Poll: Best Living Vocalists

[Sandman]

Listening to some music today, it occurred to me that some vocalists are
head and shoulders above others.

Think about who you really like listening to when he or she sings.

Think about raw talent.

Think about musical discipline.

Think about stage presence.

Think about overall performance.

Think about purity and beauty of vocal performance.

Think about pitch, tempo, and all those other "technical" things, but very
basic to coming across as a good vocalist.

MY CHOICES (HEAD AND SHOULDERS ABOVE THE REST):

BEST LIVING MALE VOCALIST: Andrea Bocelli

BEST LIVING FEMALE VOCALIST: Celine Deion

Feel free to feel differently.

[Torresists]

>From: "Sandman"
>Date: 2/28/2004 10:02 PM Central Standard Time
>Message-id: >
>
>Listening to some music today, it occurred to me that some vocalists are
>head and shoulders above others.
>
>Think about who you really like listening to when he or she sings.
>
>Think about raw talent.
>
>Think about musical discipline.
>
>Think about stage presence.
>
>Think about overall performance.
>
>Think about purity and beauty of vocal performance.
>
>Think about pitch, tempo, and all those other "technical" things, but very
>basic to coming across as a good vocalist.
>
>MY CHOICES (HEAD AND SHOULDERS ABOVE THE REST):
>
>BEST LIVING MALE VOCALIST: Andrea Bocelli
>
>BEST LIVING FEMALE VOCALIST: Celine Deion
>
Back to rehab, Sanders. Try to really "dry out" this time; you're gonna be
changing ca-ca diapers soon . ;-)

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

> BEST LIVING MALE VOCALIST: Ray Charles
>
> BEST LIVING FEMALE VOCALIST: Tracy Nelson
>




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[ScottW]

"Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
...
>
> > BEST LIVING MALE VOCALIST: Ray Charles
Can he still sing?
I saw Greg Lake a few years ago and his voice was shot
but when I saw him in college, he had an incredible voice.
> >
> > BEST LIVING FEMALE VOCALIST: Tracy Nelson

Still alive though her best stuff was years ago: Annie Haslam

ScottW

[S888Wheel]

>
>BEST LIVING MALE VOCALIST: Andrea Bocelli
>
>BEST LIVING FEMALE VOCALIST: Celine Deion
>
>Feel free to feel differently.

Feelin differently.

[S888Wheel]

>
> Still alive though her best stuff was years ago: Annie Haslam

She's one of those singers that people either love or hate. You will be hard
pressed to find anyone with a greater range, 5 octaves, but I have noticed that
her style really bothers some people. I saw Renaissance live on one of their
last tours. I was front row center. Great show. I actually bumped into Annie
Haslam hours before the show and was invited back stage after the show. Nice
lady.

[Sander deWaal]

(S888Wheel) said:

>>Annie Haslam

>She's one of those singers that people either love or hate. You will be hard
>pressed to find anyone with a greater range, 5 octaves,

Rachelle Ferrell.

--
Sander deWaal
Vacuum Audio Consultancy

[dave weil]

On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 15:51:50 +0100, Sander deWaal
> wrote:

(S888Wheel) said:
>
>>>Annie Haslam
>
>>She's one of those singers that people either love or hate. You will be hard
>>pressed to find anyone with a greater range, 5 octaves,
>
>Rachelle Ferrell.

I've always liked Annie Haslam, but I've never really connected with
her. She seems to be devoid of "passion". But that reminds me of a
serious hole in my collection that needs to be remedied.

[S888Wheel]

>
>>>>Annie Haslam
>>
>>>She's one of those singers that people either love or hate. You will be
>hard
>>>pressed to find anyone with a greater range, 5 octaves,
>>
>>Rachelle Ferrell.
>
>I've always liked Annie Haslam, but I've never really connected with
>her. She seems to be devoid of "passion". But that reminds me of a
>serious hole in my collection that needs to be remedied.
>
>

Just shows there are exceptions to my comments.

[dave weil]

On 29 Feb 2004 16:34:19 GMT, (S888Wheel) wrote:

>>
>>>>>Annie Haslam
>>>
>>>>She's one of those singers that people either love or hate. You will be
>>hard
>>>>pressed to find anyone with a greater range, 5 octaves,
>>>
>>>Rachelle Ferrell.
>>
>>I've always liked Annie Haslam, but I've never really connected with
>>her. She seems to be devoid of "passion". But that reminds me of a
>>serious hole in my collection that needs to be remedied.
>>
>>
>
>Just shows there are exceptions to my comments.

Sure. It's just a personal expression though and shouldn't be taken as
a diss against Ms. Halsam, whose music I've enjoyed over the years -
sadly not recently though. That's something that I'm going to correct
immediately, starting with Ashes Are Burning (anything with Andy
Powell of Wishbone Ash can't be all bad!) to be followed by the
Carnegie Hall set.

Her rather "bloodless" style works perfectly with the music of
Renaissance though. Much like Sam Phillips' similar icy style works
for her.

[dave weil]

On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 10:42:34 -0600, dave weil >
wrote:

>Sure. It's just a personal expression though and shouldn't be taken as
>a diss against Ms. Halsam

Or Haslam even...

[ScottW]

"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
> On 29 Feb 2004 16:34:19 GMT, (S888Wheel) wrote:
>
> >>
> >>>>>Annie Haslam
> >>>
> >>>>She's one of those singers that people either love or hate. You will
be
> >>hard
> >>>>pressed to find anyone with a greater range, 5 octaves,
> >>>
> >>>Rachelle Ferrell.
> >>
> >>I've always liked Annie Haslam, but I've never really connected with
> >>her. She seems to be devoid of "passion". But that reminds me of a
> >>serious hole in my collection that needs to be remedied.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Just shows there are exceptions to my comments.
>
> Sure. It's just a personal expression though and shouldn't be taken as
> a diss against Ms. Halsam, whose music I've enjoyed over the years -
> sadly not recently though. That's something that I'm going to correct
> immediately, starting with Ashes Are Burning (anything with Andy
> Powell of Wishbone Ash can't be all bad!) to be followed by the
> Carnegie Hall set.

Aaah memories. I recall seeing Wishbone Ash a year after Argus
came out. Great concert. They did a 45 minute version of
Phoenix to close the show that was just awesome .
Climax Blues Band was the lead. Peter Haycock was pretty incredible
on that slide. FM Live is a great party album.

ScottW

[Sandman]

Glad to see people having fun with this thread.

[MINe 109]

In article >,
"Sandman" > wrote:

> Glad to see people having fun with this thread.
>
>

Does the male vocalist have to be blind?

Stephen

[Nousaine]

Best Living Pop/Rock Vocalists: IMO

Male: Russell Smith
Ray Charles
C J Chenier

Female: KD Lang
Ruthie Foster

[Sandman]

"MINe 109" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> "Sandman" > wrote:
>
> > Glad to see people having fun with this thread.
> >
> >
>
> Does the male vocalist have to be blind?

I suppose overcoming such a handicap and being able to find your way onstage
could be considered a factor, eh?

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Nousaine" > wrote in message
...
> Best Living Pop/Rock Vocalists: IMO
>
> Male: Russell Smith
> Ray Charles
> C J Chenier
>
> Female: KD Lang
> Ruthie Foster
>
>
Who are Russell Smith and Ruthie Foster?




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[S888Wheel]

>
>>>
>>>>>>Annie Haslam
>>>>
>>>>>She's one of those singers that people either love or hate. You will be
>>>hard
>>>>>pressed to find anyone with a greater range, 5 octaves,
>>>>
>>>>Rachelle Ferrell.
>>>
>>>I've always liked Annie Haslam, but I've never really connected with
>>>her. She seems to be devoid of "passion". But that reminds me of a
>>>serious hole in my collection that needs to be remedied.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Just shows there are exceptions to my comments.

>
>Sure. It's just a personal expression though and shouldn't be taken as
>a diss against Ms. Halsam,

I didn't see it as a dis.

> whose music I've enjoyed over the years -
>sadly not recently though. That's something that I'm going to correct
>immediately, starting with Ashes Are Burning (anything with Andy
>Powell of Wishbone Ash can't be all bad!) to be followed by the
>Carnegie Hall set.

Nice choice of records.


>
>Her rather "bloodless" style works perfectly with the music of
>Renaissance though. Much like Sam Phillips' similar icy style works
>for her.

I never thought of her as cold or bloodless. I thought the knock on her was the
lack of grittyness. Some see her as simply to sugary and flighty.

[Arny Krueger]

"Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message

> "Nousaine" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Best Living Pop/Rock Vocalists: IMO
>>
>> Male: Russell Smith
>> Ray Charles
>> C J Chenier
>>
>> Female: KD Lang
>> Ruthie Foster
>>
>>
> Who are Russell Smith and Ruthie Foster?

Yustabe, are you really too stupid to look up her name in Google?

[dave weil]

On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 08:49:00 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>"Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message

>> "Nousaine" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Best Living Pop/Rock Vocalists: IMO
>>>
>>> Male: Russell Smith
>>> Ray Charles
>>> C J Chenier
>>>
>>> Female: KD Lang
>>> Ruthie Foster
>>>
>>>
>> Who are Russell Smith and Ruthie Foster?
>
>Yustabe, are you really too stupid to look up her name in Google?

So much for the art of conversation.

[Arny Krueger]

"dave weil" > wrote in message

> On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 08:49:00 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>
>> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
>>
>>> "Nousaine" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> Best Living Pop/Rock Vocalists: IMO
>>>>
>>>> Male: Russell Smith
>>>> Ray Charles
>>>> C J Chenier
>>>>
>>>> Female: KD Lang
>>>> Ruthie Foster
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Who are Russell Smith and Ruthie Foster?
>>
>> Yustabe, are you really too stupid to look up her name in Google?
>
> So much for the art of conversation.

It's alive and well in places where sadistic jerk-offs like you and Yusatabe
aren't.

[dave weil]

On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 09:34:25 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>"dave weil" > wrote in message

>> On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 08:49:00 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
>>>
>>>> "Nousaine" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>> Best Living Pop/Rock Vocalists: IMO
>>>>>
>>>>> Male: Russell Smith
>>>>> Ray Charles
>>>>> C J Chenier
>>>>>
>>>>> Female: KD Lang
>>>>> Ruthie Foster
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Who are Russell Smith and Ruthie Foster?
>>>
>>> Yustabe, are you really too stupid to look up her name in Google?
>>
>> So much for the art of conversation.
>
>It's alive and well in places where sadistic jerk-offs like you and Yusatabe
>aren't.

So, tell me Mr. Smarmy - how does *your* suggestion further the art of
conversation? How does it give Tom a chance to discuss the merits of
Ruthie Foster (an artist that *I'm* not familiar with)?

BTW, were you talking about RAH-E, a place you used to chide me about
not posting at? Maybe I *should* post there, since they were smart
enough to toss you out on your ass for being a disruptive and petulant
child.

[Joe Duffy]

In article >,
Sandman > wrote:
>
>BEST LIVING MALE VOCALIST: Andrea Bocelli
>
ROTFLMAO!



Joe

[Joe Duffy]

In article >,
George M. Middius <glanbrok44_at_bonbon.net> wrote:
>
>
>Sandman said:
>
>> Glad to see people having fun with this thread.
>
>Most Appallingly Awful Female Vocalist: Norah Jones
>
>
I hate to agree with a midget,
but...


Joe

[S888Wheel]

>
>>> Male: Russell Smith
>>> Ray Charles
>>> C J Chenier
>>>
>>> Female: KD Lang
>>> Ruthie Foster
>>>
>>>
>> Who are Russell Smith and Ruthie Foster?
>
>Yustabe, are you really too stupid to look up her name in Google?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

I bet he is smart enough to know the difference between the artists and the
titles of their recordings when he does. Any more comments on the recording
artist you call "Fold es Eg?" Any thoughts on how their music (chuckle) is
similar to ELP without the use of Google as Cliff Notes?

[MINe 109]

In article >,
"Sandman" > wrote:

> "MINe 109" > wrote in message
> ...
> > In article >,
> > "Sandman" > wrote:
> >
> > > Glad to see people having fun with this thread.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Does the male vocalist have to be blind?
>
> I suppose overcoming such a handicap and being able to find your way onstage
> could be considered a factor, eh?

The Blind Boys of Alabama would be the best vocal group, then.

Stephen

[dave weil]

On Mon, 01 Mar 2004 17:03:06 GMT, MINe 109 >
wrote:

>In article >,
> "Sandman" > wrote:
>
>> "MINe 109" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > In article >,
>> > "Sandman" > wrote:
>> >
>> > > Glad to see people having fun with this thread.
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> > Does the male vocalist have to be blind?
>>
>> I suppose overcoming such a handicap and being able to find your way onstage
>> could be considered a factor, eh?
>
>The Blind Boys of Alabama would be the best vocal group, then.

Only if they do camera commercials.

[MINe 109]

In article >,
"Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote:

> "Nousaine" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Best Living Pop/Rock Vocalists: IMO
> >
> > Male: Russell Smith
> > Ray Charles
> > C J Chenier
> >
> > Female: KD Lang
> > Ruthie Foster
> >
> >
> Who are Russell Smith and Ruthie Foster?

I did the google and found Russell as the lead singer and songwriter for
the Amazing Rhythm Aces.

Stephen

[Arny Krueger]

"dave weil" > wrote in message

> On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 09:34:25 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>
>> "dave weil" > wrote in message
>>
>>> On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 08:49:00 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
>>>>
>>>>> "Nousaine" > wrote in message
>>>>> ...
>>>>>> Best Living Pop/Rock Vocalists: IMO
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Male: Russell Smith
>>>>>> Ray Charles
>>>>>> C J Chenier
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Female: KD Lang
>>>>>> Ruthie Foster
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Who are Russell Smith and Ruthie Foster?
>>>>
>>>> Yustabe, are you really too stupid to look up her name in Google?
>>>
>>> So much for the art of conversation.
>>
>> It's alive and well in places where sadistic jerk-offs like you and
>> Yusatabe aren't.
>
> So, tell me Mr. Smarmy - how does *your* suggestion further the art of
> conversation?

Weil, we're speaking in a forum that you routinely trash. Why don't you
further the art of conversation by either departing or cleaning up your act?

> How does it give Tom a chance to discuss the merits of
> Ruthie Foster (an artist that *I'm* not familiar with)?

I see no serious intent by Yustabe along those lines. If he was serious, he
would have done a little homework.

> BTW, were you talking about RAH-E, a place you used to chide me about
> not posting at?

If you had a brain Weil, you could answer that question for yourself. Since
you lack the necessary equipment requred to add two and two and get
four-point-zero I'll tell you explicitly: No.

> Maybe I *should* post there, since they were smart
> enough to toss you out on your ass for being a disruptive and petulant
> child.

No, the disruptive and petulent children like Lavo and sockpuppet Wheel
still post there. Therefore, there's no evidence that anybody has been
tossed out on those grounds.

