"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"John Atkinson" wrote in message
. com
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"John Atkinson" wrote in message
om
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
Wow Atkinson, on the one hand you support legal action against
libel of a sockpuppet...
I am not aware of saying anything pro or con this subject, Mr.
Krueger.
Cough, gag! Good think I wasn't drinking anything when I read this
*gem*
Okay Mr. Krueger. If you seem to think I am incorrect, post a Google
message ID for the posting or postings in I which have said I
"support legal action against libel of a sockpuppet..." As you can't
do so, this [is] yet another example of your frugality with the truth
when it comes to criticisms of me and of the magazine I edit.
I just dealt with this little deceit of yours Atkinson in another post.
Not in any posting retrievable by groups.google.com, Mr. Krueger. Your
connection with reality seems increasingly tenuous: You accuse others of
ridiculous conspiracies against you; you accuse search engines of "lying"
to you; you accuse me of "fiendish schemes" against you: and now you refer
to r.a.o. messages that were never actually posted to the newsgroups.
Now you have _two_ messages to retrieve before anyone will believe these
accusations you throw out, Mr. Krueger: 1) the message of mine in which
I am supposed to have supported "legal action against libel of a
sockpuppet," and 2) the message of yours in which you were supposed to
have given this message ID, which is what I assume you mean by "dealt
with.".
Yeah Atkinson, it's all my fault that people like you seem compelled
to try to exploit a personal tragedy in order to get *debating
trade* points.
I haven't tried to "exploit" your personal tragedy, Mr. Krueger.
I just dealt with this little deceit of yours Atkinson in another post.
Again this is not in any posting retrievable by groups.google.com, Mr.
Krueger. So now you have _3_ message ID's to quote. Remember: it was you
yourself who has repeatedly said that those who refer to past messages
are obliged to post the appropriate message IDs.
Everything I have said, both publicly and privately, is to offer you
my deepest sympathies and condolences for your loss.
What loss might that be, Atkinson?
I believe this was answered in my very next sentence, Mr. Krueger, when
I wrote:
As a parent myself, I can imagine nothing worst than to outlive your
own children.
I was clearly referring, of course to the tragic passing of your teenage
son Nate. I have written directly about this on the newsgroups just
_twice_ in the years since then. Here is the _complete_ text of the most
recent of those postings:
Begin quoted text:
-------------------------------------
In message on 1999/06/19
wrote:
I have expressed my public sympathy on r.a.o. with your personal
tragedy. As a parent, I believe that the death of one's child is
possibly the greatest pain anyone can be called upon to bear.
-------------------------------------
Please also note that I also e-mailed you at the time of your son's
passing with my condolences and sympathy, something that you have never
acknowledged either privately or publicly.
Please also note that I have _never_ said or written _anything_ that is
in any way negative about your loss, that I have _never_ used this loss
_in any way whatsoever_ against you. All that I have done other than to
offer you my condolences is to state my opinion that you sadly use your
personal tragedy to generate pity for yourself and to attack those
with whom you disagree about audio, as in the offensive posting of
_yours_ to which Marc Phillips was referring.
I have also publicly condemned the nasty behavior of those
who have attempted to use this tragedy against you.
Was that once or twice in four years of continual harassment by
your friends, Mr Atkinson?
I don't keep count, Mr. Krueger, nor do I feel it my responsibility to
wade into the r.a.o. waters to defend you on every possible occasion.
But "friends"? "Continual harassment?" How am I responsible for what
others do? How can the actions of people who in the main appear to be
responding to a barrage of flames from you be defined as "harassment"?
Are you going to suggest that I, too, am "harassing" you, Mr. Krueger,
because I dare to correct your public misstatements about me and my
activities as the editor of Stereophile?
Snip of more of the usual schoolyard nastiness from someone who, as I
have said, is more to be pitied than anything else.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile