FLAME WARRIOR
Preliminary report of
AN INTERNET EXPERIMENT IN LOW RESOURCE MOTIVATIONAL RESEARCH

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This is a successful pilot experiment in individual human psychology
conducted using only the internet's own resources. The only cost was
the time of the researchers. There were no material costs.

VENUE
The Usenet consists of public correspondence groups accessible to
anyone on the Internet. It is a part of the Internet beside the World
Wide Web, accessible to anyone with a computer and an internet
connection.

BACKGROUND
Mr Arny Krueger describes himself on audiophile newsgroups as an
engineer or a sound recording engineer. His professional qualifications
are not known. The only known sound recording he has done is of his
local church choir, of which he sends people copies. He claims to have
special expertise in placebo tests but, again, his professional
qualification or experience is unascertainable. He has a self-made
netsite on which he describes his methods; they would not earn an
undergraduate a pass mark. He is widely known, to the point of
notoriety, as a Usenet flamer, that is, an unscrupulous debater who
insists on winning every argument and will resort to extreme means to
counter or suppress the views of those who disagree with him.

Mr Krueger was warned in advance that he would be the subject of a
psychological study. Several of his likely associates were also warned
and all viewed the warning to him; we know this because they
contributed to the relevant threads. This study limited itself to
replicating subject Krueger's observed routine behaviour under
controlled circumstances for the purposes of benchmark description and
definition. No motivational manipulation was attempted.

THE HYPOTHESIS
That the subject Krueger has contempt for scientific method. That the
subject Krueger will use illegitimate means to win an argument. That
the subject Krueger will refuse to accept that he can be in error.

METHODOLOGY
An article was posted to the Usenet on a subject, listener preferences
between transistor and tube audio amplifiers, on which Krueger is known
to hold strong views. The article included a paragraph from a report on
a series of real placebo tests with the specific description of the
particular test subjects removed and substituted by a non-specific,
wordy description of the very large and varied generic class to which
they belong. Without the specific information on the particular test
subjects the article makes no sense, nor can it be criticised in
anything approaching a scientific or professional manner.

The absence of the necessary information was intended to be obvious to
anyone qualified to discuss or conduct placebo tests. Its obviousness
was tested: Twelve honours students were given this short article as
part of a coursework test and asked for a response within fifteen
minutes (just long enough to read it); all identified the anomaly and
asked for details of the test subject group.

The article was then provocatively (to Krueger) named "Why tubes are
the paradigm" and posted, when the opportunity arose, as an apparent
reply to pre-existing correspondence. The article and the resulting
thread is at:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.a...aa51186ea4b171

RESULT OF THE INITIAL TEST
Subject Krueger responded immediately in an aggressively hostile
manner.
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.a...f9e1eb9 48304
He apparently did not notice, or if he noticed did not care, that the
test subjects were not specified. He did not ask for the test subjects
to be specified. Instead he stated that the tests could not be valid
because the generic group to which they belong, musical performers,
"are likely to be hearing-damaged due to exposure to loud sounds".
This is in fact true of small minority of the universe from which the
actual test subjects were drawn but not of the particular test
subjects. He then proceeded to claim that other named subgroups from
the universe were also either hearing-impaired or capable of impairing
their hearing (singers).

He did not at this time or at any later point succeed in identifying
the test subjects.

Subject Krueger offered further unscientific, spurious or personally
insulting reasons for doubting the results:
"(1) Classical musicians are basically performers of retro-music.
That they would prefer retro-technology makes perfect sense."
This is of course impossible in tests where the subjects cannot see the
machines under test.
"(2) Said blind tests were set by Andre Jute. Therefore we know for
sure that
they are biased against modern technology."
A common smear tactic from subject Krueger's armory.
"(3) Aformentioned hearing problems that [are] endemic among
performers who must endure extraordinary SPLs as they perform."
Note "endemic" and "extraordinary SPLs" (sound pressure
levels), neither of which is justified by any evidence he proffered
either at this point or later.

These points were then argued with subject Krueger by team leader Jute
but Krueger snipped Jute's arguments and claimed:
" Bottom line, Jute has properly addressed (none) (zero) (nada)
critical points. Therefore they stand."
"snip empty rhetoric"
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.audio.tubes/browse_frm/thread/9f37729ce5c847/db0142000dfc0120?q=%22Jute+has+properly+addressed+ (none)+(zero)+(nada)+critical%22&rnum=3#db0142000d fc0120

CONCLUSIONS OF THE FIRST TEST
All three strands of the hypothesis were proved correct as stated
1. Subject Krueger does not understand or honour the scientific method.
He did not ask for the specifics of the test subject.
2. Subject Krueger wants to win so badly that he uses illegitimate
means to win arguments.
3. Subject Krueger will not admit error.