[Lionel]

Sandman wrote:
> Listening to some music today, it occurred to me that some vocalists are
> head and shoulders above others.
>
> Think about who you really like listening to when he or she sings.
>
> Think about raw talent.
>
> Think about musical discipline.
>
> Think about stage presence.
>
> Think about overall performance.
>
> Think about purity and beauty of vocal performance.
>
> Think about pitch, tempo, and all those other "technical" things, but very
> basic to coming across as a good vocalist.
>
> MY CHOICES (HEAD AND SHOULDERS ABOVE THE REST):
>
> BEST LIVING MALE VOCALIST: Andrea Bocelli
>
> BEST LIVING FEMALE VOCALIST: Celine Deion
>
> Feel free to feel differently.

Jeanne Lee.
I will denied all "she died".
For the septics listen again "After hours" with Mal Waldron.

[dave weil]

On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 13:52:19 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>"dave weil" > wrote in message

>> On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 09:34:25 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> "dave weil" > wrote in message
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 08:49:00 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
>>>>>
>>>>>> "Nousaine" > wrote in message
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> Best Living Pop/Rock Vocalists: IMO
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Male: Russell Smith
>>>>>>> Ray Charles
>>>>>>> C J Chenier
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Female: KD Lang
>>>>>>> Ruthie Foster
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Who are Russell Smith and Ruthie Foster?
>>>>>
>>>>> Yustabe, are you really too stupid to look up her name in Google?
>>>>
>>>> So much for the art of conversation.
>>>
>>> It's alive and well in places where sadistic jerk-offs like you and
>>> Yusatabe aren't.
>>
>> So, tell me Mr. Smarmy - how does *your* suggestion further the art of
>> conversation?
>
>Weil, we're speaking in a forum that you routinely trash. Why don't you
>further the art of conversation by either departing or cleaning up your act?

The rest of the group has been waiting for you to do JUST THAT. Please
avail yourself of that opportunity at the first available moment.

>> How does it give Tom a chance to discuss the merits of
>> Ruthie Foster (an artist that *I'm* not familiar with)?
>
>I see no serious intent by Yustabe along those lines. If he was serious, he
>would have done a little homework.

Who cares what *you* see, you puffed-up, self-important little weasel
<chuckle>?

>> BTW, were you talking about RAH-E, a place you used to chide me about
>> not posting at?
>
>If you had a brain Weil, you could answer that question for yourself. Since
>you lack the necessary equipment requred to add two and two and get
>four-point-zero I'll tell you explicitly: No.

I guess that you're confused then.

>> Maybe I *should* post there, since they were smart
>> enough to toss you out on your ass for being a disruptive and petulant
>> child.
>
>No, the disruptive and petulent children like Lavo and sockpuppet Wheel
>still post there. Therefore, there's no evidence that anybody has been
>tossed out on those grounds.

Thank you for copying me. It's a dubious honor, but it says more about
you than me, I suppose.

And you *were* tossed out on those grounds. That much is indisputable,
as you cam crying on RAO like a kid who had his teddy bear snatched
away. I'll bet that stung for a while. You're the BizarroWorld Sally
Field.

[Arny Krueger]

"dave weil" > wrote in message

> On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 13:52:19 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>
>> "dave weil" > wrote in message
>>
>>> On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 09:34:25 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> "dave weil" > wrote in message
>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 08:49:00 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Nousaine" > wrote in message
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>> Best Living Pop/Rock Vocalists: IMO
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Male: Russell Smith
>>>>>>>> Ray Charles
>>>>>>>> C J Chenier
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Female: KD Lang
>>>>>>>> Ruthie Foster
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Who are Russell Smith and Ruthie Foster?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yustabe, are you really too stupid to look up her name in Google?
>>>>>
>>>>> So much for the art of conversation.
>>>>
>>>> It's alive and well in places where sadistic jerk-offs like you and
>>>> Yusatabe aren't.
>>>
>>> So, tell me Mr. Smarmy - how does *your* suggestion further the art
>>> of conversation?
>>
>> Weil, we're speaking in a forum that you routinely trash. Why don't
>> you further the art of conversation by either departing or cleaning
>> up your act?
>
> The rest of the group has been waiting for you to do JUST THAT.

Weil, "The group" being composed of whom? Please provide a complete list
their actual legal names and addresses. If you can't, it shows your/their
lack of good faith.

> Please avail yourself of that opportunity at the first available moment.

Noting that despite your hopes and dreams Weil, free speech is still the
rule on just about all of Usenet.

>>> How does it give Tom a chance to discuss the merits of
>>> Ruthie Foster (an artist that *I'm* not familiar with)?

>> I see no serious intent by Yustabe along those lines. If he was
>> serious, he would have done a little homework.

> Who cares what *you* see, you puffed-up, self-important little weasel
> <chuckle>?

You're obviously speaking for yourself, Weil.

>>> BTW, were you talking about RAH-E, a place you used to chide me
>>> about not posting at?

>> If you had a brain Weil, you could answer that question for
>> yourself. Since you lack the necessary equipment required to add two
>> and two and get four-point-zero I'll tell you explicitly: No.

> I guess that you're confused then.

Not at all, Weil. It would appear that you would be so highly confused that
I would propose that there be serious conversation on RAHE.

>>> Maybe I *should* post there, since they were smart
>>> enough to toss you out on your ass for being a disruptive and
>>> petulant child.


>> No, the disruptive and petulant children like Lavo and sockpuppet
>> Wheel still post there. Therefore, there's no evidence that anybody
>> has been tossed out on those grounds.

> Thank you for copying me.

Say what? Show the text that I allegedly copied?

>It's a dubious honor, but it says more about
> you than me, I suppose.

When you show the text that I allegedly copied, we can discuss this matter
further.

> And you *were* tossed out on those grounds.

Prove it. In fact the one public claim of an infraction on my part by a RAHE
moderator was thoroughly falsified. Furthermore the infraction that he
falsely accused me of was not punishable by exclusion. Furthermore, the RAHE
moderators never notified me that I was just excluded. They just programmed
their webot to throw away my posts without notice or explanation, as they
had been doing randomly for weeks and weeks.

> That much is indisputable,

Shows how poorly you understand the word "indisputable", Weil.

> as you cam crying on RAO like a kid who had his teddy bear snatched away.

I did no such thing.

>I'll bet that stung for a while.

Not at all. It was effectively a promotion.

> You're the BizarroWorld Sally

No mirrors in your house, eh Weil?

Got any more lies to tell?
> Field.

[dave weil]

On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 14:25:53 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>>> Weil, we're speaking in a forum that you routinely trash. Why don't
>>> you further the art of conversation by either departing or cleaning
>>> up your act?
>>
>> The rest of the group has been waiting for you to do JUST THAT.
>
>Weil, "The group" being composed of whom? Please provide a complete list
>their actual legal names and addresses. If you can't, it shows your/their
>lack of good faith.
>
>> Please avail yourself of that opportunity at the first available moment.
>
>Noting that despite your hopes and dreams Weil, free speech is still the
>rule on just about all of Usenet.

Hypocrisy noted!

[Arny Krueger]

"dave weil" > wrote in message

> On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 14:25:53 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>
>>>> Weil, we're speaking in a forum that you routinely trash. Why don't
>>>> you further the art of conversation by either departing or cleaning
>>>> up your act?
>>>
>>> The rest of the group has been waiting for you to do JUST THAT.
>>
>> Weil, "The group" being composed of whom? Please provide a complete
>> list their actual legal names and addresses. If you can't, it shows
>> your/their lack of good faith.

No relevant response.

[dave weil]

On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 14:25:53 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>Not at all, Weil. It would appear that you would be so highly confused that
>I would propose that there be serious conversation on RAHE.

Boy, *that's* certainly a change of opinion.

http://tinyurl.com/2wojl

(too much juicy stuff there to quote here...)

I especially *love* this one:

http://tinyurl.com/2845f

> > > "and too on topic and civil.
> > And you contribute to the civility around here exactly how? By calling
> > people idiots? Do you think that they'd tolerate that over there at
> > RAHE?
> You need to get out more. I have stuff on RAHE all the time.

The bottom line is that those who can, do and those who can't have
plenty of excuses".

I guess that you're now the one who *can't* and you've got plenty of
excuses. Plus, there's that great misplaced comma to chuckle at.

Then there's the previous lauding of RAH-E:

http://tinyurl.com/22lkl

"RAO is unique in terms of how extremely dysfunctional it is. RAO is
so dysfunctional that Usenet has even created two newsgroups whose
charters prohibit most if not all of the warfare on RAO, one
moderated (RAHE) and one not (AAE). Both are far more successful than
RAO, by most reasonable criteria".

Gotta love Google...

[S888Wheel]

>
>No, the disruptive and petulent children like Lavo and sockpuppet Wheel
>still post there. Therefore, there's no evidence that anybody has been
>tossed out on those grounds.
>

Here is a clue for you. None of the moderators have ever publically infered
that we were assholes. You can't catch a clue even when it bites you in the
ass.

[Arny Krueger]

"dave weil" > wrote in message

> On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 14:25:53 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>
>> Not at all, Weil. It would appear that you would be so highly
>> confused that I would propose that there be serious conversation on
>> RAHE.
>
> Boy, *that's* certainly a change of opinion.
>
> http://tinyurl.com/2wojl
>
> (too much juicy stuff there to quote here...)
>
> I especially *love* this one:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/2845f

Date: 2001-09-06 13:20:03 PST

Yet another one of David Weil's previously unwritten rules - you can't
change your opinions, even over a period of several years. OTOH, he can
change his whenever his bowels (or whatever he thinks with) move...

[Arny Krueger]

"S888Wheel" > wrote in message

>> No, the disruptive and petulant children like Lavo and sockpuppet
>> Wheel still post there. Therefore, there's no evidence that anybody
>> has been tossed out on those grounds.
>>
>
> Here is a clue for you. None of the moderators have ever publically
> infered that we were assholes.

I'm quite sure that the RAHE moderators have never publically infered
anything.

Nice job of obfuscating their private observations.

> You can't catch a clue even when it bites you in the ass.

I have sufficient inventory of clues that I don't need to catch any more at
the moment.

[dave weil]

On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 14:41:45 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>"dave weil" > wrote in message

>> On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 14:25:53 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
>> wrote:
>>
>>>>> Weil, we're speaking in a forum that you routinely trash. Why don't
>>>>> you further the art of conversation by either departing or cleaning
>>>>> up your act?
>>>>
>>>> The rest of the group has been waiting for you to do JUST THAT.
>>>
>>> Weil, "The group" being composed of whom? Please provide a complete
>>> list their actual legal names and addresses. If you can't, it shows
>>> your/their lack of good faith.
>
>No relevant response.
>
Just like there was no "relevant response" to your lies about my
MG-1s. So what?

[dave weil]

On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 14:49:38 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>"dave weil" > wrote in message

>> On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 14:25:53 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Not at all, Weil. It would appear that you would be so highly
>>> confused that I would propose that there be serious conversation on
>>> RAHE.
>>
>> Boy, *that's* certainly a change of opinion.
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/2wojl
>>
>> (too much juicy stuff there to quote here...)
>>
>> I especially *love* this one:
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/2845f
>
>Date: 2001-09-06 13:20:03 PST
>
>Yet another one of David Weil's previously unwritten rules - you can't
>change your opinions, even over a period of several years. OTOH, he can
>change his whenever his bowels (or whatever he thinks with) move...

Spoken just like the little boy expelled from the adults' table
because he was disruptive. "I didn't want to be here anyway!
WAHHHHHH!"

[Arny Krueger]

"dave weil" > wrote in message

> On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 14:49:38 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>
>> "dave weil" > wrote in message
>>
>>> On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 14:25:53 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Not at all, Weil. It would appear that you would be so highly
>>>> confused that I would propose that there be serious conversation on
>>>> RAHE.
>>>
>>> Boy, *that's* certainly a change of opinion.
>>>
>>> http://tinyurl.com/2wojl
>>>
>>> (too much juicy stuff there to quote here...)
>>>
>>> I especially *love* this one:
>>>
>>> http://tinyurl.com/2845f
>>
>> Date: 2001-09-06 13:20:03 PST
>>
>> Yet another one of David Weil's previously unwritten rules - you
>> can't change your opinions, even over a period of several years.
>> OTOH, he can change his whenever his bowels (or whatever he thinks
>> with) move...
>
> Spoken just like the little boy expelled from the adults' table
> because he was disruptive. "I didn't want to be here anyway!
> WAHHHHHH!"

That's just it Weil, RAHE long ago stopped being "the adults table". Its
just a place where a few lost golden ears are working out their denial phase
of grieving. The good news is that they are no longer doing it at my
expense.

[MINe 109]

In article >,
Lionel > wrote:

> > BEST LIVING FEMALE VOCALIST: Celine Deion

> Jeanne Lee.
> I will denied all "she died".
> For the septics listen again "After hours" with Mal Waldron.

If you're septic, please listen on a portable on the way to the
emergency room.

I had never heard of Jeanne Lee. I'll remember for hers next time I look
for used jazz recordings.

Of course, she *is* dead, unlike Dianne Reeves, Cassandra Wilson, etc.

Stephen

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
>
> > "Nousaine" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> Best Living Pop/Rock Vocalists: IMO
> >>
> >> Male: Russell Smith
> >> Ray Charles
> >> C J Chenier
> >>
> >> Female: KD Lang
> >> Ruthie Foster
> >>
> >>
> > Who are Russell Smith and Ruthie Foster?
>
> Yustabe, are you really too stupid to look up her name in Google?
>

I wanted to hear his opinion




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Michael McKelvy]

"Sandman" > wrote in message
...
> Listening to some music today, it occurred to me that some vocalists are
> head and shoulders above others.
>
> Think about who you really like listening to when he or she sings.
>
> Think about raw talent.
>
> Think about musical discipline.
>
> Think about stage presence.
>
> Think about overall performance.
>
> Think about purity and beauty of vocal performance.
>
> Think about pitch, tempo, and all those other "technical" things, but very
> basic to coming across as a good vocalist.
>
> MY CHOICES (HEAD AND SHOULDERS ABOVE THE REST):
>
> BEST LIVING MALE VOCALIST: Andrea Bocelli
>
> BEST LIVING FEMALE VOCALIST: Celine Deion
>
> Feel free to feel differently.
>
>
You've got to be ****ing kidding, right?

Jennifer Warnes is head and shoulders above Celine hogs the spotlight Dion.
There are somanny others that also come to mind, Kate Bush if she'd do more
mainstream stuff is also a strong contender.

Placido Domingo has more talent and understanding of his voice than Bocelli
will have if he lives to be 100.

[Michael McKelvy]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "dave weil" > wrote in message
>
> > On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 08:49:00 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
> >>
> >>> "Nousaine" > wrote in message
> >>> ...
> >>>> Best Living Pop/Rock Vocalists: IMO
> >>>>
> >>>> Male: Russell Smith
> >>>> Ray Charles
> >>>> C J Chenier
> >>>>
> >>>> Female: KD Lang
> >>>> Ruthie Foster
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> Who are Russell Smith and Ruthie Foster?
> >>
> >> Yustabe, are you really too stupid to look up her name in Google?
> >
> > So much for the art of conversation.
>
> It's alive and well in places where sadistic jerk-offs like you and
Yusatabe
> aren't.
>
>
Aww, c'mon Arny, lead by example.

[ScottW]

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> The Doofster said:
>
> > >Most Appallingly Awful Female Vocalist: Norah Jones
>
> > I hate to agree with a midget,
>
> No you don't. You know I'm right about nearly everything I say, but
> you're such an ornery little Kroo-loving putz that you pretend to know
> better without ever elaborating.
>
> For instance, I don't think there is such a thing as overpriced audio
> gear.

