"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message
oups.com...
Michael McKelvy wrote:
"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message
oups.com...
Michael McKelvy wrote:
"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message
oups.com...
Michael McKelvy wrote:
"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message
oups.com...
Michael McKelvy wrote:
"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...
"Michael McKelvy" wrote in message
news
"Michael McKelvy" wrote in
message
ink.net...
Who is the provider of regular phone service in the
Miami
area?
Bellsouth?
It's just that there's this person's phone number you
would
expect
to
find in their books, but it doesn't show up.
you are really obsessed with this!
Not nearly as much as he is with me.
Another lie from McKelvy, obviously.
No, just my impression, given the amount of bandwidth you are
using.
I'm not the person that has been spreading lies about another
person's
identity, professional activities, credentals, etc. for
almost 7
years.
I'm also not the person that has passed on false email
information
received from a questionable source.
Neither am I. I'm just a guy who can't reconcile your on line
behavior with
your stated profession, and have therefore expressed my onion
on
the
matter.
That's a lie. You've repeatedly made false statements about my
identity, my professional activities
They are still opinions.
A lie by any other name is still a lie.
A lie requires you to know it is a lie.
No, it does not. Conscious intent is not required. If somebody says
Germany is in South America, they are lying.
No they are mistaken, unless they know better.
They are making a false
statement.
Which is not the same as a lie.
If they were under oath in a court room, they could be
charged with perjury.
They don't charge with perjury if you don't know what you said was not true.
Their ignorance would not be a reasonable
defense unless they were significantly retarded.
Then you'll have to quote some legal ruling that says so or from a state law
that says so. If someonme testifies under oath and does not know what they
are saying is untrue, they are not charged to the best of my knowledge.
There is no intent to decieve.
Deliberate avoidance of
concrete evidence and repetition of the sasme false statements is
lying, not stating opinions.
I'm not avoiding it, it just hasn't proven anything.
Another false statement.
It would be considered evidence, but it is far from conclusive.
(about which you actually know
nothing oher than what I've mentioned on RAO).
Which is the same as knowing nothing for sure.
In your case, since you've deliberately ignored factual information
while continuing to lie about me, that would be true. For almost
all
other posters, that wuold be seen as just another one of your lies.
Crystal ball again? They are easier to convince.
There is a difference
between expressing an "opinion" (the word you use to describe
your
lies), and making statements that have been contradicted over
and
over
again by concrete evidence that you've seen but chosen to ignort
or
disbelieve.
It's not so much that I disbeleive them, it's that there is no way
to
know
if they are true, they are hearsay.
Numerous other people, without your agenda, have verified the
information I have presented.
Good for them. I haven't.
Becaus you prefer to keep lying about these things.
No, because this is a NG and you can say anything. Saying something is true
doesn't make it so.
You've chosen to ignore it and contiue
your lies and libel campaign.
The only one on a campaign here is you, you keep bringing it up.
But you only believe people that say
what you want to hear about your RAO enemies. You've also claimed
that
Krueger "stands for the truth",
Provide an in context quote for that, because if you can't and I made
that
statement you'd say it was a lie.
It's part of one of your posts in which you said you support Krueger
because he "stands for the truth".
About Audio. Try staying in context.
I specifically reember you saying
that when I criticized your defense of his posting behavior and failure
to criticize his obvious attacks on other people.
Partly because for 10 years I've seen him attacked for telling the truth.
even though a number of different RAO
posters have proven (in terms of Google and through other methods)
that
he has frequently lied.
I've seen people say it, I've never seen anybody prove he's done anything
more than jerk some chains and RESPOND to attacks.
A number of peop;e have lied about him as well, are you as ****ed
about
that?
Also, are you denying that you passsed on fale email
information (which you never bother to even try and verify) from
a
questionable source (one who had never met me and was known to
use
a
variety of sockpuppet personae on RAO).
I'm not denying that I passed along info from an E-mail. I assure
you it
was not "fale."
False. Lame try to avoid responsibility by imitating your role
model,
Krueger's, sleazy tactic of hypocritically attacking the typos of
his
many enemies.
You keep saying role model, why? People have made fun of my typos,
are you
as ****ed about that?
For the zillionth time, one of the fallacies in your thinking is
that
when a professional person goes on a recreational newsgroup,
they
should treat it as an extension of their office, or somehow,
behave
differently than other people do that post there.
That does not excuse the behavior you exhibit here. It would make
no
difference in how I regard you as an RAO participant.
You miss the point entirely.
Yes you do.
You've claimed I'm unprofessional, yet
this is not a professional environment.
And you are the one that keeps hammering people overthe head about your
professional backround. You are the one who constantly refers to examples
of various disorders and comparing them to people on RAO you don't like.
You want to have it both ways.
That doesn't mean you should behave like a barbarian. It doesn't
excuse
you, and it doesn't mean you should forget what that profession is
about.
I behave about the same, no better or worse, than many of RAO's
posters.
That hardly makes it OK.
RAO, like other unmoderated NGs, has people from a variety of
professions and occupations. A lot of them attack other people and
respond when attacked. To expect everybody else to continue flaming
away (including yourself) while falsely claiming that a professional
should not, especially on a purely recreational, not professional
forum, is both unrealistic and ludicrous.
Your behavior is as bad if not
worse, than that of most of the people here.
And that means it's OK for you to act the same? Or worse?
I'm just pointing out your hypocrisy and attempt to impose self-serving
double standards on others. Those that do that are just looking for an
easy path to more and more flaming. Or to put it another way, they
want to provide the heat, but don't want to get any in return.
Bruce you see flames where there's barely any smoke. You say it's wrong for
Arny to use prior attacks against him as justification for flaming but then
you do the same ****ing thing.
At least they haven't
engaged in an almost 7 year campaign of lies and libels directed at
another person's occupation, identity, etc.
You can repeat this ad nauseum, it won't make what I've said anything
more
than my opinions.
And you can falsely state that your provably false statements afe
"opinions", and that won't change the fact that they are lies.
Blah, blah. In my opinion nobody has PROVRD you are who you say you are.
There is a likelihood that you are in fact who you say are, but there is
also apossiblilityu you aren't. My instincts say you aren't. My instincts
are usually right, not always, but usually. Until I get proof to MY OWN
satisfaction, I will remain skeptical. Should I find out I'm wrong it won't
change much about my feelings about how you act here. And even though this
is a public forum where you can say what you want, someone with your
backround, should know better, mnore is expected from you , like it or not.
You
could say Germany is in South America, but the evidence would indicate
that you had lied.
If I said it would be a lie, but if someone who had no idea where it
actually was said it, it would simply be an error.
Similarly, the evidence here is concrete,
verifiable, and proves that you are lying.
No, it's hearsay.
You, no doubt, find fault
with the behavior of many people here that have accurately
described
the many problems with your RAO conduct.
No, I find fault with the whole ****ing mess. I do notice that when
I was
on topic, people like you come out and look for a fight.
People post on
recreational newsgroups to have a little fun, have a few laughs,
and
unfortunately, in the case of RAO, often insult other people.
And you seem to relish the insult part.
You definitely do, hypocrite.
I enjoy it when it's light hearted and not personal. I enjoy it when
blustering fools get shot down for their ignorance. I do not enjoy
endless
catfights about how wronged people have been by somebody or how they
have
to fight back because someone said somnething bad. It's way too
childish
for for grown folks. For a mental health professional, it certainly
ridiculous.
It is no more ridiculous for a mental health professional to defend
himself against the idiotic, juvenile name-calling and flames
It is if he does it in a ridiculous, idiotic, and juvenile way.
that
people like you are known for, than for anybody else to do the same.
I start most conversations with an attempt at reasonable discussion. I'm
nearly always responding to attacks when I get nasty. There are some few
exceptions. The Julian Hirsch thread was a prime example. There was no
reason, no justification and no class involved in making a personal attack
against Arny in that thread, it was stupid, boorish and juvenile.
No matter how often you try and excuse the behavior of everybody else
while you rationalise your double standards attempts to prevent
retaliation, the argument is both hypocritical and self-serving.
Not really. I still try and stay non-inflammatory and I don't go looking
for people to flame. I've started a few flame threads, but it is not my
habit. You've probably done more of it the last month than I have in 10
years.
As
I've said above, you're just trying to prevent people attacked from
striking back.
Actually, that's a very good stategy. Don't respond and they will
eventually shut up.
We both know that RAO is a playground, not a work
environment.
That doesn't mean we should **** here.
You've rarely met a Krueger flame you
can't supplement and endorse.
Care to back that up with anything from Google?
I didn't think so.
You're also among the first to smear
other people that don't support your extreme prejudices.
Got any proof?
I didn't think so.
To
expect one person to refrain while others take pot shots is
unrealistic
and unfair.