SECOND TEST
At this point it was decided to discover how far subject Krueger would
carry his denial of error. He was publicly bluntly confronted with
posing as an expert when he didn't know what the subject was. A new
thread was started for this purpose in which proof was demanded of his
statements in relation to the test subjects, which were still not
identified him:
"Classical performers hearing-damaged" - Arny Kruger Lie No. 51281
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.a...9730fa608eb787

The result was a great deal more personal abuse directed at subject
Krueger's interlocutors. Having been advised that he had not been
informed of the specifics of the test group, he still did not request
information about the particular test group. Instead he went at random
through a wide variety of performers from the huge possible universe,
attempting to prove with data he found on Google that the outcome of
the tests described in the original article "Tubes are the
paradigm" could not be true. He continued to insist that he was the
ultimate expert on the subject. Here is his final admission, after more
than 200 messages in various threads, of his error, complete with
further personal abuse:

"The definition of a lie is knowingly telling a falsehood. However,
Jute accuses me of lying because I talked about musicians:
'...without knowing who they are or what they play or where.'
Therefore, Jute has stipulated that I spoke in ignorance, not malice.
Therefore Jute is either ignorant of the meaning of simple English
words or is he himself lying."
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.a...53f45437 e3c5

Six hours after subject Krueger finally admitted "I spoke in
ignorance" he was once more in denial, telling one of his followers:
"It definitely separated the posers from the players," implying
that he won the argument. He furthermore deliberately restricted
dissemmination of his message admitting ignorance to only one of the
newsgroups in the debate; it was the only one of his messages he so
restricted.

CONCLUSIONS OF THE SECOND TEST
All the conclusions of the first test were confirmed:

4. Subject Krueger does not understand or honour the scientific method.
Having been clearly and repeatedly told that he did know all the
necessary facts, he still did not ask for the specifics of the test
subjects, he still pontificated as if he were an authority, regardless
of the fact that he could not say an authority on what.
5. Subject Krueger wants to win so badly that he uses illegitimate
means to win arguments, and personal abuse to intimidate those who
defeat him in straight argument.
6. Subject Krueger does not admit fallibility. When forced under severe
pressure to admit a gross error, he tries to limit dissemmination of
his admission, he tries to shift blame for it onto those who have
proved the error and within hours claims a victory, denying that he
committed the error.

COMPLETE REPORT
The full analysis with tables containing message counts and time
intervals will be available at the end of February. The appendix of
psycho-textual analysis will be available in May.
E&OE
JT, MH, RN, JK, supervised by AJ

You're a regular Ralph Greenson, Jute. Now give yourself a Nembutal
enema, **** off, and DIE!

"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...
FLAME WARRIOR
Preliminary report of
AN INTERNET EXPERIMENT IN LOW RESOURCE MOTIVATIONAL RESEARCH

Whoever Jute is, and regardless of his ethics, he ranks at the very top of
literary skills on usenet. Sometimes I put a lot of work into a post, but
Jute's efforts dwarf mine.

This futher arouses my curiousity about him. Regardless of his motives or
ethics, which I will not judge here, the demonstrated skill implies a level
of comfort and practice that can only be maintained by frequent publication.

What does this guy actually do in real life?

Robert Morein wrote:

"Andre Jute" wrote in message
roups.com...
FLAME WARRIOR
Preliminary report of
AN INTERNET EXPERIMENT IN LOW RESOURCE MOTIVATIONAL RESEARCH

Whoever Jute is, and regardless of his ethics, he ranks at the very top of
literary skills on usenet. Sometimes I put a lot of work into a post, but
Jute's efforts dwarf mine.

This futher arouses my curiousity about him. Regardless of his motives or
ethics, which I will not judge here, the demonstrated skill implies a level
of comfort and practice that can only be maintained by frequent publication.

What does this guy actually do in real life?

He molests collies.

dippyborg lied:

He molests collies.

That's better than servicing donkeys, as you do.

"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...
FLAME WARRIOR
Preliminary report of
AN INTERNET EXPERIMENT IN LOW RESOURCE MOTIVATIONAL RESEARCH

This and the foloowing are the biggest batch of unmitigated bull**** I have
ever seen.
You made this up after having your ass handed to you and losing in a
discussion on why Tubed SET amps are ****, a fact which everyone but a few
idiots seems to realize.
Allegedly conducting a DBT of some sort of musicans, you were then made
aware of the fact that they tend not to hear very well.


BACKGROUND
Mr Arny Krueger describes himself on audiophile newsgroups as an
engineer

An EE. This is true even if you don't beleive it.

or a sound recording engineer.
A job he does for his church, not an occupation.