If the gear wasn't overpriced, why did you deal with an
ass like Trots and accept a lower cost?

ScotW

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

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

>You know I'm right about nearly everything I say,

That makes you abnormal.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Nousaine]

dave weil wrote:



>So, tell me Mr. Smarmy - how does *your* suggestion further the art of
>conversation? How does it give Tom a chance to discuss the merits of
>Ruthie Foster (an artist that *I'm* not familiar with)?
>

"Runaway Soul" Bluecorn Music. ruthiefoster.com

[Arny Krueger]

"Michael McKelvy" > wrote in message
hlink.net
> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "dave weil" > wrote in message
>>
>>> On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 08:49:00 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
>>>>
>>>>> "Nousaine" > wrote in message
>>>>> ...
>>>>>> Best Living Pop/Rock Vocalists: IMO
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Male: Russell Smith
>>>>>> Ray Charles
>>>>>> C J Chenier
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Female: KD Lang
>>>>>> Ruthie Foster
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Who are Russell Smith and Ruthie Foster?
>>>>
>>>> Yustabe, are you really too stupid to look up her name in Google?
>>>
>>> So much for the art of conversation.
>>
>> It's alive and well in places where sadistic jerk-offs like you and
>> Yusatabe aren't.
>>
>>
> Aww, c'mon Arny, lead by example.

I do. The majority of my posting efforts are put into real audio newsgroups,
not RAO.

[Arny Krueger]

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message


>You know I'm right about nearly everything I say,

Megalomania, your name is Middius.

[dave weil]

On 02 Mar 2004 03:04:45 GMT, (Nousaine) wrote:

> dave weil wrote:
>
>
>
>>So, tell me Mr. Smarmy - how does *your* suggestion further the art of
>>conversation? How does it give Tom a chance to discuss the merits of
>>Ruthie Foster (an artist that *I'm* not familiar with)?
>>
>
>"Runaway Soul" Bluecorn Music. ruthiefoster.com

Gee Tom, *that* was real helpful...

[dave weil]

On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 22:15:45 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>"George M. Middius" > wrote in message

>
>>You know I'm right about nearly everything I say,
>
>Megalomania, your name is Middius.

You can't even quote properly.

You'd screw up a wet dream, Arnold.

[Nousaine]

dave weil wrote:



>
>On 02 Mar 2004 03:04:45 GMT, (Nousaine) wrote:
>
>> dave weil wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>So, tell me Mr. Smarmy - how does *your* suggestion further the art of
>>>conversation? How does it give Tom a chance to discuss the merits of
>>>Ruthie Foster (an artist that *I'm* not familiar with)?
>>>
>>
>>"Runaway Soul" Bluecorn Music. ruthiefoster.com
>
>Gee Tom, *that* was real helpful...

OK ; ignore it. Just my opinion.

[dave weil]

On 02 Mar 2004 05:06:47 GMT, (Nousaine) wrote:

>dave weil wrote:
>
>
>
>>
>>On 02 Mar 2004 03:04:45 GMT, (Nousaine) wrote:
>>
>>> dave weil wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>So, tell me Mr. Smarmy - how does *your* suggestion further the art of
>>>>conversation? How does it give Tom a chance to discuss the merits of
>>>>Ruthie Foster (an artist that *I'm* not familiar with)?
>>>>
>>>
>>>"Runaway Soul" Bluecorn Music. ruthiefoster.com
>>
>>Gee Tom, *that* was real helpful...
>
>OK ; ignore it. Just my opinion.

Done.

[ScottW]

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> It must be terrible to OD on Dog Chow.
>
> > > The Doofster said:
> > >
> > > > >Most Appallingly Awful Female Vocalist: Norah Jones
> > >
> > > > I hate to agree with a midget,
> > >
> > > No you don't. You know I'm right about nearly everything I say, but
> > > you're such an ornery little Kroo-loving putz that you pretend to know
> > > better without ever elaborating.
> > >
> > > For instance, I don't think there is such a thing as overpriced audio
> > > gear.
>
> > If the gear wasn't overpriced, why did you deal with an
> > ass like Trots and accept a lower cost?
>
> Because you are able to out-stupid yourself every day of your life, I
> suppose.
>
> BTW, consensus is that duh-Mikey is about to shuffle off his mortal
> coil and he wants you to eat the rest of his bugs.

Come on George, if no price was too high why did you
go to Trotsky for your Lexicon?

In hindsight, do you regret it? Why not?

ScottW

[S888Wheel]

>
>I do. The majority of my posting efforts are put into real audio newsgroups,
>not RAO.

Given how much you have posted on RAO that is strong testimony to the assertion
that you live your life on Usenet.

[Arny Krueger]

"dave weil" > wrote in message

> On 02 Mar 2004 03:04:45 GMT, (Nousaine) wrote:
>
>> dave weil wrote:

>>> So, tell me Mr. Smarmy - how does *your* suggestion further the art
>>> of conversation? How does it give Tom a chance to discuss the
>>> merits of Ruthie Foster (an artist that *I'm* not familiar with)?
>>>
>>
>> "Runaway Soul" Bluecorn Music. ruthiefoster.com
>
> Gee Tom, *that* was real helpful...

So speaks RAO's bully and enforcer.

So, tell me Mr. Enforcer how does *your* comment further the art
of conversation around here?

[Arny Krueger]

"dave weil" > wrote in message


> On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 22:15:45 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:

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

>>> You know I'm right about nearly everything I say,

>> Megalomania, your name is Middius.

> You can't even quote properly.

> You'd screw up a wet dream, Arnold.

That would obviously be a far larger concern of yours than mine, Weil. You
ought to try having a long-term loving relationship with a member of the
opposite sex some time, Weil. It would help you with that problem!

[Arny Krueger]

"S888Wheel" > wrote in message

>> I do. The majority of my posting efforts are put into real audio
>> newsgroups, not RAO.
>
> Given how much you have posted on RAO that is strong testimony to the
> assertion that you live your life on Usenet.

Just another one of sockpuppet wheels gratuitous attacks on my work and
professional accomplishments.

[Lionel]

MINe 109 wrote:
> In article >,
> Lionel > wrote:
>
>
>>>BEST LIVING FEMALE VOCALIST: Celine Deion
>
>
>>Jeanne Lee.
>>I will denied all "she died".
>>For the septics listen again "After hours" with Mal Waldron.
>
>
> If you're septic, please listen on a portable on the way to the
> emergency room.
>
> I had never heard of Jeanne Lee. I'll remember for hers next time I look
> for used jazz recordings.
>
> Of course, she *is* dead, unlike Dianne Reeves, Cassandra Wilson, etc.

Ooops, skeptic/septic an interesting freudian slip. ;-)

BTW Stephen, if you like Mal Waldron piano I guess that you will love
Jeanne Lee voice. It's one of the most sensual mariage I've never heard.
http://www.allaboutjazz.com/reviews/r0903_063.htm

[Arny Krueger]

"dave weil" > wrote in message

> On 02 Mar 2004 05:06:47 GMT, (Nousaine) wrote:
>
>> dave weil wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> On 02 Mar 2004 03:04:45 GMT, (Nousaine) wrote:
>>>
>>>> dave weil wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> So, tell me Mr. Smarmy - how does *your* suggestion further the
>>>>> art of conversation? How does it give Tom a chance to discuss the
>>>>> merits of Ruthie Foster (an artist that *I'm* not familiar with)?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Runaway Soul" Bluecorn Music. ruthiefoster.com
>>>
>>> Gee Tom, *that* was real helpful...
>>
>> OK ; ignore it. Just my opinion.
>
> Done.

Bully Weil doesn't realize that Nousaine just did a number on him.

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Nousaine" > wrote in message
...
> dave weil wrote:
>
>
>
> >
> >On 02 Mar 2004 03:04:45 GMT, (Nousaine) wrote:
> >
> >> dave weil wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>So, tell me Mr. Smarmy - how does *your* suggestion further the art of
> >>>conversation? How does it give Tom a chance to discuss the merits of
> >>>Ruthie Foster (an artist that *I'm* not familiar with)?
> >>>
> >>
> >>"Runaway Soul" Bluecorn Music. ruthiefoster.com
> >
> >Gee Tom, *that* was real helpful...
>
> OK ; ignore it. Just my opinion.
>

I was trying to find out the basis of your opinion.
You mentioned interesting artists I knew about, and two I
didn't know about, so I would appreciate to know a little
about them, and why you like them.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "S888Wheel" > wrote in message
>
> >> I do. The majority of my posting efforts are put into real audio
> >> newsgroups, not RAO.
> >
> > Given how much you have posted on RAO that is strong testimony to the
> > assertion that you live your life on Usenet.
>
> Just another one of sockpuppet wheels gratuitous attacks on my work and
> professional accomplishments.
>
>

thanks for admitting that posting to Usent audio
groups is the total sum of your work and professional
accomplishments!




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Arny Krueger]

"Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message

> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "S888Wheel" > wrote in message
>>
>>>> I do. The majority of my posting efforts are put into real audio
>>>> newsgroups, not RAO.
>>>
>>> Given how much you have posted on RAO that is strong testimony to
>>> the assertion that you live your life on Usenet.
>>
>> Just another one of sockpuppet wheels gratuitous attacks on my work
>> and professional accomplishments.
>>
>>
>
> thanks for admitting that posting to Usent audio
> groups is the total sum of your work and professional
> accomplishments!

You're not lying, right Yustabe? You are really that stupid?

Sad.

[MINe 109]

In article >,
Lionel > wrote:

> MINe 109 wrote:
> > In article >,
> > Lionel > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>>BEST LIVING FEMALE VOCALIST: Celine Deion
> >
> >
> >>Jeanne Lee.
> >>I will denied all "she died".
> >>For the septics listen again "After hours" with Mal Waldron.
> >
> >
> > If you're septic, please listen on a portable on the way to the
> > emergency room.
> >
> > I had never heard of Jeanne Lee. I'll remember for hers next time I look
> > for used jazz recordings.
> >
> > Of course, she *is* dead, unlike Dianne Reeves, Cassandra Wilson, etc.
>
> Ooops, skeptic/septic an interesting freudian slip. ;-)
>
> BTW Stephen, if you like Mal Waldron piano I guess that you will love
> Jeanne Lee voice. It's one of the most sensual mariage I've never heard.
> http://www.allaboutjazz.com/reviews/r0903_063.htm

Thanks for the link. You have to love a "naked alto"! I found some
low-sound-quality audio here:

http://www.nprjazz.org/programs/jeannelee.html

Stephen

[dave weil]

On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 21:53:13 -0800, "ScottW" >
wrote:

>> BTW, consensus is that duh-Mikey is about to shuffle off his mortal
>> coil and he wants you to eat the rest of his bugs.
>
>Come on George, if no price was too high why did you
>go to Trotsky for your Lexicon?
>
>In hindsight, do you regret it? Why not?

Since you seem to be insistant, I'd say that George paid exactly what
the lexicon was worth to him, so it wasn't overpriced at all. And it
was a used unit. If you're trying to imply that the retail price was
"too high", there are thousands of people who didn't find it
overpriced at that price. The only overpriced item is one that
*nobody* buys.

I'm surprised that someone has to explain this simple capitalistic
concept to such a perceptive capitalists as you.

[dave weil]

On Tue, 2 Mar 2004 04:05:55 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>"dave weil" > wrote in message

>> On 02 Mar 2004 03:04:45 GMT, (Nousaine) wrote:
>>
>>> dave weil wrote:
>
>>>> So, tell me Mr. Smarmy - how does *your* suggestion further the art
>>>> of conversation? How does it give Tom a chance to discuss the
>>>> merits of Ruthie Foster (an artist that *I'm* not familiar with)?
>>>>
>>>
>>> "Runaway Soul" Bluecorn Music. ruthiefoster.com
>>
>> Gee Tom, *that* was real helpful...
>
>So speaks RAO's bully and enforcer.
>
>So, tell me Mr. Enforcer how does *your* comment further the art
>of conversation around here?

How does yours. Mr. Bully?

(Yeah, I can play your IKWYABWAI game too).

[dave weil]

On Tue, 2 Mar 2004 04:07:33 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>"dave weil" > wrote in message

>
>> On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 22:15:45 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
>> wrote:
>
>>> "George M. Middius" > wrote in message
>>>
>
>>>> You know I'm right about nearly everything I say,
>
>>> Megalomania, your name is Middius.
>
>> You can't even quote properly.

Lack of response noted.

[dave weil]

On Tue, 2 Mar 2004 06:55:23 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>"dave weil" > wrote in message

>> On 02 Mar 2004 05:06:47 GMT, (Nousaine) wrote:
>>
>>> dave weil wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 02 Mar 2004 03:04:45 GMT, (Nousaine) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> dave weil wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> So, tell me Mr. Smarmy - how does *your* suggestion further the
>>>>>> art of conversation? How does it give Tom a chance to discuss the
>>>>>> merits of Ruthie Foster (an artist that *I'm* not familiar with)?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Runaway Soul" Bluecorn Music. ruthiefoster.com
>>>>
>>>> Gee Tom, *that* was real helpful...
>>>
>>> OK ; ignore it. Just my opinion.
>>
>> Done.
>
>Bully Weil doesn't realize that Nousaine just did a number on him.

Obviously you are too dumb to recognize the job that *I* did on him.

I love the new nickname, Arnold. Bully for you! Now hand over the
lunch money and shut up.

[S888Wheel]

>
>Bully Weil doesn't realize that Nousaine just did a number on him.
>

Nah. Dave doesn't pretend to be familiar with music he has never heard and
knows nothing about. How is that Fold es Eg CD Arny?

[S888Wheel]

>>> I do. The majority of my posting efforts are put into real audio
>>> newsgroups, not RAO.
>>
>> Given how much you have posted on RAO that is strong testimony to the
>> assertion that you live your life on Usenet.
>
>Just another one of sockpuppet wheels gratuitous attacks on my work and
>professional accomplishments.
>

Do you have any idea how funny this is?

[Arny Krueger]

"S888Wheel" > wrote in message

>>>> I do. The majority of my posting efforts are put into real audio
>>>> newsgroups, not RAO.
>>>
>>> Given how much you have posted on RAO that is strong testimony to
>>> the assertion that you live your life on Usenet.
>>
>> Just another one of sockpuppet wheels gratuitous attacks on my work
>> and professional accomplishments.
>>
>
> Do you have any idea how funny this is?

I know that I can force you into a fit of paranoia by simply asking you
about your life and professional accomplishments.

[S888Wheel]

>>>>> I do. The majority of my posting efforts are put into real audio
>>>>> newsgroups, not RAO.
>>>>
>>>> Given how much you have posted on RAO that is strong testimony to
>>>> the assertion that you live your life on Usenet.
>>>
>>> Just another one of sockpuppet wheels gratuitous attacks on my work
>>> and professional accomplishments.
>>>
>>
>> Do you have any idea how funny this is?
>
>I know that I can force you into a fit of paranoia by simply asking you
>about your life and professional accomplishments.
>

Obviously you don't. It is all flying over your head. Get back to me when you
have developed the skills to do a Google search and the smarts to catch clues
as they slap you in the face in regards to my occupation and accoplishments.
No, keep yapping. It is more entertaining to see you make an ass of yourself.

