"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 3 Oct 2003 20:49:00 -0400, in rec.audio.opinion you wrote:

[snip]
Yes, you *are* rather blind...

I'm glad to see that you require my input though. Rather flattering.

From what I've heard, there's no reason to discount it. I've been told that
you're a good listener, and fair.

All of which you've undermined by your unseemly silence.

Bob Morein wrote:

"dave weil" wrote in message
...

On Fri, 3 Oct 2003 20:49:00 -0400, in rec.audio.opinion you wrote:


[snip]

Yes, you *are* rather blind...

I'm glad to see that you require my input though. Rather flattering.


From what I've heard, there's no reason to discount it. I've been told
that
you're a good listener, and fair.

All of which you've undermined by your unseemly silence.




Wow, Bob, you're playing dave like a fiddle. Except that you're tone
deaf, and badly in need of lessons. What I see in you is a junior
Krueger, sitting around in his underpants slobbering for attention.
It's not a pretty sight.

By the way, you might want to file both of those analogies under
"Examples of good writing."

"trotsky" wrote in message
news
Bob Morein wrote:

"dave weil" wrote in message
...

On Fri, 3 Oct 2003 20:49:00 -0400, in rec.audio.opinion you wrote:


[snip]

Yes, you *are* rather blind...

I'm glad to see that you require my input though. Rather flattering.


From what I've heard, there's no reason to discount it. I've been told
that
you're a good listener, and fair.

All of which you've undermined by your unseemly silence.




Wow, Bob, you're playing dave like a fiddle. Except that you're tone
deaf, and badly in need of lessons. What I see in you is a junior
Krueger, sitting around in his underpants slobbering for attention.
It's not a pretty sight.

Kinda like that picture of you tinkering in your garage next to the gsoline
can. Perhaps the fumes have done you some harm.

way, you might want to file both of those analogies under
"Examples of good writing."

Michael Mckelvy wrote:
"trotsky" wrote in message
news
Bob Morein wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
...


On Fri, 3 Oct 2003 20:49:00 -0400, in rec.audio.opinion you wrote:


[snip]


Yes, you *are* rather blind...

I'm glad to see that you require my input though. Rather flattering.


From what I've heard, there's no reason to discount it. I've been told
that
you're a good listener, and fair.

All of which you've undermined by your unseemly silence.




Wow, Bob, you're playing dave like a fiddle. Except that you're tone
deaf, and badly in need of lessons. What I see in you is a junior
Krueger, sitting around in his underpants slobbering for attention.
It's not a pretty sight.


Kinda like that picture of you tinkering in your garage next to the gsoline
can. Perhaps the fumes have done you some harm.



Sounds like you're just another Usenet loser afraid to show one iota of
self awareness, Bob. Am I close?

"trotsky" wrote in message
...


Michael Mckelvy wrote:
"trotsky" wrote in message
news
Bob Morein wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
...


On Fri, 3 Oct 2003 20:49:00 -0400, in rec.audio.opinion you wrote:


[snip]


Yes, you *are* rather blind...

I'm glad to see that you require my input though. Rather flattering.


From what I've heard, there's no reason to discount it. I've been told
that
you're a good listener, and fair.

All of which you've undermined by your unseemly silence.




Wow, Bob, you're playing dave like a fiddle. Except that you're tone
deaf, and badly in need of lessons. What I see in you is a junior
Krueger, sitting around in his underpants slobbering for attention.
It's not a pretty sight.


Kinda like that picture of you tinkering in your garage next to the
gsoline
can. Perhaps the fumes have done you some harm.



Sounds like you're just another Usenet loser afraid to show one iota of
self awareness, Bob. Am I close?

Only if you are talking to yourself.

On Sat, 4 Oct 2003 01:56:34 -0400, "Bob Morein"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 3 Oct 2003 20:49:00 -0400, in rec.audio.opinion you wrote:

[snip]
Yes, you *are* rather blind...

I'm glad to see that you require my input though. Rather flattering.

From what I've heard, there's no reason to discount it. I've been told that
you're a good listener, and fair.

All of which you've undermined by your unseemly silence.

Isn't it fair for me to be allowed to finish my evaluation? Why should
I continue under these conditions? Why should I help someone who
questions my ability to conduct an evaluation? On the converse, I
don't think it's right to go the other way and hurt them either just
because I'm a bit annoyed with them.

Maybe i chose the wrong thing by posting my evaluations as they
unfolded instead of waiting and posting them all at the same time. The
problem was, I had other things going on that were taking up large
blocks of my time and it was taking longer than I had expected to find
the time to seriously evaluate them so, I wanted you guys not to have
to wait for the evaluation. I guess I did myself a disservice by
trying to give you folks timely information...Greg just couldn't wait
the the conclusion.