Why? What harm can it do to ignore them? You sound like a child
when you
say things like that. You think you put out fire with gasoline?
So why don't you ignore them?
I ignore most of it. If I didn't I would be here 24 hours a day.
You're not attacked *that* often. You have engaged in plenty of
personal attacks, and many of them have been unprovoked.
And many of them have been. The ones that arent' are usually cases like the
Julian Hirsch thread you **** on.
Practice what you preach, hypocrite.
I've frequently ignored flames from you, Krueger and the few other
misfits that have nothing better to do with their time.
And then other times you start attacxk threads or attack somebody in
the
middle of a thread like the Julian Hirsch thread, which no mnatter
how you
try to spin it, made you an ass.
When I start an attack thread, it is almost always, if not always, in
response to one from your role model,
He's not my role model. I respect his knowledge of audio.
Krueger, or one of a few other
people.
Why start an attack thread at all? What do you gain from it? How does it
help anything.
Lead by example. Same thing I told Arny.
You can check the Google record, and you'll see that mine are
in retaliation, unlike Krueger, who has been running wild with them
lately, since he's becoming more unstable and agitated as the evidence
against him gets presented.
I've checked the Google record and you make more personal attacks.
You are the person who has been spread lies and innuendo about my
use
of
legally prescribed pain medications and making false claims
about
my
mental
state.
I've made it clear that any statements I make about *anybody's*
mental
state on RAO refers only to their online behavior and nothing
else.
But if you are a psychologist as you claim, and for now let's
assume
that is
true,
It's a fact, not an assumption.
it is reckless an unprofessional to use legitmate diagnostic terms
about people you don't know.
As I've told you before, the terms I'm using are not diagnostic.
Sorry, you don't get to divorce your profession from your use of
professioal
terms.
You don't determine what are and are not professional terms for use by
a psychologist. You've again made a false statement about diagnoses,
and now you're just trying to backpedal and spin your obvious lies.
Nope, I'm calling it like I see it.
You also don't determine how anybody should behave on a NG when they
are attacked,and their profession or occupation makes no difference,
Just tell me whjat you gain from it?
since that's not what's being discussed, except, of course, when you
choose to smear it, as has been your habit.
I don't smear the profession, I respect the profession, I just don't like
the way YOU act and it strikes me as ****ing wierd that YOU could be a
person getting paid to solve people's emotional problems when you seem to be
one.
This is supposed to be an
audio forum, not a mental health forum.
Then stop discussing mental health here.
However, since much of the
online behavior consists of people attacking the mental health of
others (such as your friend, Krueger, calling people delusional, insane
and senile),
He wouldn't have an couldn't have if you hadn't been blabbing mental health
this and delusional that every time you hit the ****ing keyboard.
it's perfectly appropriate to describe his behavior for
what most of us know it is - a set of false beliefs about others that
has no evidence to support it.
If it's not approriate for him it's less so for you.
iOW, a set of delusional beliefs.
That's a description based on the evidence, and one that many of made,
not just me. The fact that you think he "stands for truth" doesn't
change the basic facts.
How anyt times are you going to use those word out of context?
They
are descriptive adjectives which I feel apply to the online
behavior of
some of RAO's posters. A diagnosis requires a face-to-face
evaluation
and a bunch of other information as well in most cases.
Then when you do one and have the patients permission, you can do so. In
the mean time you should be using whatever skill you have to make tinjgs
better, noit try to show that you can be worse.
Feel free to use them there, find other words here.
I don't see you
criticizing Krueger for using terms like "delusional" - a term he's
misapplied over and over again to many different posters.
I don't see him spending endless bandwidth on such ****. If he wasn't
responded to and wasn't attacked for nearly everything he says, regardless
of what it might be, he'd hardly be sayinmg anything that wasn't audio
related.
If they were mental health professionals I doubt they would, if they
did,
I'd be on their asses too.
You'd be both wrong and acting inappropriately in both cases. To
assume that *anybody* coming here, no matter what their profession, is
going to just ignore personal attacks against them is both naive and
unrealistic.
Probably, but thenm I expect frown ups to behave better, including myself.
Engineers are supposed to be "professionals", as are
people rrom other fields, yet we find more than a few here flaming
away.
What we find is engineers saying that wire is wire, (a truth) or that
competently dsigned amps sound alike, (another truth) and thenm being told
they said something entirely different, or that they can't hear.