[Arny Krueger]

"S888Wheel" > wrote in message

>>>>>> I do. The majority of my posting efforts are put into real audio
>>>>>> newsgroups, not RAO.
>>>>>
>>>>> Given how much you have posted on RAO that is strong testimony to
>>>>> the assertion that you live your life on Usenet.
>>>>
>>>> Just another one of sockpuppet wheels gratuitous attacks on my
>>>> work and professional accomplishments.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Do you have any idea how funny this is?
>>
>> I know that I can force you into a fit of paranoia by simply asking
>> you about your life and professional accomplishments.
>>
>
> Obviously you don't. It is all flying over your head. Get back to me
> when you have developed the skills to do a Google search and the
> smarts to catch clues as they slap you in the face in regards to my
> occupation and accoplishments.

I'm quite sure you have no accoplishments, sockpuppet wheel.


The fact that you want to make a big puzzle out of your occupation and
professional accomplishments shows that you have plenty to hide, sockpuppet
wheel. It allows you to avoid taking responsibility for your actions. If you
were a man, you'd just say what you had to say.

> No, keep yapping.

The more you run and hide, the more you indict yourself.

>It is more entertaining to see you make an ass of yourself.

Thanks for the fine example of how to make an ass out of yourself,
sockpuppet wheel.

[S888Wheel]

>
>>
>> Obviously you don't. It is all flying over your head. Get back to me
>> when you have developed the skills to do a Google search and the
>> smarts to catch clues as they slap you in the face in regards to my
>> occupation and accoplishments.
>
>I'm quite sure you have no accoplishments, sockpuppet wheel.
>
>

You are quite sure of a lot of your stupid beliefs.


>
>The fact that you want to make a big puzzle out of your occupation and
>professional accomplishments shows that you have plenty to hide, sockpuppet
>wheel.

No. it shows that I don't feed sociopaths with personal information. It also
allows us to laugh at your stupidity. One might think that is cruel until one
gets to know what an asshole you are.


>It allows you to avoid taking responsibility for your actions. If you
>were a man, you'd just say what you had to say.
>

I do say what I have to say. WTF does keeping personal information away from
one sociopath have to do with taking responsibilities for my actions? Are you
really that detatched from reality that you think not telling you my occupation
somehow relieves me from taking responsibility for my actions?


>
>> No, keep yapping.
>
>The more you run and hide, the more you indict yourself.
>

Keep up the show. It is funny.


>
>>It is more entertaining to see you make an ass of yourself.
>
>Thanks for the fine example of how to make an ass out of yourself,
>sockpuppet wheel.

"I know you are but what am I?" And you were just whining about maturity.
Pathetic.

[Arny Krueger]

"S888Wheel" > wrote in message

>>> Obviously you don't. It is all flying over your head. Get back to me
>>> when you have developed the skills to do a Google search and the
>>> smarts to catch clues as they slap you in the face in regards to my
>>> occupation and accoplishments.
>>
>> I'm quite sure you have no accoplishments, sockpuppet wheel.

> You are quite sure of a lot of your stupid beliefs.

You have far more of your own, theres far less substantiationf or them, and
you're far more agressive about spewing them all over RAO.


>> The fact that you want to make a big puzzle out of your occupation
>> and professional accomplishments shows that you have plenty to hide,
>> sockpuppet wheel.

> No. it shows that I don't feed sociopaths with personal information.

We're not talking about personal information, we're talking about
information that is given out casually.

What do you do for a living? I flog computers.

It's the kind of routine decent conversation that you admit that you are too
paranoid and full of self-doubt to participate in.

> It also allows us to laugh at your stupidity.

This *us* would be you and your multiple personalities? Please provide the
legal names and addresses of who this *us* is, sockpuppet. If you can't,
then they are obviously figments of your imagination.

> One might think that is
> cruel until one gets to know what an asshole you are.

I'm a heck of a nice guy, friendly and helpful to all who deserve it, and
many who don't.

>> It allows you to avoid taking responsibility for your actions. If you
>> were a man, you'd just say what you had to say.

> I do say what I have to say.

No you don't. You've admittied that you are caught in the grip of paranoia,
and that you fear that revealing ordinary casual information will cause you
great harm.

>WTF does keeping personal information
> away from one sociopath have to do with taking responsibilities for
> my actions?

Because the so-called sociopath is a figument of your overheated paranoid
imagination, sockpuppet. There is no sociopath, just like there is no
pedophile that your close friend Marc Phillips obsesses over. You're quite
the pair, one more cowardly and fearful than the other.

>Are you really that detatched from reality that you think
> not telling you my occupation somehow relieves me from taking
> responsibility for my actions?

I'm quite sure that I am not detatched from reality.

>>> No, keep yapping.

>> The more you run and hide, the more you indict yourself.

> Keep up the show. It is funny.

Hyenas laugh more sensibly than you do, sockpuppet.

>>> It is more entertaining to see you make an ass of yourself.

>> Thanks for the fine example of how to make an ass out of yourself,
>> sockpuppet wheel.

> "I know you are but what am I?" And you were just whining about
> maturity. Pathetic.

You are so pathetic that you quake and quiver in fear that I might learn
what your occupation is. I'm guessing it's something like male prostitute.

[dave weil]

On Tue, 2 Mar 2004 16:01:31 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>
>"S888Wheel" > wrote in message

>>>> Obviously you don't. It is all flying over your head. Get back to me
>>>> when you have developed the skills to do a Google search and the
>>>> smarts to catch clues as they slap you in the face in regards to my
>>>> occupation and accoplishments.
>>>
>>> I'm quite sure you have no accoplishments, sockpuppet wheel.
>
>> You are quite sure of a lot of your stupid beliefs.
>
>You have far more of your own, theres far less substantiationf or them, and
>you're far more agressive about spewing them all over RAO.

In English please.

>What do you do for a living? I flog computers.

Why am I not surprised? Do you use a cat 'o nine tails or do you use
poplar branches? Do you then stab it through the side with a letter
opener? How about the crown 'o thorns? Do you use a hybrid tea, or are
you more enlightened and use a bourbon rose?

<snip>

>No you don't. You've admittied

Is this some sort of odd S&M fantasy, Arnold? How does your wife feel
about this?

>>WTF does keeping personal information
>> away from one sociopath have to do with taking responsibilities for
>> my actions?

>Because the so-called sociopath is a figument

Let's just stop right there, Dr. Grammar.

>>Are you really that detatched from reality that you think
>> not telling you my occupation somehow relieves me from taking
>> responsibility for my actions?

>I'm quite sure that I am not detatched from reality.

No, it's just a "figument" of your imagination.

<snip>

<snip>

>> "I know you are but what am I?" And you were just whining about
>> maturity. Pathetic.

>You are so pathetic that you quake and quiver in fear that I might
>learn what your occupation is. I'm guessing it's something like male prostitute.

Wishful thinking, I suppose.

[S888Wheel]

>>>> Obviously you don't. It is all flying over your head. Get back to me
>>>> when you have developed the skills to do a Google search and the
>>>> smarts to catch clues as they slap you in the face in regards to my
>>>> occupation and accoplishments.
>>>
>>> I'm quite sure you have no accoplishments, sockpuppet wheel.
>
>> You are quite sure of a lot of your stupid beliefs.
>
>You have far more of your own, theres far less substantiationf or them, and
>you're far more agressive about spewing them all over RAO.
>

Prove it.

>
>>> The fact that you want to make a big puzzle out of your occupation
>>> and professional accomplishments shows that you have plenty to hide,
>>> sockpuppet wheel.
>
>> No. it shows that I don't feed sociopaths with personal information.
>
>We're not talking about personal information, we're talking about
>information that is given out casually.

Guess you are too stupid to understand the nature of personal information.

>
>What do you do for a living? I flog computers.

An interesting claim.

>
>It's the kind of routine decent conversation that you admit that you are too
>paranoid and full of self-doubt to participate in.
>

I do not have routine decent conversations with sociopaths. Like I said, I have
told others who have asked. You also keep ignoring the entertainment factor
that some of get in seeing you struggle over something so accessable given all
the clues Art gave you. I actually emailed Art complaining that he was giving
out too much information. He replied with his assurance that you were too
stupid to pick up on such obvious clues. He was right. You turned out to be
even more stupid than I had earlier thought.

>
>> It also allows us to laugh at your stupidity.
>
>This *us* would be you and your multiple personalities?

No. It would be a number of other RAO regulars. I guess you are too stupid to
get the fact that they are reading these posts and laughing their asses off.

> Please provide the
>legal names and addresses of who this *us* is, sockpuppet. If you can't,
>then they are obviously figments of your imagination.

What do you need addresses for Arny. Are you going to stalk them?

>
>> One might think that is
>> cruel until one gets to know what an asshole you are.
>
>I'm a heck of a nice guy,

Bull****


> friendly and helpful to all who deserve it, and
>many who don't.

More bull****.

>
>>> It allows you to avoid taking responsibility for your actions. If you
>>> were a man, you'd just say what you had to say.
>
>> I do say what I have to say.
>
>No you don't.

Yes I do.

>You've admittied that you are caught in the grip of paranoia,
>and that you fear that revealing ordinary casual information will cause you
>great harm.

Nope. Never made any such admissions. I am getting some good cheap
entertainment at your expense though.

>
>
>>WTF does keeping personal information
>> away from one sociopath have to do with taking responsibilities for
>> my actions?
>
>Because the so-called sociopath is a figument of your overheated paranoid
>imagination, sockpuppet.

Nope.

>There is no sociopath,

Maybe you just act like one on RAO. That is evidence enough for me to not feed
you personal information. Honestly, why should I tell you anything about me?
Give me one reaonable logical reason. Lets see if you can accomplish that.

> just like there is no
>pedophile that your close friend Marc Phillips obsesses over.

I was unaware that Marc was obsessing over anyone.

> You're quite
>the pair, one more cowardly and fearful than the other.

I bet one of us is more fearful than the other. What are the chances of finding
two people with exactly the same threshold of fear? About the same as you
saying something intelegent.

>
>>Are you really that detatched from reality that you think
>> not telling you my occupation somehow relieves me from taking
>> responsibility for my actions?
>
>I'm quite sure that I am not detatched from reality.

Like I said. Your are sure of a lot of your own stupid beliefs.


>
>>>> No, keep yapping.
>
>>> The more you run and hide, the more you indict yourself.
>
>> Keep up the show. It is funny.
>
>Hyenas laugh more sensibly than you do, sockpuppet.

No Arny. The most sensible way to deal with you is to laugh at you.

>
>>>> It is more entertaining to see you make an ass of yourself.
>
>>> Thanks for the fine example of how to make an ass out of yourself,
>>> sockpuppet wheel.
>
>> "I know you are but what am I?" And you were just whining about
>> maturity. Pathetic.
>
>You are so pathetic

Try comming up with an original thought.


>you quake and quiver in fear

No I laugh in your general direction.


>I might learn
>what your occupation is.

If you had half a brain you would have figured it out long ago.


>I'm guessing it's something like male prostitute.
>

That is the sort of guess I would expect from a sociopath with no imagination.
Listen to that group Fold es Eg lately? Do you realize just how much you are
laughed at here? I doubt it. If you did you couldn't be so funny.

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
>
> > "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> "S888Wheel" > wrote in message
> >>
> >>>> I do. The majority of my posting efforts are put into real audio
> >>>> newsgroups, not RAO.
> >>>
> >>> Given how much you have posted on RAO that is strong testimony to
> >>> the assertion that you live your life on Usenet.
> >>
> >> Just another one of sockpuppet wheels gratuitous attacks on my work
> >> and professional accomplishments.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > thanks for admitting that posting to Usent audio
> > groups is the total sum of your work and professional
> > accomplishments!
>
> You're not lying, right Yustabe? You are really that stupid?
>
I'm only that stupid when I am directly imitating you.
God, you are so pathetically stupid. You are calling yourself
stupid, and are too stupid to realize it.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...

> You are so pathetic that you quake and quiver in fear that I might learn
> what your occupation is. I'm guessing it's something like male prostitute.
>

Still shoveling.......somebody throw the man a rope




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[ScottW]

"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 21:53:13 -0800, "ScottW" >
> wrote:
>
> >> BTW, consensus is that duh-Mikey is about to shuffle off his mortal
> >> coil and he wants you to eat the rest of his bugs.
> >
> >Come on George, if no price was too high why did you
> >go to Trotsky for your Lexicon?
> >
> >In hindsight, do you regret it? Why not?
>
> Since you seem to be insistant, I'd say that George paid exactly what
> the lexicon was worth to him, so it wasn't overpriced at all.

Try that logic with the local dealer whose price George
shunned and turned to the grey market instead.
You do realize Trots was violating the rules
by selling out his region?

> And it
> was a used unit. If you're trying to imply that the retail price was
> "too high", there are thousands of people who didn't find it
> overpriced at that price. The only overpriced item is one that
> *nobody* buys.

Ridiculous. The overprice point is set by the biggest
fool with the most money?
Overpriced or not is an individual judgement
all consumers make everyday including George.
He clearly is full of bull when he states that such a situation
never exists.
>
> I'm surprised that someone has to explain this simple capitalistic
> concept to such a perceptive capitalists as you.

Should I use this grammatical error to obfuscate now?
No, I should simply point out that your socialist
viewpoint actually strips freedom from individual consumers
to decide if a price is acceptable or not.

ScottW

[dave weil]

On Tue, 2 Mar 2004 15:51:18 -0800, "ScottW" >
wrote:

>
>"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
>> On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 21:53:13 -0800, "ScottW" >
>> wrote:
>>
>> >> BTW, consensus is that duh-Mikey is about to shuffle off his mortal
>> >> coil and he wants you to eat the rest of his bugs.
>> >
>> >Come on George, if no price was too high why did you
>> >go to Trotsky for your Lexicon?
>> >
>> >In hindsight, do you regret it? Why not?
>>
>> Since you seem to be insistant, I'd say that George paid exactly what
>> the lexicon was worth to him, so it wasn't overpriced at all.
>
> Try that logic with the local dealer whose price George
>shunned and turned to the grey market instead.

If a dealer wants to take action, they're welcome to. If you want to
report Greg, you're welcome to. I don't know what kind of dealer
arrangements that lexicon has with their network. They certainly don't
condone selling "using the Internet", so perhaps you could say that
there was a 'technical violation" and yet, a private sale outside of
Mr. Signh's region might not be considered a "foul" if it was
initiation based on e-mail conversations. That would be up to Lexicon
to determine. Friends sell items to friends all of the time. It's one
of those sweetheart deals that goes on. Is it right? I dunno. However,
if *I* were a dealer and wanted to do a friend a favor, I don't think
I would be all that troubled, *UNLESS* it was specifically forbidden
by contract.

>You do realize Trots was violating the rules
>by selling out his region?

I'm not sure he was. Are you? Here's what Lexicon has to say on their
website:

"Important Notice Regarding Authorized Dealers and Internet Fraud
The Harman Specialty Group only sells its products to authorized
retailers in the United States and maintains a legal agreement with
each retailer to ensure that the products are properly represented and
supported. As part of this agreement, the retailers are NOT permitted
to sell or solicit sales through the use of the Internet or World Wide
Web. If you are interested in our products and have located a
"authorized retailer" selling them on the Internet, please be
cautious. We have been made aware of a few situations in which
customers were defrauded of large sums of money by someone posing as
an "authorized retailer," when in fact they had no affiliation with
the Harman Specialty Group. If you have any questions about the status
of a retailer, please contact us before making any payment or
providing credit card information".