"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 4 Oct 2003 01:56:34 -0400, "Bob Morein"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 3 Oct 2003 20:49:00 -0400, in rec.audio.opinion you wrote:

[snip]
Yes, you *are* rather blind...

I'm glad to see that you require my input though. Rather flattering.

From what I've heard, there's no reason to discount it. I've been told
that
you're a good listener, and fair.

All of which you've undermined by your unseemly silence.

Isn't it fair for me to be allowed to finish my evaluation? Why should
I continue under these conditions?

In the above, you seem to complain that you're not being allowed to
continue, due to some "conditions."
But in the last sentence of your post, you imply that Greg wanted the
speakers back.


Why should I help someone who
questions my ability to conduct an evaluation?

By this, I take it Greg questioned your ability to perform the evaluation.


On the converse, I
don't think it's right to go the other way and hurt them either just
because I'm a bit annoyed with them.

Maybe i chose the wrong thing by posting my evaluations as they
unfolded instead of waiting and posting them all at the same time. The
problem was, I had other things going on that were taking up large
blocks of my time and it was taking longer than I had expected to find
the time to seriously evaluate them so, I wanted you guys not to have
to wait for the evaluation. I guess I did myself a disservice by
trying to give you folks timely information...Greg just couldn't wait
the the conclusion.

I think you're saying this:

Greg wanted the speakers back before you could devote enough time to form a
complete opinion.
He questioned you ability to perform the evaluation.
If this is the case, it is a completely satisfactory answer.

On Sat, 4 Oct 2003 16:51:25 -0400, "Bob Morein"
wrote:

But in the last sentence of your post, you imply that Greg wanted the
speakers back.

No, I said that I boxed the speakers up and was waiting for him to
pick them up.

Nobody seemes to have actaully read what i wrote.

But what's new around here?

dave weil wrote:
On Sat, 4 Oct 2003 16:51:25 -0400, "Bob Morein"
wrote:


But in the last sentence of your post, you imply that Greg wanted the
speakers back.


No, I said that I boxed the speakers up and was waiting for him to
pick them up.


Jeez, dave, why do you even give this loser the time of day? He's just
trying to push your buttons, and has no interest in what you really have
to say.

On Sun, 05 Oct 2003 12:10:29 GMT, trotsky wrote:



dave weil wrote:
On Sat, 4 Oct 2003 16:51:25 -0400, "Bob Morein"
wrote:


But in the last sentence of your post, you imply that Greg wanted the
speakers back.


No, I said that I boxed the speakers up and was waiting for him to
pick them up.


Jeez, dave, why do you even give this loser the time of day? He's just
trying to push your buttons, and has no interest in what you really have
to say.

He's not the only one.

dave weil wrote:
On Sun, 05 Oct 2003 12:10:29 GMT, trotsky wrote:



dave weil wrote:

On Sat, 4 Oct 2003 16:51:25 -0400, "Bob Morein"
wrote:



But in the last sentence of your post, you imply that Greg wanted the
speakers back.


No, I said that I boxed the speakers up and was waiting for him to
pick them up.


Jeez, dave, why do you even give this loser the time of day? He's just
trying to push your buttons, and has no interest in what you really have
to say.


He's not the only one.



That sounds like a reference to me, which is completely disingenuous.
I've been on the level since the get go, and you have yet to refute a
single thing I've said.

"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 4 Oct 2003 16:51:25 -0400, "Bob Morein"
wrote:

But in the last sentence of your post, you imply that Greg wanted the
speakers back.

No, I said that I boxed the speakers up and was waiting for him to
pick them up.

Nobody seemes to have actaully read what i wrote.

But what's new around here?

Pot, meet kettle.

dave weil wrote:

On Sat, 4 Oct 2003 16:51:25 -0400, "Bob Morein"
wrote:


But in the last sentence of your post, you imply that Greg wanted the
speakers back.


No, I said that I boxed the speakers up and was waiting for him to
pick them up.

Nobody seemes to have actaully read what i wrote.

But what's new around here?

Trotsky is preparing a 3-ways speaker...
Interested ?
)

I need info on Sphis Audioproduct model lbx250 studio monitors please.

Lorne
"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 4 Oct 2003 16:51:25 -0400, "Bob Morein"
wrote:

But in the last sentence of your post, you imply that Greg wanted the
speakers back.

No, I said that I boxed the speakers up and was waiting for him to
pick them up.

Nobody seemes to have actaully read what i wrote.

But what's new around here?

On Sat, 4 Oct 2003 16:51:25 -0400, "Bob Morein"
wrote:

I think you're saying this:

Greg wanted the speakers back before you could devote enough time to form a
complete opinion.
He questioned you ability to perform the evaluation.
If this is the case, it is a completely satisfactory answer.

It is *not* the case.

But I don't feel like explaining to you YET again.

If you *really* want to know what happened, go back and review the
record.