You
have lied at claimed that I've "diagnosed" people on RAO, which
is
clearly not the case. You've also implied that I've been guilty
of
ethical lapses, when in fact none have ever existed.
I only know that if I had your credentials, I would not be calling
people
delusional and insane at the drop of a hat.
Does this mean that you think that everybody else on RAO is
entitled to
use these terms, but a person who actually has some knowledge of
what
they mean and how to use them does not? GMFAB !!!
Have you ever heard the expression "Ignorance is no excuse"?
Have you ever heard of leading by example? You're the one who's
supposed to
be able to help a diseased mind, yet here you act more crazy than
almost
anyone else.
That's the type of provably false statement and delusional statement
That's an opinion based on observation.
for which you are ridiculed and despised. Shall we take a vote on
that, you lying idiot?
Why not start another one of those non-existent attack threads yo never
start unless atacked?
Let's ask the RAO readership at large what they
thing of Krueger's and Lionel's mental status, for example, or yours,
when you act like a fool and make idiotic statements like that.
So we can get the same 5 or 8 Bozo's saying the same **** over and ovder
again?
That has not happened, and you know it - or should know it. And
insanity is a legal term, not a medical or psychological term.
Ok let me rephrase, you act at least as childish and asinine as anybody you
criticise.
Again,
you're trying to argue for a double standard in which people you
support like Krueger, Lionel and torresists can smear people using
terms like delusional, insane, paranoid, senile, etc. - while a
person
who happens to be a psychologist can not.
Actually, I'm arguing for one standard, maturity.
See the hypocrisy in
that
attempt to prevent retaliation to personal attacks?
Then change professions.
Change your way of acting on public newsgroups. Stop your alnost 7
year history of deliberately lying, libeling and distorting the facts
about me. Stop the self-serving hypocrisy that is as foolish as you
are in your assinne evaluations and false claims.
I can't stop whay I haven't started.
I understand that you are paranoid as hell when it comes to your many
enemies, including me, on RAO.
It's not paranoia, it's skepticism.
Many people that are addicted to various types of
medication - both analgesics and antianxiety drugs - do what's
known as
"doctor shopping". They get different prescriptions formo
different
doctors for the same pills. I've come across this a number of
times
with patients I've evaluated and treated. Whether or not this
applies
to you, I don't know. I'm just pointing out that when a person
says "I
have a legal presdcription", it proves nothing about their usage
pattern.
That's their problem not mine. You are still seeming to imply some
connection with that behavior and mine.
Another assumption is not supported by the facts.
A reasonable interpretation of what you just said.
You just love to
read things into what other people say, don't you?
If irony killed.
It's pretty simple. They dull the pain, if I could live without
them,
I
would gladly do so. I've spent a fair amount of time and a large
amount of
money trying to use non-narcotic methods to get rid of the pain.
Have you cosidered either biofeedback treatment or hypnosis for
pain
anaesthesia?
No.
Well, perhaps you should before you opt for more radical treatment
methods like surgery.
Both methods are non-invasive, present no risks, and if
done by suitably trained people, can be quite effective with a
fairly
wide range of pain problems. You can verify this for yourself
through
a Google search for references.
I'll look into it. but I have doubts due to the cause of the pain.
Both methods have been used with many different types of pain, as well
as a large number of real physical problems. If you think that pain is
purely a physical problem for a person, than you're a fool.
Thanks for putting words in my mouth again.
I'm going
to be in touch with yet another doctor to see if surgery is a
viable
option.
As I'm sure you are aware, surgery on one's spine is not something
you do if
it not required, there are some very serious risks, far more than
from
oxicontin.
See above. Biofeedback training involving electromyographic
training
(or EMG training has frequently been used with chronic pain
conditions
in which muscle spasms and/or muscular contractions contribute to
the
sensations of pain.
That's not my problem look up spinal stenosis.
I'm not perfect, but neither am I stupid, self-destructive, or
anxious
to be arrested.
Nor do you act like anything more than a petualnt school boy when you
are
here.
Bull****. I simply defend myself against the juvenile name-calling and
smears of chronic flamesr like you.
That would be great if it were true.
If you don't want to accept that you've been wrong for many years
and
issue a retraction, that is your problem.
I'm perfectly willing to accept I'm wrong anytime, once it's proven to me,
to my satisfaction.
I'm capable of accepting my fault, hope about you and yours?
There's none for me to accept.
LOL! And here I thought we might actuyally have a serious discussion.