As I noted, you *might* be able to make a case that the sale was
"internet driven" because the contact originally occured through the
internet. However, Greg didn't advertise this item freely on the
internet. This wasn't the case of moving product through the web. It
was a one-off deal between friends. My point is, I'm not sure that you
can make the case that this was a case of "selling through the
internet"", as most of us recognize that phrase. Also, note that their
main concern is "fake" dealers selling product.

>> And it
>> was a used unit.

I was wrong about this.

>If you're trying to imply that the retail price was
>> "too high", there are thousands of people who didn't find it
>> overpriced at that price. The only overpriced item is one that
>> *nobody* buys.
>
> Ridiculous. The overprice point is set by the biggest
>fool with the most money?

Well, in a capitalistic society and, in a word, yes. If someone wants
to buy a $20,000 wris****ch, they are free too, even though I might
think that it's an obscene use of resources.

Are you a bloody Communist or something? <chuckle>

>Overpriced or not is an individual judgement

EXACTLY. That's the point.

> all consumers make everyday including George.
> He clearly is full of bull when he states that such a situation
> never exists.

I agree that it *might* exist. If nobody (and by nobody, I mean "not
enough people to make the manufacture and sale of an item profitable)
buys something, then, yes, likely it's "overpriced". This could also
apply to a $2.00 bar of soap. I just don't feel that it's an
exclusive province of "high-end" audo. I'm sure that Pioneer has
offered some cheap "overpriced" items occasionally.

>> I'm surprised that someone has to explain this simple capitalistic
>> concept to such a perceptive capitalists as you.
>
> Should I use this grammatical error to obfuscate now?

If you are Arnold, then I guess that it would be appropriate.

> No, I should simply point out that your socialist
> viewpoint actually strips freedom from individual consumers
> to decide if a price is acceptable or not.

ARE YOU NUTS??!!?? It's *your* comments that do exactly that. The
marketplace determines the amount that a price will float to. Not you
and not me, with the caveat that it's actually indeed us that
determine it by our willingness to purchase such products. If a WAMM
speaker is too expensive ( read overpriced), nobody (see above) will
buy it.

[ScottW]

"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 2 Mar 2004 15:51:18 -0800, "ScottW" >
> wrote:
>
> >
> >"dave weil" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 21:53:13 -0800, "ScottW" >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >> BTW, consensus is that duh-Mikey is about to shuffle off his mortal
> >> >> coil and he wants you to eat the rest of his bugs.
> >> >
> >> >Come on George, if no price was too high why did you
> >> >go to Trotsky for your Lexicon?
> >> >
> >> >In hindsight, do you regret it? Why not?
> >>
> >> Since you seem to be insistant, I'd say that George paid exactly what
> >> the lexicon was worth to him, so it wasn't overpriced at all.
> >
> > Try that logic with the local dealer whose price George
> >shunned and turned to the grey market instead.
>
> If a dealer wants to take action, they're welcome to. If you want to
> report Greg, you're welcome to. I don't know what kind of dealer
> arrangements that lexicon has with their network. They certainly don't
> condone selling "using the Internet", so perhaps you could say that
> there was a 'technical violation" and yet, a private sale outside of
> Mr. Signh's region might not be considered a "foul" if it was
> initiation based on e-mail conversations. That would be up to Lexicon
> to determine. Friends sell items to friends all of the time. It's one
> of those sweetheart deals that goes on. Is it right? I dunno. However,
> if *I* were a dealer and wanted to do a friend a favor, I don't think
> I would be all that troubled, *UNLESS* it was specifically forbidden
> by contract.
>
> >You do realize Trots was violating the rules
> >by selling out his region?
>
> I'm not sure he was. Are you?

Pretty sure. This is old news that was covered
long ago. Trots pretty much accepted it was
in technical violation but used the "friends"
clause. Then George stabbed him in the back,
according to Trots.

> Here's what Lexicon has to say on their
> website:
>
> "Important Notice Regarding Authorized Dealers and Internet Fraud
> The Harman Specialty Group only sells its products to authorized
> retailers in the United States and maintains a legal agreement with
> each retailer to ensure that the products are properly represented and
> supported. As part of this agreement, the retailers are NOT permitted
> to sell or solicit sales through the use of the Internet or World Wide
> Web. If you are interested in our products and have located a
> "authorized retailer" selling them on the Internet, please be
> cautious. We have been made aware of a few situations in which
> customers were defrauded of large sums of money by someone posing as
> an "authorized retailer," when in fact they had no affiliation with
> the Harman Specialty Group. If you have any questions about the status
> of a retailer, please contact us before making any payment or
> providing credit card information".
>
> As I noted, you *might* be able to make a case that the sale was
> "internet driven" because the contact originally occured through the
> internet. However, Greg didn't advertise this item freely on the
> internet. This wasn't the case of moving product through the web. It
> was a one-off deal between friends. My point is, I'm not sure that you
> can make the case that this was a case of "selling through the
> internet"", as most of us recognize that phrase. Also, note that their
> main concern is "fake" dealers selling product.
>
> >> And it
> >> was a used unit.
>
> I was wrong about this.
>
> >If you're trying to imply that the retail price was
> >> "too high", there are thousands of people who didn't find it
> >> overpriced at that price. The only overpriced item is one that
> >> *nobody* buys.
> >
> > Ridiculous. The overprice point is set by the biggest
> >fool with the most money?
>
> Well, in a capitalistic society and, in a word, yes.

Only for products the producer only wants to sell one of.
Aside from Jupiter Audio, how many companies engage
in this philosophy? There are a few but they aren't the norm.

> If someone wants
> to buy a $20,000 wris****ch, they are free too, even though I might
> think that it's an obscene use of resources.

Then the watchmaker closes his doors as his market is exhausted.

>
> Are you a bloody Communist or something? <chuckle>

I am a bloody realist <s******>.
>
> >Overpriced or not is an individual judgement
>
> EXACTLY. That's the point.
>
> > all consumers make everyday including George.
> > He clearly is full of bull when he states that such a situation
> > never exists.
>
> I agree that it *might* exist.

I think you and George need to get this straight.
You both appear to be in fundamental agreement with me.

> If nobody (and by nobody, I mean "not
> enough people to make the manufacture and sale of an item profitable)

strange definition of nobody.

> buys something, then, yes, likely it's "overpriced". This could also
> apply to a $2.00 bar of soap. I just don't feel that it's an
> exclusive province of "high-end" audo. I'm sure that Pioneer has
> offered some cheap "overpriced" items occasionally.
>
> >> I'm surprised that someone has to explain this simple capitalistic
> >> concept to such a perceptive capitalists as you.
> >
> > Should I use this grammatical error to obfuscate now?
>
> If you are Arnold, then I guess that it would be appropriate.
>
> > No, I should simply point out that your socialist
> > viewpoint actually strips freedom from individual consumers
> > to decide if a price is acceptable or not.
>
> ARE YOU NUTS??!!?? It's *your* comments that do exactly that. The
> marketplace determines the amount that a price will float to. Not you
> and not me, with the caveat that it's actually indeed us that
> determine it by our willingness to purchase such products. If a WAMM
> speaker is too expensive ( read overpriced), nobody (see above) will
> buy it.

No, if it's too expensive - I won't buy it. I'll look to another product.
A million other people can buy all they want and it won't change
my perspective.
You seem to be in conflict with yourself. You acknowledge the
individual choice of the consumer on the value of a product
and then deny that choice if the "marketplace" differs.

All this is really irrelevant. George had access to 2 (or more
Lexicons). Obviously, the locally available unit was overpriced
(and the salesman an even bigger ass than Trots, which is hard to
imagine) to him as he chose to go elsewhere.
I guess we could even define dealing with asshole salemen a
cost above and beyond the dollar cost.
George spouted off with some idealism which in his typical fashion,
he didn't think through.

ScottW

[dave weil]

On Tue, 2 Mar 2004 17:10:16 -0800, "ScottW" >
wrote:

>
>"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
>> On Tue, 2 Mar 2004 15:51:18 -0800, "ScottW" >
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"dave weil" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >> On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 21:53:13 -0800, "ScottW" >
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >> BTW, consensus is that duh-Mikey is about to shuffle off his mortal
>> >> >> coil and he wants you to eat the rest of his bugs.
>> >> >
>> >> >Come on George, if no price was too high why did you
>> >> >go to Trotsky for your Lexicon?
>> >> >
>> >> >In hindsight, do you regret it? Why not?
>> >>
>> >> Since you seem to be insistant, I'd say that George paid exactly what
>> >> the lexicon was worth to him, so it wasn't overpriced at all.
>> >
>> > Try that logic with the local dealer whose price George
>> >shunned and turned to the grey market instead.
>>
>> If a dealer wants to take action, they're welcome to. If you want to
>> report Greg, you're welcome to. I don't know what kind of dealer
>> arrangements that lexicon has with their network. They certainly don't
>> condone selling "using the Internet", so perhaps you could say that
>> there was a 'technical violation" and yet, a private sale outside of
>> Mr. Signh's region might not be considered a "foul" if it was
>> initiation based on e-mail conversations. That would be up to Lexicon
>> to determine. Friends sell items to friends all of the time. It's one
>> of those sweetheart deals that goes on. Is it right? I dunno. However,
>> if *I* were a dealer and wanted to do a friend a favor, I don't think
>> I would be all that troubled, *UNLESS* it was specifically forbidden
>> by contract.
>>
>> >You do realize Trots was violating the rules
>> >by selling out his region?
>>
>> I'm not sure he was. Are you?
>
> Pretty sure. This is old news that was covered
>long ago. Trots pretty much accepted it was
>in technical violation but used the "friends"
>clause. Then George stabbed him in the back,
>according to Trots.

As *I* said, you *might* be able to call 'technical violation" but
only Lexicon can determine whether they forbid "sweetheart deals"
between friends. I seriously doubt that they would mind (and I've been
in the business). There's usually latitude regarding such one on one
deals. It happens all of the time.

>> Here's what Lexicon has to say on their
>> website:
>>
>> "Important Notice Regarding Authorized Dealers and Internet Fraud
>> The Harman Specialty Group only sells its products to authorized
>> retailers in the United States and maintains a legal agreement with
>> each retailer to ensure that the products are properly represented and
>> supported. As part of this agreement, the retailers are NOT permitted
>> to sell or solicit sales through the use of the Internet or World Wide
>> Web. If you are interested in our products and have located a
>> "authorized retailer" selling them on the Internet, please be
>> cautious. We have been made aware of a few situations in which
>> customers were defrauded of large sums of money by someone posing as
>> an "authorized retailer," when in fact they had no affiliation with
>> the Harman Specialty Group. If you have any questions about the status
>> of a retailer, please contact us before making any payment or
>> providing credit card information".
>>
>> As I noted, you *might* be able to make a case that the sale was
>> "internet driven" because the contact originally occured through the
>> internet. However, Greg didn't advertise this item freely on the
>> internet. This wasn't the case of moving product through the web. It
>> was a one-off deal between friends. My point is, I'm not sure that you
>> can make the case that this was a case of "selling through the
>> internet"", as most of us recognize that phrase. Also, note that their
>> main concern is "fake" dealers selling product.

No response. I hate to "pull a Krueger", but I suspect that the reason
that you didn't reply to this is that you recognize that in the
marketplace, stuff like this happens all of the time and isn't really
considered a 'violation". They are trying to keep people from
"marketeing and selling" products o the general public out of their
areas, not trying to keep a friend from selling to a friend.

>> >> And it
>> >> was a used unit.
>>
>> I was wrong about this.
>>
>> >If you're trying to imply that the retail price was
>> >> "too high", there are thousands of people who didn't find it
>> >> overpriced at that price. The only overpriced item is one that
>> >> *nobody* buys.
>> >
>> > Ridiculous. The overprice point is set by the biggest
>> >fool with the most money?
>>
>> Well, in a capitalistic society and, in a word, yes.
>
>Only for products the producer only wants to sell one of.

No. Only for products that a producer wants to *make a profit* from

>Aside from Jupiter Audio, how many companies engage
>in this philosophy? There are a few but they aren't the norm.

Why bring in Jupiter Audio? If he only sells 200 pairs of speakers in
a year, he can probably make a pretty good living. If JBL sold that
many, it would *probably* be considered a failure. It's all about
economies of scale and bottom line profits.

>> If someone wants
>> to buy a $20,000 wris****ch, they are free too, even though I might
>> think that it's an obscene use of resources.
>
>Then the watchmaker closes his doors as his market is exhausted.

No he doesn't, because there are enough people who are willing to buy
such watches to make a company quite successful. Rolex is a very
successful company, and yet their cheapest watch is probably a couple
of thousand dollars. that's *still* about $1800 more than I think
someone should pay for a watch. Does that mean that the cheapest Rolex
is "overpriced"? Of course not. I'll bet that I think that the car you
drive is "overpriced". Does it make it so?

>> Are you a bloody Communist or something? <chuckle>
>
> I am a bloody realist <s******>.

Apparently not a capitalistic realist though.

>> >Overpriced or not is an individual judgement
>>
>> EXACTLY. That's the point.
>>
>> > all consumers make everyday including George.
>> > He clearly is full of bull when he states that such a situation
>> > never exists.
>>
>> I agree that it *might* exist.
>
>I think you and George need to get this straight.

I don't think so. George has his own opinions.

>You both appear to be in fundamental agreement with me.

No I don't.

>> If nobody (and by nobody, I mean "not
>> enough people to make the manufacture and sale of an item profitable)
>
> strange definition of nobody.

Whatever you say. I realize that you don't understand idiom, but
that's *your* problem, not mine.

>> buys something, then, yes, likely it's "overpriced". This could also
>> apply to a $2.00 bar of soap. I just don't feel that it's an
>> exclusive province of "high-end" audo. I'm sure that Pioneer has
>> offered some cheap "overpriced" items occasionally.
>>
>> >> I'm surprised that someone has to explain this simple capitalistic
>> >> concept to such a perceptive capitalists as you.
>> >
>> > Should I use this grammatical error to obfuscate now?
>>
>> If you are Arnold, then I guess that it would be appropriate.
>>
>> > No, I should simply point out that your socialist
>> > viewpoint actually strips freedom from individual consumers
>> > to decide if a price is acceptable or not.
>>
>> ARE YOU NUTS??!!?? It's *your* comments that do exactly that. The
>> marketplace determines the amount that a price will float to. Not you
>> and not me, with the caveat that it's actually indeed us that
>> determine it by our willingness to purchase such products. If a WAMM
>> speaker is too expensive ( read overpriced), nobody (see above) will
>> buy it.
>
>No, if it's too expensive - I won't buy it.

And that's fine. It only means that it's overpriced *to you*. To a
truly wealthy person, it might be a steal. That's the point.

> I'll look to another product.

And that's what capitalism is all about. However, there's someone else
standing around with their pocketbook open. It's not overpriced to
*them*. It's all relative. And also, a millionaire might find a $2.00
bar of soap oeverpriced. It's all about the ratio between function and
price.

