admit you have no
>> > evidence to back up your lies?
>
>> I'm not surprised that you don't recognize a lie when you se one.
>
> Good job, Mickey. This admission puts you a big step ahead of the
> Krooborg, who has never taken responsibility for his thousands upon
> thousands of lies.
>
>
When will you?

March 16th 06, 04:59 AM

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> From: >
> Date: Tues, Mar 14 2006 11:30 pm
> Email: >
>
>>>>> Some of those discussions were highly technical and
>>>>> difficult to always follow... but it was interesting and
>>>>> sometimes revealing.
>
>>>>> Those days are long gone.
>
>>>>And Middius is one of the main reasons.
>
>>> There's one *powerful* person.
>
>>> He controls everybody.
>
>>More like he annoys everybody. and for no apparent reason.
>
> Aw, it looks to me as though he simply enjoys tweaking your noses. He's
> pretty good at it. The funny thing to me is that you let him.
>
>>>He seems to pervade your thoughts every waking moment.
>
>>You are a wizard at overstatement. Once I leave his board, Inever think
>>of
>>him.
>
> So he only pervades your thoughts obssessively when you're posting.
>

Nothing obsessive at all, that's simply your spin.

>>>He's also driven off what sounds to me like
>>>the most intelligent group of people here.
>
>>That much is true.
>
>>> Um, so why are you still here, nob?;-)
>
> (Sometimes I crack myself up...)
>
>>Why are you?
>
> What? An 'IKYABWAI'? Nah, I don't think nob got the slam.
>
> I'm having fun. Aren't you?
>
Always. If I wasn't I wouldn't be here.

>>I left for a long while, but I decided that there was still stuff to be
>>learned even with the noise from the peanut gallery.
>
> This is an incredibly inefficient way of learning anything. Why not
> consider:
>
> a) Identifying your shortcomings (i.e. 'what you need to learn') and
> then,
>
> b) research it?
>
> That's what all the best colleges teach these days.
>
What makes you think I don't. This is not the only place I spend time.
This place is recreation more than learning, although it was different
before Middius.

March 16th 06, 05:00 AM

"Clyde Slick" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>> From: >
>> Date: Tues, Mar 14 2006 1:07 pm
>> Email: >
>>
>>>> Some of those discussions were highly technical and
>>>> difficult to always follow... but it was interesting and
>>>> sometimes revealing.
>>
>>>> Those days are long gone.
>>
>>>And Middius is one of the main reasons.
>>
>> There's one *powerful* person.
>>
>> He controls everybody. He seems to pervade your thoughts every waking
>> moment. He's also driven off what sounds to me like the most
>> intelligent group of people here.
>>
>> Um, so why are you still here, nob?;-)
>>
>
> and Arny!!
>
>
If Arny was gone, what would you do?

March 16th 06, 05:02 AM

"Fella" > wrote in message
.. .
> wrote:
>
>> > wrote in message
>> oups.com...
>>
>>>Fella ranted:
>>>
>>>
wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>I'm just curious. I just did a search of r.a.o. going back at least
>>>>>>eight years. Thousands and thousands of 'objectivist' posts by Mr.
>>>>>>Krueger, nob, and others.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Have these thousands of posts, representing hundreds and thousands of
>>>>>>man hours, been to any effect?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Has anyone ever actually changed their mind on how they think about
>>>>>>audio based on what they've read here?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Just curious...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>I did. I used to read Arny back way back in the day, when I was just a
>>>>>wee little lurker. I was a hard-boiled extremist objectivist. Even more
>>>>>than Arny is. ABX was my religion, and I practiced it every day. You
>>>>>couldn't convince me that ANYTHING sounded ANY different from ANYTHING
>>>>>else in audio. Even loudspeakers all sounded the same, where I was
>>>>>concerned. But after taking in a gutfull of Arny Krueger, he sickened
>>>>>me so much, that I renounced the religion of objectivism, and smashed
>>>>>my ABX comparator box with a mallet.
>>>>>
>>>>>I even tore down my picture of sexy Dave Carlstrom, and today, as most
>>>>>people know me, I'm an alternative audio guru. I always maintain an
>>>>>even number of cd's in my collection, I cross out the bar codes in my
>>>>>cd cases with a "specially treated" $150 red marker, and I park my car
>>>>>in the same place and the same direction every day. All to ensure good
>>>>>sound from my home audio. And I'm happy to report, the sound I'm
>>>>>getting off my hifi kit has NEVER been better in all my days. So thank
>>>>>you, Arny Krueger!
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Troll BE GONE!
>>>>
>>>>This post is almost proof that this is some borg posing as an extreme
>>>>audio subjectivist crackpot. The message to be derived from the text
>>>>above: If you abandon the objectivist abxism religion you become a
>>>>pitiful silly subjectivist crackpot troll with a $200 green marker stuck
>>>>up your butt.
>>>
>>>Nice kook rant. So... are you going to ever back up any of your
>>>********, or simply remain the ignorant twit that you so clearly are?
>>>
>>
>> I vote for the second one.
>
> Yet another piece of proof that shp is a piece of twisted borg; duh!mikey
> aligns himself with him against me. :(

Just keep telling yourself that.