>A million other people can buy all they want and it won't change
>my perspective.

But it's only *your* perception. It's ot a universal perception. Your
SUV would be an overpriced extravagance to me. Does that mean that
Chevy is selling "overpriced goods"? I don't think so.

>You seem to be in conflict with yourself.

Hardly.

>You acknowledge the individual choice of the consumer on the value of a product
>and then deny that choice if the "marketplace" differs.

No, I don't deny that "choice". I'm saying that it's all relative and
that it's the marketplace that decides whether a product is
'overpriced".

>All this is really irrelevant. George had access to 2 (or more
>Lexicons). Obviously, the locally available unit was overpriced
>(and the salesman an even bigger ass than Trots, which is hard to
>imagine) to him as he chose to go elsewhere.

And you can't separate the "more of an ass" part from the transaction.
If he had been a better salesman, George would have bought from him.
That doesn't mean that the product was 'overpriced".

>I guess we could even define dealing with asshole salemen a
>cost above and beyond the dollar cost.

Well, yes. That's obvious.

>George spouted off with some idealism which in his typical fashion,
>he didn't think through.

No sir, it's *you* who haven't thought your position through. If you
were a radical anarchist, I wouldn't say that. But you are a
Republican apologist with more money than brains and, as such, you
aren't toeing the party line. Please turn in your American flag lapel
pin immediately.

[ScottW]

"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 2 Mar 2004 17:10:16 -0800, "ScottW" >
> wrote:
>
> >
> >"dave weil" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> On Tue, 2 Mar 2004 15:51:18 -0800, "ScottW" >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >"dave weil" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> >> On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 21:53:13 -0800, "ScottW" >
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >> BTW, consensus is that duh-Mikey is about to shuffle off his
mortal
> >> >> >> coil and he wants you to eat the rest of his bugs.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Come on George, if no price was too high why did you
> >> >> >go to Trotsky for your Lexicon?
> >> >> >
> >> >> >In hindsight, do you regret it? Why not?
> >> >>
> >> >> Since you seem to be insistant, I'd say that George paid exactly
what
> >> >> the lexicon was worth to him, so it wasn't overpriced at all.
> >> >
> >> > Try that logic with the local dealer whose price George
> >> >shunned and turned to the grey market instead.
> >>
> >> If a dealer wants to take action, they're welcome to. If you want to
> >> report Greg, you're welcome to. I don't know what kind of dealer
> >> arrangements that lexicon has with their network. They certainly don't
> >> condone selling "using the Internet", so perhaps you could say that
> >> there was a 'technical violation" and yet, a private sale outside of
> >> Mr. Signh's region might not be considered a "foul" if it was
> >> initiation based on e-mail conversations. That would be up to Lexicon
> >> to determine. Friends sell items to friends all of the time. It's one
> >> of those sweetheart deals that goes on. Is it right? I dunno. However,
> >> if *I* were a dealer and wanted to do a friend a favor, I don't think
> >> I would be all that troubled, *UNLESS* it was specifically forbidden
> >> by contract.
> >>
> >> >You do realize Trots was violating the rules
> >> >by selling out his region?
> >>
> >> I'm not sure he was. Are you?
> >
> > Pretty sure. This is old news that was covered
> >long ago. Trots pretty much accepted it was
> >in technical violation but used the "friends"
> >clause. Then George stabbed him in the back,
> >according to Trots.
>
> As *I* said, you *might* be able to call 'technical violation" but
> only Lexicon can determine whether they forbid "sweetheart deals"
> between friends. I seriously doubt that they would mind (and I've been
> in the business). There's usually latitude regarding such one on one
> deals. It happens all of the time.
>
> >> Here's what Lexicon has to say on their
> >> website:
> >>
> >> "Important Notice Regarding Authorized Dealers and Internet Fraud
> >> The Harman Specialty Group only sells its products to authorized
> >> retailers in the United States and maintains a legal agreement with
> >> each retailer to ensure that the products are properly represented and
> >> supported. As part of this agreement, the retailers are NOT permitted
> >> to sell or solicit sales through the use of the Internet or World Wide
> >> Web. If you are interested in our products and have located a
> >> "authorized retailer" selling them on the Internet, please be
> >> cautious. We have been made aware of a few situations in which
> >> customers were defrauded of large sums of money by someone posing as
> >> an "authorized retailer," when in fact they had no affiliation with
> >> the Harman Specialty Group. If you have any questions about the status
> >> of a retailer, please contact us before making any payment or
> >> providing credit card information".
> >>
> >> As I noted, you *might* be able to make a case that the sale was
> >> "internet driven" because the contact originally occured through the
> >> internet. However, Greg didn't advertise this item freely on the
> >> internet. This wasn't the case of moving product through the web. It
> >> was a one-off deal between friends. My point is, I'm not sure that you
> >> can make the case that this was a case of "selling through the
> >> internet"", as most of us recognize that phrase. Also, note that their
> >> main concern is "fake" dealers selling product.
>
> No response. I hate to "pull a Krueger", but I suspect that the reason
> that you didn't reply to this is that you recognize that in the
> marketplace, stuff like this happens all of the time and isn't really
> considered a 'violation". They are trying to keep people from
> "marketeing and selling" products o the general public out of their
> areas, not trying to keep a friend from selling to a friend.

Yeah, it could also be that it isn't that critical to the core
point that George was being hypocritical.
You do remember what this was all about, don't you?
>
> >> >> And it
> >> >> was a used unit.
> >>
> >> I was wrong about this.
> >>
> >> >If you're trying to imply that the retail price was
> >> >> "too high", there are thousands of people who didn't find it
> >> >> overpriced at that price. The only overpriced item is one that
> >> >> *nobody* buys.
> >> >
> >> > Ridiculous. The overprice point is set by the biggest
> >> >fool with the most money?
> >>
> >> Well, in a capitalistic society and, in a word, yes.
> >
> >Only for products the producer only wants to sell one of.
>
> No. Only for products that a producer wants to *make a profit* from
>
> >Aside from Jupiter Audio, how many companies engage
> >in this philosophy? There are a few but they aren't the norm.
>
> Why bring in Jupiter Audio? If he only sells 200 pairs of speakers in
> a year, he can probably make a pretty good living. If JBL sold that
> many, it would *probably* be considered a failure. It's all about
> economies of scale and bottom line profits.

No, it's all about value and how many fools Trots can rip off.

How about the ridiculous 1 sale makes a profit product like
the ridiculously expensive cables whose material content is worth
at most a few hundred, yet sell for 4 figures?

>
> >> If someone wants
> >> to buy a $20,000 wris****ch, they are free too, even though I might
> >> think that it's an obscene use of resources.
> >
> >Then the watchmaker closes his doors as his market is exhausted.
>
> No he doesn't, because there are enough people who are willing to buy
> such watches to make a company quite successful. Rolex is a very
> successful company, and yet their cheapest watch is probably a couple
> of thousand dollars. that's *still* about $1800 more than I think
> someone should pay for a watch. Does that mean that the cheapest Rolex
> is "overpriced"? Of course not. I'll bet that I think that the car you
> drive is "overpriced". Does it make it so?

No, that would a contradiction. If it was overpriced, I wouldn't
be driving it. I would be driving something else.
>
> >> Are you a bloody Communist or something? <chuckle>
> >
> > I am a bloody realist <s******>.
>
> Apparently not a capitalistic realist though.

A capitalistic realist with a consumer perspective.
If it's overpriced I don't have to buy it, I can go
elsewhere.
>
> >> >Overpriced or not is an individual judgement
> >>
> >> EXACTLY. That's the point.
> >>
> >> > all consumers make everyday including George.
> >> > He clearly is full of bull when he states that such a situation
> >> > never exists.
> >>
> >> I agree that it *might* exist.
> >
> >I think you and George need to get this straight.
>
> I don't think so. George has his own opinions.
>
> >You both appear to be in fundamental agreement with me.
>
> No I don't.
>
> >> If nobody (and by nobody, I mean "not
> >> enough people to make the manufacture and sale of an item profitable)
> >
> > strange definition of nobody.
>
> Whatever you say. I realize that you don't understand idiom, but
> that's *your* problem, not mine.

Your use of a single word in gross deviation from it's
accepted meaning cannot be written of as an idiom. Sorry.

>
> >> buys something, then, yes, likely it's "overpriced". This could also
> >> apply to a $2.00 bar of soap. I just don't feel that it's an
> >> exclusive province of "high-end" audo. I'm sure that Pioneer has
> >> offered some cheap "overpriced" items occasionally.
> >>
> >> >> I'm surprised that someone has to explain this simple capitalistic
> >> >> concept to such a perceptive capitalists as you.
> >> >
> >> > Should I use this grammatical error to obfuscate now?
> >>
> >> If you are Arnold, then I guess that it would be appropriate.
> >>
> >> > No, I should simply point out that your socialist
> >> > viewpoint actually strips freedom from individual consumers
> >> > to decide if a price is acceptable or not.
> >>
> >> ARE YOU NUTS??!!?? It's *your* comments that do exactly that. The
> >> marketplace determines the amount that a price will float to. Not you
> >> and not me, with the caveat that it's actually indeed us that
> >> determine it by our willingness to purchase such products. If a WAMM
> >> speaker is too expensive ( read overpriced), nobody (see above) will
> >> buy it.
> >
> >No, if it's too expensive - I won't buy it.
>
> And that's fine. It only means that it's overpriced *to you*. To a
> truly wealthy person, it might be a steal. That's the point.

Exactly, and we were talking about George and if he ever
found anything overpriced. A situation he claims doesn't exist.
>
> > I'll look to another product.
>
> And that's what capitalism is all about. However, there's someone else
> standing around with their pocketbook open. It's not overpriced to
> *them*. It's all relative. And also, a millionaire might find a $2.00
> bar of soap oeverpriced. It's all about the ratio between function and
> price.
>
> >A million other people can buy all they want and it won't change
> >my perspective.
>
> But it's only *your* perception. It's ot a universal perception. Your
> SUV would be an overpriced extravagance to me. Does that mean that
> Chevy is selling "overpriced goods"? I don't think so.

We were talking about one individual perspective.

>
> >You seem to be in conflict with yourself.
>
> Hardly.
>
> >You acknowledge the individual choice of the consumer on the value of a
product
> >and then deny that choice if the "marketplace" differs.
>
> No, I don't deny that "choice". I'm saying that it's all relative and
> that it's the marketplace that decides whether a product is
> 'overpriced".

And I say it is the individual.
Can we agree to disagree?

>
> >All this is really irrelevant. George had access to 2 (or more
> >Lexicons). Obviously, the locally available unit was overpriced
> >(and the salesman an even bigger ass than Trots, which is hard to
> >imagine) to him as he chose to go elsewhere.
>
> And you can't separate the "more of an ass" part from the transaction.
> If he had been a better salesman, George would have bought from him.
> That doesn't mean that the product was 'overpriced".

Except when the deal was revealed George indicated that the salesman
was an ass and Trots gave him a great deal.
I don't think George has as big a problem with asses as you think he does.
>
> >I guess we could even define dealing with asshole salemen a
> >cost above and beyond the dollar cost.
>
> Well, yes. That's obvious.
>
> >George spouted off with some idealism which in his typical fashion,
> >he didn't think through.
>
> No sir, it's *you* who haven't thought your position through. If you
> were a radical anarchist, I wouldn't say that. But you are a
> Republican apologist with more money than brains and, as such, you
> aren't toeing the party line. Please turn in your American flag lapel
> pin immediately.

It's stuck to my badge and won't come off.

BTW, I wrote in Pat Buchanan on my republican ballot today.

ScottW

[dave weil]

On Tue, 2 Mar 2004 21:00:20 -0800, "ScottW" >
wrote:

>I'll bet that I think that the car you
>> drive is "overpriced". Does it make it so?
>
> No, that would a contradiction. If it was overpriced, I wouldn't
>be driving it. I would be driving something else.

But *I* think it's overpriced. Therefore, according to your logic, it
*must* be overpriced because *someone* thinks it's overpriced.

You lose.

Again.

Sorry.

[dave weil]

On Tue, 2 Mar 2004 21:00:20 -0800, "ScottW" >
wrote:

>> No, I don't deny that "choice". I'm saying that it's all relative and
>> that it's the marketplace that decides whether a product is
>> 'overpriced".
>
> And I say it is the individual.
> Can we agree to disagree?

But then, you just accepted that your car is overpriced,. Right?

[dave weil]

On Tue, 2 Mar 2004 21:00:20 -0800, "ScottW" >
wrote:

>BTW, I wrote in Pat Buchanan on my republican ballot today.

That figures.

But it's a free country.

[ScottW]

"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 2 Mar 2004 21:00:20 -0800, "ScottW" >
> wrote:
>
> >I'll bet that I think that the car you
> >> drive is "overpriced". Does it make it so?
> >
> > No, that would a contradiction. If it was overpriced, I wouldn't
> >be driving it. I would be driving something else.
>
> But *I* think it's overpriced. Therefore, according to your logic, it
> *must* be overpriced because *someone* thinks it's overpriced.
>
> You lose.
>
> Again.
>
> Sorry.

It would be overpriced to you and if you had said that
no car is ever overpriced, you would be FOS, again.

ScottW

[ScottW]

"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 2 Mar 2004 21:00:20 -0800, "ScottW" >
> wrote:
>
> >> No, I don't deny that "choice". I'm saying that it's all relative and
> >> that it's the marketplace that decides whether a product is
> >> 'overpriced".
> >
> > And I say it is the individual.
> > Can we agree to disagree?
>
> But then, you just accepted that your car is overpriced,. Right?

Right, thats why I leased it.

ScottW

[ScottW]

"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 2 Mar 2004 21:00:20 -0800, "ScottW" >
> wrote:
>
> >BTW, I wrote in Pat Buchanan on my republican ballot today.
>
> That figures.
>
> But it's a free country.

Yup, I'm also boycotting Exxon/Mobil
and encourage anyone else in Ca. to join
the boycott. Their gas is overpriced.

ScottW

[Arny Krueger]

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message

> dave weil said:
>
>>> You are so pathetic that you quake and quiver in fear that I might
>>> learn what your occupation is. I'm guessing it's something like
>>> male prostitute.
>>
>> Wishful thinking, I suppose.
>
> I'll bet even a middle-aged hustler would make more money than Krooger
> does with his "flogging".

So George, speaking from personal experience, what does a middle-aged
hustler make?

[Arny Krueger]

"Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message

> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>> You are so pathetic that you quake and quiver in fear that I might
>> learn what your occupation is. I'm guessing it's something like male
>> prostitute.
>>
>
> Still shoveling.......somebody throw the man a rope

Given that you're being used as a standard of brainlessness by these guys,
why help them?

[Marc Phillips]

Arny said:

>"Michael McKelvy" > wrote in message
hlink.net
>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> "dave weil" > wrote in message
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 08:49:00 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
>>>>>
>>>>>> "Nousaine" > wrote in message
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> Best Living Pop/Rock Vocalists: IMO
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Male: Russell Smith
>>>>>>> Ray Charles
>>>>>>> C J Chenier
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Female: KD Lang
>>>>>>> Ruthie Foster
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Who are Russell Smith and Ruthie Foster?
>>>>>
>>>>> Yustabe, are you really too stupid to look up her name in Google?
>>>>
>>>> So much for the art of conversation.
>>>
>>> It's alive and well in places where sadistic jerk-offs like you and
>>> Yusatabe aren't.
>>>
>>>
>> Aww, c'mon Arny, lead by example.
>
>I do. The majority of my posting efforts are put into real audio newsgroups,
>not RAO.

Too bad the moderators reject most of your efforts, eh?

Boon

[Arny Krueger]

"Marc Phillips" > wrote in message

> Arny said:
>
>> "Michael McKelvy" > wrote in message
>> hlink.net
>>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> "dave weil" > wrote in message
>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 08:49:00 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Nousaine" > wrote in message
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>> Best Living Pop/Rock Vocalists: IMO
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Male: Russell Smith
>>>>>>>> Ray Charles
>>>>>>>> C J Chenier
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Female: KD Lang
>>>>>>>> Ruthie Foster
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Who are Russell Smith and Ruthie Foster?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yustabe, are you really too stupid to look up her name in Google?
>>>>>
>>>>> So much for the art of conversation.
>>>>
>>>> It's alive and well in places where sadistic jerk-offs like you and
>>>> Yusatabe aren't.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Aww, c'mon Arny, lead by example.
>>
>> I do. The majority of my posting efforts are put into real audio
>> newsgroups, not RAO.
>
> Too bad the moderators reject most of your efforts, eh?

Shows how ignorant and out-of-date you are, Phillips. I haven't posted to a
moderated group this year. Any fool who knows how to use google could figure
that out in a few seconds.

Typical of your trolling style, Phillips. Post the most ludicrous thing and
see if I'll correct you.

[dave weil]

On Tue, 2 Mar 2004 21:14:50 -0800, "ScottW" >
wrote:

>
>"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
>> On Tue, 2 Mar 2004 21:00:20 -0800, "ScottW" >
>> wrote:
>>
>> >I'll bet that I think that the car you
>> >> drive is "overpriced". Does it make it so?
>> >
>> > No, that would a contradiction. If it was overpriced, I wouldn't
>> >be driving it. I would be driving something else.
>>
>> But *I* think it's overpriced. Therefore, according to your logic, it
>> *must* be overpriced because *someone* thinks it's overpriced.
>>
>> You lose.
>>
>> Again.
>>
>> Sorry.
>
> It would be overpriced to you and if you had said that
>no car is ever overpriced, you would be FOS, again.

But the fact that it's overpriced *to me* doesn't make it overpriced
in general terms, and that's what George was talking about, and you
know it.

If you take *your* view, then every single thing in the marketplace is
"overpriced" because you can always find a single person that thinks
it costs too much and who would jump at the chance to buy it cheaper
(including your "overpriced" cell phones).

So, taking this tack of yours means that you can *never* say that
anything is perfectly priced. and that's just stupid because economics
isn't about what each person thinks of a price but it's about the
*marketplace*.

[Arny Krueger]

"dave weil" > wrote in message



> But the fact that it's overpriced *to me* doesn't make it overpriced
> in general terms, and that's what George was talking about, and you
> know it.

That's immediately obvious from George's most immediate post to this thread:

George M. Middius" > wrote in message


> I am astonished. The Terrierdork accidentally figured out reality.

> Who is feeding you your smegma today, Dorkie? The rule is supposed to
> be "Give Scottie enough to wind him up but not enough so he can
> possibly make any sense."

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "George M. Middius" > wrote in message
>
> > dave weil said:
> >
> >>> You are so pathetic that you quake and quiver in fear that I might
> >>> learn what your occupation is. I'm guessing it's something like
> >>> male prostitute.
> >>
> >> Wishful thinking, I suppose.
> >
> > I'll bet even a middle-aged hustler would make more money than Krooger
> > does with his "flogging".
>
> So George, speaking from personal experience, what does a middle-aged
> hustler make?
>

Thinking about coming out of retirement?




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
>
> > "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >
> >> You are so pathetic that you quake and quiver in fear that I might
> >> learn what your occupation is. I'm guessing it's something like male
> >> prostitute.
> >>
> >
> > Still shoveling.......somebody throw the man a rope
>
> Given that you're being used as a standard of brainlessness by these guys,
> why help them?
>
>

After you finished diggin the hole, we're gonna fill it in. Better figure
out
how to get out of it right now.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Arny Krueger]

"Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message

> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "George M. Middius" > wrote in message
>>
>>> dave weil said:
>>>
>>>>> You are so pathetic that you quake and quiver in fear that I might
>>>>> learn what your occupation is. I'm guessing it's something like
>>>>> male prostitute.
>>>>
>>>> Wishful thinking, I suppose.
>>>
>>> I'll bet even a middle-aged hustler would make more money than
>>> Krooger does with his "flogging".
>>
>> So George, speaking from personal experience, what does a middle-aged
>> hustler make?
>>
>
> Thinking about coming out of retirement?

You're the one who says that he is retiring, Yustabe.

[Arny Krueger]

"Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message

> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
>>
>>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>
>>>> You are so pathetic that you quake and quiver in fear that I might
>>>> learn what your occupation is. I'm guessing it's something like
>>>> male prostitute.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Still shoveling.......somebody throw the man a rope
>>
>> Given that you're being used as a standard of brainlessness by these
>> guys, why help them?
>>
>>
>
> After you finished diggin the hole, we're gonna fill it in. Better
> figure out how to get out of it right now.

<I love it when the victim doesn't even know that it is trapped.>

[Arny Krueger]

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message

> Sockpuppet Yustabe said:
>
>>>> I'll bet even a middle-aged hustler would make more money than
>>>> Krooger does with his "flogging".
>
>>> So George, speaking from personal experience, what does a
>>> middle-aged hustler make?
>
>> Thinking about coming out of retirement?
>
> Arnii loves to downplay his sordid past. But he left a trail of
> evidence:
>
> "When I was 15 a man who seemed nice, suggested that I do a few
> things with him, and "I'd never go back to women"."

Good thing I knew how to just say no. How much later in life did you learn
that lesson, Middius? 25? 35?

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
>
> > "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
> >>
> >>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> >>> ...
> >>>
> >>>> You are so pathetic that you quake and quiver in fear that I might
> >>>> learn what your occupation is. I'm guessing it's something like
> >>>> male prostitute.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Still shoveling.......somebody throw the man a rope
> >>
> >> Given that you're being used as a standard of brainlessness by these
> >> guys, why help them?
> >>
> >>
> >
> > After you finished diggin the hole, we're gonna fill it in. Better
> > figure out how to get out of it right now.
>
> <I love it when the victim doesn't even know that it is trapped.>
>
>

Arny, you are so unbeleivebly ****ing stupid.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Arny Krueger]

"Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message

> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
>>
>>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
>>>>
>>>>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>>> You are so pathetic that you quake and quiver in fear that I
>>>>>> might learn what your occupation is. I'm guessing it's something
>>>>>> like male prostitute.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Still shoveling.......somebody throw the man a rope
>>>>
>>>> Given that you're being used as a standard of brainlessness by
>>>> these guys, why help them?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> After you finished diggin the hole, we're gonna fill it in. Better
>>> figure out how to get out of it right now.
>>
>> <I love it when the victim doesn't even know that it is trapped.>
>>
>>
>
> Arny, you are so unbeleivebly ****ing stupid.
>

Obvoiusly Yustabe this is what you think is "anothe clue".

Too bad about the remidial writing class and how it totally failed.

[S888Wheel]

>
>>> You are so pathetic that you quake and quiver in fear that I might
>>> learn what your occupation is. I'm guessing it's something like male
>>> prostitute.
>>>
>>
>> Still shoveling.......somebody throw the man a rope
>
>Given that you're being used as a standard of brainlessness by these guys,
>why help them?
>

The jokes just keep going over Arny's head. More popcorn please.

[S888Wheel]

>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
>>>
>>>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>>> You are so pathetic that you quake and quiver in fear that I might
>>>>> learn what your occupation is. I'm guessing it's something like
>>>>> male prostitute.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Still shoveling.......somebody throw the man a rope
>>>
>>> Given that you're being used as a standard of brainlessness by these
>>> guys, why help them?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> After you finished diggin the hole, we're gonna fill it in. Better
>> figure out how to get out of it right now.
>
><I love it when the victim doesn't even know that it is trapped.>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

You have no idea how funny that is do you?

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
>
> > "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
> >>
> >>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> >>> ...
> >>>> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
> >>>>
> >>>>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> >>>>> ...
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> You are so pathetic that you quake and quiver in fear that I
> >>>>>> might learn what your occupation is. I'm guessing it's something
> >>>>>> like male prostitute.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Still shoveling.......somebody throw the man a rope
> >>>>
> >>>> Given that you're being used as a standard of brainlessness by
> >>>> these guys, why help them?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> After you finished diggin the hole, we're gonna fill it in. Better
> >>> figure out how to get out of it right now.
> >>
> >> <I love it when the victim doesn't even know that it is trapped.>
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Arny, you are so unbeleivebly ****ing stupid.
> >
>
> Obvoiusly Yustabe this is what you think is "anothe clue".
>
> Too bad about the remidial writing class and how it totally failed.
>

I am sure you will claim that you typed 'remidial' on purpose!




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[S888Wheel]

>
>Obvoiusly Yustabe this is what you think is "anothe clue".

He slaps you in the face with them on a regular basis and we all get a good
laugh.

[dave weil]

On Wed, 3 Mar 2004 10:47:02 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>Too bad about the remidial writing class and how it totally failed.

What's a "remidial writing class"? There's no such thing, right?

Ahhh delicious irony! We must all give props to Arnold for his
continual source of amusement. Why someone would want to play the
idiot time after tme is something only known to Arnold and his Maker,
I guess.

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 3 Mar 2004 10:47:02 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>
> >Too bad about the remidial writing class and how it totally failed.
>
> What's a "remidial writing class"? There's no such thing, right?
>
> Ahhh delicious irony! We must all give props to Arnold for his
> continual source of amusement. Why someone would want to play the
> idiot time after tme is something only known to Arnold and his Maker,
> I guess.

His Maker? Well, nobody is perfect.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Arny Krueger]

"S888Wheel" > wrote in message

>> Obvoiusly Yustabe this is what you think is "anothe clue".
>
> He slaps you in the face with them on a regular basis and we all get
> a good laugh.

He can't do squat, not even give his proper name.

[Arny Krueger]

"S888Wheel" > wrote in message


> You have no idea how funny that is do you?

I know that small minds can be driven into uncontrollable laughter by the
smallest things. The shoe seems to fit you.

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "S888Wheel" > wrote in message
>
> >> Obvoiusly Yustabe this is what you think is "anothe clue".
> >
> > He slaps you in the face with them on a regular basis and we all get
> > a good laugh.
>
> He can't do squat, not even give his proper name.
>

Cut the crap, you know my name.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "S888Wheel" > wrote in message
>
>
> > You have no idea how funny that is do you?
>
> I know that small minds can be driven into uncontrollable laughter by the
> smallest things. The shoe seems to fit you.
>

Arny, all you are reduced to is whining about typos.
That is the extent of your intellect.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Arny Krueger]

"Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message


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

>> "S888Wheel" > wrote in message
>>
>>>> Obviously Yustabe this is what you think is "another clue".
>
>>> He slaps you in the face with them on a regular basis and we all get
>>> a good laugh.

>> He can't do squat, not even give his proper name.

> Cut the crap, you know my name.

I know the name you sometimes give. However, given all of the other lies you
tell routinely, I don't know why you should be granted *any* credibility.

[Arny Krueger]

"Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message


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

>> "S888Wheel" > wrote in message
>>

>>> You have no idea how funny that is do you?

>> I know that small minds can be driven into uncontrollable laughter
>> by the smallest things. The shoe seems to fit you.

> Arny, all you are reduced to is whining about typos.

As if that wasn't another one of your lies.

> That is the extent of your intellect.

As if that isn't another one of your lies.

You've got a track record for making some of the most inane and
poorly-informed comments ever made on RAO. That's saying a lot! Even Middius
laughs at you, and for good cause.

[S888Wheel]

>
>> You have no idea how funny that is do you?
>
>I know that small minds can be driven into uncontrollable laughter by the
>smallest things. The shoe seems to fit you.

The jokes keep right on going over your head.

[S888Wheel]

>>>>> Obviously Yustabe this is what you think is "another clue".
>>
>>>> He slaps you in the face with them on a regular basis and we all get
>>>> a good laugh.
>
>>> He can't do squat, not even give his proper name.
>
>> Cut the crap, you know my name.
>
>I know the name you sometimes give. However, given all of the other lies you
>tell routinely, I don't know why you should be granted *any* credibility.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Pass the Redvines please.

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
>
>
> > "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> > ...
>
> >> "S888Wheel" > wrote in message
> >>
> >>>> Obviously Yustabe this is what you think is "another clue".
> >
> >>> He slaps you in the face with them on a regular basis and we all get
> >>> a good laugh.
>
> >> He can't do squat, not even give his proper name.
>
> > Cut the crap, you know my name.
>
> I know the name you sometimes give. However, given all of the other lies
you
> tell routinely, I don't know why you should be granted *any* credibility.
>

the paranoia runs deep.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Arny Krueger]

"Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message

> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
>>
>>
>>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>
>>>> "S888Wheel" > wrote in message
>>>>
>>>>>> Obviously Yustabe this is what you think is "another clue".
>>>
>>>>> He slaps you in the face with them on a regular basis and we all
>>>>> get a good laugh.
>>
>>>> He can't do squat, not even give his proper name.
>>
>>> Cut the crap, you know my name.
>>
>> I know the name you sometimes give. However, given all of the other
>> lies
> you
>> tell routinely, I don't know why you should be granted *any*
>> credibility.
>>
>
> the paranoia runs deep.

So deep that Yustabe and sockpuppet wheel need to back each other up.

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
>
> > "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
> >>
> >>
> >>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> >>> ...
> >>
> >>>> "S888Wheel" > wrote in message
> >>>>
> >>>>>> Obviously Yustabe this is what you think is "another clue".
> >>>
> >>>>> He slaps you in the face with them on a regular basis and we all
> >>>>> get a good laugh.
> >>
> >>>> He can't do squat, not even give his proper name.
> >>
> >>> Cut the crap, you know my name.
> >>
> >> I know the name you sometimes give. However, given all of the other
> >> lies
> > you
> >> tell routinely, I don't know why you should be granted *any*
> >> credibility.
> >>
> >
> > the paranoia runs deep.
>
> So deep that Yustabe and sockpuppet wheel need to back each other up.
>
IDIOT, you brought up the subject of my name.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[S888Wheel]

>
>Do the nominees have to be alive? I'd much prefer one to be dead. I'd
>have to go for voices that move me: Stevie Wonder (especially his old
>stuff) and Roy Orbison. My wife's voice also makes me cry, but that's
>another story.

Stevie Wonder is dead?

[Marc Phillips]

Arny said:

>"Marc Phillips" > wrote in message

>> Arny said:
>>
>>> "Michael McKelvy" > wrote in message
>>> hlink.net
>>>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>> "dave weil" > wrote in message
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 08:49:00 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Nousaine" > wrote in message
>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>> Best Living Pop/Rock Vocalists: IMO
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Male: Russell Smith
>>>>>>>>> Ray Charles
>>>>>>>>> C J Chenier
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Female: KD Lang
>>>>>>>>> Ruthie Foster
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Who are Russell Smith and Ruthie Foster?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yustabe, are you really too stupid to look up her name in Google?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So much for the art of conversation.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's alive and well in places where sadistic jerk-offs like you and
>>>>> Yusatabe aren't.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Aww, c'mon Arny, lead by example.
>>>
>>> I do. The majority of my posting efforts are put into real audio
>>> newsgroups, not RAO.
>>
>> Too bad the moderators reject most of your efforts, eh?
>
>Shows how ignorant and out-of-date you are, Phillips. I haven't posted to a
>moderated group this year. Any fool who knows how to use google could figure
>that out in a few seconds.
>
>Typical of your trolling style, Phillips. Post the most ludicrous thing and
>see if I'll correct you.

Thanks Krueger for admitting that your posts can only get through on moderated
newsgroups.

Boon

[Marc Phillips]

Arny said:

>The shoe seem to fit you.

So do you stupidity.

Boon

[Marc Phillips]

Yusty Coke Drinker said:

>On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 04:02:13 GMT, "Sandman" >
>wrote:
>
>>Feel free to feel differently.
>
>I do. Celine Dion makes my ears bleed, and I abhor all that wavy hand
>so-so-so-sincere gesturing she does when she sings. I would like to
>kill her, when I'm done with my wife.
>
>Do the nominees have to be alive? I'd much prefer one to be dead. I'd
>have to go for voices that move me: Stevie Wonder (especially his old
>stuff) and Roy Orbison. My wife's voice also makes me cry, but that's
>another story.

How about Marvin Gaye, mother****er?

Boon

[Marc Phillips]

S888Wheel said:

>Stevie Wonder is dead?
>

After "Songs in the Key of Life," yeah, pretty much.

Boon

[Arny Krueger]

"Marc Phillips" > wrote in message

> Arny said:
>
>> The shoe seem to fit you.
>
> So do you stupidity.

Wow Phillips, I'll bet that this sentence would have gotten you an "A" in
your English composition classes.

[Arny Krueger]

"Marc Phillips" > wrote in message


> Thanks Krueger for admitting that your posts can only get through on
> moderated newsgroups.


He's clearly lost it, folks. Total meltdown.

[Marc Phillips]

Arny said:

>"Marc Phillips" > wrote in message

>
>> Thanks Krueger for admitting that your posts can only get through on
>> moderated newsgroups.
>
>
>He's clearly lost it, folks. Total meltdown.

Thanks Krueger for admitting how clear your meltdown is to everyone.

Boon

[Marc Phillips]

Arny said:

>"Marc Phillips" > wrote in message

>> Arny said:
>>
>>> The shoe seem to fit you.
>>
>> So do you stupidity.
>
>Wow Phillips, I'll bet that this sentence would have gotten you an "A" in
>your English composition classes.

Thanks Krueger for admitting that you're impressed with people who got As in
English.

Boon

[MINe 109]

In article >,
(Marc Phillips) wrote:

> S888Wheel said:
>
> >Stevie Wonder is dead?
> >
>
> After "Songs in the Key of Life," yeah, pretty much.

But he's blind, so he's on the list.

Stephen

[dave weil]

On Thu, 04 Mar 2004 16:49:10 GMT, MINe 109 >
wrote:

>In article >,
> (Marc Phillips) wrote:
>
>> S888Wheel said:
>>
>> >Stevie Wonder is dead?
>> >
>>
>> After "Songs in the Key of Life," yeah, pretty much.
>
>But he's blind, so he's on the list.

It would only be impressive if he were deaf too.

[Schizoid Man]

"dave weil" > wrote in message
> On Thu, 04 Mar 2004 16:49:10 GMT, MINe 109 >
> wrote:
>
> >In article >,
> > (Marc Phillips) wrote:
> >
> >> S888Wheel said:
> >>
> >> >Stevie Wonder is dead?
> >> >
> >>
> >> After "Songs in the Key of Life," yeah, pretty much.
> >
> >But he's blind, so he's on the list.
>
> It would only be impressive if he were deaf too.

What would be really impressive is, if he were mute too.

[dave weil]

On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 11:32:06 -0600, "Schizoid Man"
> wrote:

>
>"dave weil" > wrote in message
>> On Thu, 04 Mar 2004 16:49:10 GMT, MINe 109 >
>> wrote:
>>
>> >In article >,
>> > (Marc Phillips) wrote:
>> >
>> >> S888Wheel said:
>> >>
>> >> >Stevie Wonder is dead?
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> After "Songs in the Key of Life," yeah, pretty much.
>> >
>> >But he's blind, so he's on the list.
>>
>> It would only be impressive if he were deaf too.
>
>What would be really impressive is, if he were mute too.

That's why Helen Keller would rise to the top of my list *if* she were
alive...

[Bruce J. Richman]

Dave Weil wrote:


>On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 11:32:06 -0600, "Schizoid Man"
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"dave weil" > wrote in message
>>> On Thu, 04 Mar 2004 16:49:10 GMT, MINe 109 >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> >In article >,
>>> > (Marc Phillips) wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> S888Wheel said:
>>> >>
>>> >> >Stevie Wonder is dead?
>>> >> >
>>> >>
>>> >> After "Songs in the Key of Life," yeah, pretty much.
>>> >
>>> >But he's blind, so he's on the list.
>>>
>>> It would only be impressive if he were deaf too.
>>
>>What would be really impressive is, if he were mute too.
>
>That's why Helen Keller would rise to the top of my list *if* she were
>alive...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

If she saw this, she'd probably scream her hands off <grin>


Especially after burning her ear by answering the iron !!!



Bruce J. Richman

[Bruce J. Richman]

Schizoid Man wrote:


Johnny Ray was deaf (or "at least" very hard of hearing)




Bruce J. Richman

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Marc Phillips" > wrote in message
...
> Yusty Coke Drinker said:
>
> >On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 04:02:13 GMT, "Sandman" >
> >wrote:
> >
> >>Feel free to feel differently.
> >
> >I do. Celine Dion makes my ears bleed, and I abhor all that wavy hand
> >so-so-so-sincere gesturing she does when she sings. I would like to
> >kill her, when I'm done with my wife.
> >
> >Do the nominees have to be alive? I'd much prefer one to be dead. I'd
> >have to go for voices that move me: Stevie Wonder (especially his old
> >stuff) and Roy Orbison. My wife's voice also makes me cry, but that's
> >another story.
>
> How about Marvin Gaye, mother****er?
>

How about Eva Cassidy




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Sander deWaal]

dave weil > said:

>>> >Stevie Wonder is dead?

>>> After "Songs in the Key of Life," yeah, pretty much.

>>But he's blind, so he's on the list.

>It would only be impressive if he were deaf too.

He got deaf after "Songs in the key of life".

BTW Arny, have you heard the album "Stevie Wonder" by Songs in the Key
of Life? It's very comparable to ELP, you know.

--
Sander deWaal
Vacuum Audio Consultancy

[Lionel]

The greatest French jazz singer, Claude Nougaro, died today. He was 74.
This guy knew how to make the words swing, he was a real "puncher" an
incredible poet.
Sad day for us.

--
"Keep the bugs off your glass and the bears off your ass"
Bad Plus

[MINe 109]

In article >,
(Bruce J. Richman) wrote:

> Schizoid Man wrote:
>
>
> Johnny Ray was deaf (or "at least" very hard of hearing)

Franki Valli, too.

Stephen

[Marc Phillips]

Yustabe said:

>"Marc Phillips" > wrote in message
...
>> Yusty Coke Drinker said:
>>
>> >On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 04:02:13 GMT, "Sandman" >
>> >wrote:
>> >
>> >>Feel free to feel differently.
>> >
>> >I do. Celine Dion makes my ears bleed, and I abhor all that wavy hand
>> >so-so-so-sincere gesturing she does when she sings. I would like to
>> >kill her, when I'm done with my wife.
>> >
>> >Do the nominees have to be alive? I'd much prefer one to be dead. I'd
>> >have to go for voices that move me: Stevie Wonder (especially his old
>> >stuff) and Roy Orbison. My wife's voice also makes me cry, but that's
>> >another story.
>>
>> How about Marvin Gaye, mother****er?
>>
>
>How about Eva Cassidy?

How about Lucinda Williams?

Boon

[Marc Phillips]

Feasty Cock said:

>On 04 Mar 2004 15:31:02 GMT, (Marc Phillips)
>wrote:
>
>>How about Marvin Gaye, mother****er?
>
>Blacks aren't singers; they're something else. They feel music
>differently to white people. I'm not saying they aren't allowed to
>sing, only that when they do sing, it's not really singing but
>modulated air disturbance, something like that.

LOL!

Boon

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Marc Phillips" > wrote in message
...
> Yustabe said:
>
> >"Marc Phillips" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> Yusty Coke Drinker said:
> >>
> >> >On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 04:02:13 GMT, "Sandman" >
> >> >wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>Feel free to feel differently.
> >> >
> >> >I do. Celine Dion makes my ears bleed, and I abhor all that wavy hand
> >> >so-so-so-sincere gesturing she does when she sings. I would like to
> >> >kill her, when I'm done with my wife.
> >> >
> >> >Do the nominees have to be alive? I'd much prefer one to be dead. I'd
> >> >have to go for voices that move me: Stevie Wonder (especially his old
> >> >stuff) and Roy Orbison. My wife's voice also makes me cry, but that's
> >> >another story.
> >>
> >> How about Marvin Gaye, mother****er?
> >>
> >
> >How about Eva Cassidy?
>
> How about Lucinda Williams?
>
> Boon
>
Not the best female singer, though I do like her quircky voice,
However, I would vote her as the best female songwriter.
Joni Mitchell, second, Carol King third (Goffin/King combo).
For male songwriter, Bob Dylan is the best
next is Brian Wilson, then the Holland/Dozier/Holland combo.
I also like Lowell George and, of course, Smokey Robinson.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Marc Phillips]

Yustabe said:

>"Marc Phillips" > wrote in message
...
>> Yustabe said:
>>
>> >"Marc Phillips" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >> Yusty Coke Drinker said:
>> >>
>> >> >On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 04:02:13 GMT, "Sandman" >
>> >> >wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >>Feel free to feel differently.
>> >> >
>> >> >I do. Celine Dion makes my ears bleed, and I abhor all that wavy hand
>> >> >so-so-so-sincere gesturing she does when she sings. I would like to
>> >> >kill her, when I'm done with my wife.
>> >> >
>> >> >Do the nominees have to be alive? I'd much prefer one to be dead. I'd
>> >> >have to go for voices that move me: Stevie Wonder (especially his old
>> >> >stuff) and Roy Orbison. My wife's voice also makes me cry, but that's
>> >> >another story.
>> >>
>> >> How about Marvin Gaye, mother****er?
>> >>
>> >
>> >How about Eva Cassidy?
>>
>> How about Lucinda Williams?
>>
>> Boon
>>
>Not the best female singer, though I do like her quircky voice,
>However, I would vote her as the best female songwriter.
>Joni Mitchell, second, Carol King third (Goffin/King combo).
>For male songwriter, Bob Dylan is the best
>next is Brian Wilson, then the Holland/Dozier/Holland combo.
>I also like Lowell George and, of course, Smokey Robinson.

Thing about Lucinda is that she uses an affectation--a drawl, literally--as a
device for her singing. She's been relying on it more and more over the years.
Truth is, however, when she sings straight, it is absolutely lovely and
moving.

Listen to "Little Angel, Little Brother" and the title track from "Sweet Old
World" for examples.

Boon

[MINe 109]

In article >,
(Marc Phillips) wrote:

> Yustabe said:
>
> >"Marc Phillips" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> Yusty Coke Drinker said:
> >>
> >> >On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 04:02:13 GMT, "Sandman" >
> >> >wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>Feel free to feel differently.
> >> >
> >> >I do. Celine Dion makes my ears bleed, and I abhor all that wavy hand
> >> >so-so-so-sincere gesturing she does when she sings. I would like to
> >> >kill her, when I'm done with my wife.
> >> >
> >> >Do the nominees have to be alive? I'd much prefer one to be dead. I'd
> >> >have to go for voices that move me: Stevie Wonder (especially his old
> >> >stuff) and Roy Orbison. My wife's voice also makes me cry, but that's
> >> >another story.
> >>
> >> How about Marvin Gaye, mother****er?
> >>
> >
> >How about Eva Cassidy?
>
> How about Lucinda Williams?

Disqualified for being alive.

Stephen

[MINe 109]

Okay, best vocalists:

Male: Justin Hawkins; Andreas Scholl; Paolo Conti

Female: Kathy McCarty; Lorraine Lieberson; Dianne Reeves

Stephen

[Mikermckelvy]

>From: "Sandman"
>Date: 2/28/04 8:02 PM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: >

>Listening to some music today, it occurred to me that some vocalists are
>head and shoulders above others.
>

>Think about who you really like listening to when he or she sings.
>
>Think about raw talent.

Meat Loaf aka Marvin Adday.

>BEST LIVING FEMALE VOCALIST: Celine Deion

2.5 octave range, has Jim Steinman in common with Meat Loaf.

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Mikermckelvy" > wrote in message
...
> >From: "Sandman"
> >Date: 2/28/04 8:02 PM Pacific Standard Time
> >Message-id: >
>
> >Listening to some music today, it occurred to me that some vocalists are
> >head and shoulders above others.
> >
>
> >Think about who you really like listening to when he or she sings.
> >
> >Think about raw talent.
>
> Meat Loaf aka Marvin Adday.
>
> >BEST LIVING FEMALE VOCALIST: Celine Deion
>
> 2.5 octave range, has Jim Steinman in common with Meat Loaf.

Meatloaf is small potatos




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Rich Andrews.]

(Mike McKelvy) wrote in
om:

> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message news:
>...
>> "Mikermckelvy" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > >From: "Sandman"
>> > >Date: 2/28/04 8:02 PM Pacific Standard Time
>> > >Message-id: >
>>
>> > >Listening to some music today, it occurred to me that some vocalists
are
>> > >head and shoulders above others.
>> > >
>>
>> > >Think about who you really like listening to when he or she sings.
>> > >
>> > >Think about raw talent.
>> >
>> > Meat Loaf aka Marvin Adday.
>> >
>> > >BEST LIVING FEMALE VOCALIST: Celine Deion
>> >
>> > 2.5 octave range, has Jim Steinman in common with Meat Loaf.
>>
>> Meatloaf is small potatos
>>
>>
> Well there's definitely less of him than there used to be, but he does
> have a great voice IMO. Hope Bat Out Of Hell 3 does better than 2.
>

I don't know about the "best" female vocalist, but there are a few nice
ones. The ones that stick out in my mind are, and in no particular order:

Anne Sofie von Otter
Karen England
Rebecca Knight
Norah Jones
Summer

Whatever Norah had going for her on her prior CD, is lost on her latest
release.

Hayley Westenra seems quite talented but needs to mature a bit.

r

--
Nothing beats the bandwidth of a station wagon filled with DLT tapes.

[elg110254]

Claudia Acuna & Cassandra Wilson are two sexy sirens who can caress a vocal
whilst making knees weak! Bryan Ferry is still THE crooner's crooner with
style-n-grace en masse!!!