His professional qualifications
are not known.

That is a lie.

The only known sound recording he has done is of his
local church choir, of which he sends people copies. He claims to have
special expertise in placebo tests but, again, his professional
qualification or experience is unascertainable.

Not true.

He has a self-made
netsite on which he describes his methods; they would not earn an
undergraduate a pass mark. He is widely known, to the point of
notoriety, as a Usenet flamer, that is, an unscrupulous debater who
insists on winning every argument and will resort to extreme means to
counter or suppress the views of those who disagree with him.

He insists on winning when the truth is on his side. In audio discussion,
that is nearly all the time.




Mr Krueger was warned in advance that he would be the subject of a
psychological study.

The person needing to be studied is the obviously deranged habitual liar,
Andre Jute.

THE HYPOTHESIS
That the subject Krueger has contempt for scientific method. That the
subject Krueger will use illegitimate means to win an argument. That
the subject Krueger will refuse to accept that he can be in error.

Which you failed to demonstrate, since it was not a scientific study that
was attempted.


METHODOLOGY
An article was posted to the Usenet on a subject, listener preferences
between transistor and tube audio amplifiers, on which Krueger is known
to hold strong views.

It has nothing to do with strong views, it has to do with the fact that tube
amplifers are technically inferior to transistor amplifers in all but very
rare instances. When they aren't inferior, they sound identical to
tranistor amplifers, that is they have so signnature sound of their own.

The article included a paragraph from a report on
a series of real placebo tests with the specific description of the
particular test subjects removed and substituted by a non-specific,
wordy description of the very large and varied generic class to which
they belong. Without the specific information on the particular test
subjects the article makes no sense, nor can it be criticised in
anything approaching a scientific or professional manner.


Nor was, other than to point out that musicans tend to suffer from hearing
loss.

The absence of the necessary information was intended to be obvious to
anyone qualified to discuss or conduct placebo tests.

More likely you did no such tests and just make this up as you go along.

Its obviousness
was tested: Twelve honours students were given this short article as
part of a coursework test and asked for a response within fifteen
minutes (just long enough to read it); all identified the anomaly and
asked for details of the test subject group.

The article was then provocatively (to Krueger) named "Why tubes are
the paradigm" and posted, when the opportunity arose, as an apparent
reply to pre-existing correspondence. The article and the resulting
thread is at:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.a...aa51186ea4b171

RESULT OF THE INITIAL TEST
Subject Krueger responded immediately in an aggressively hostile
manner.
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.a...f9e1eb9 48304

That professional musicians have extraordinary abilities to hear
imperfections due to techical issues is just and old wife's tale. For
openers, professional musicians, particularly classical performers, are
likely to be hearing-damaged due to exposure to loud sounds. Even soloists,
particularly soloists are likely to have their hearing damaged by the
extraordinarly loud sounds they can make with their own voices.

Hardly hostile, a simple statement of fact.



He apparently did not notice, or if he noticed did not care, that the
test subjects were not specified. He did not ask for the test subjects
to be specified. Instead he stated that the tests could not be valid
because the generic group to which they belong, musical performers,
"are likely to be hearing-damaged due to exposure to loud sounds".

Please point out where in the post referenced by you where he said any such
thing.
Here is the rest of the post to help you.

37. Arny Krueger
Dec 9, 8:56 am show options

Newsgroups: rec.audio.tubes
From: "Arny Krueger" - Find messages by this
author
Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2005 11:56:19 -0500
Local: Fri, Dec 9 2005 8:56 am
Subject: Why tubes are the paradigm
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message |
Show original | Report Abuse



"Andre Jute" wrote in message


oups.com...


It is the result at the ear that counts. If to the most experienced
and
refined ears in the world, professional classical performers, the
people who make their living playing, recording, listening to the
music
I wish to reproduce, a particular set of componentry sounds more
like
an open window on the concert hall, that is the set of componentry I
want. I don't care whether the components are tubes or transistors
or
some self-mimicking biological growth.


That professional musicians have extraordinary abilities to hear
imperfections due to techical issues is just and old wife's tale. For
openers, professional musicians, particularly classical performers,
are
likely to be hearing-damaged due to exposure to loud sounds. Even
soloists,
particularly soloists are likely to have their hearing damaged by the
extraordinarly loud sounds they can make with their own voices.


In my experience professional musicians in blind tests prefer tubes.


Probably due to a number of factors.

(1) Classical musicians are basically performers of retro-music. That
they
would prefer retro-technology makes perfect sense.


(2) Said blind tests were set by Andre Jute. Therefore we know for
sure that
they are biased against modern technology.


(3) Aformentioned hearing problems that endemic among performers who
must
endure extraordinary SPLs as they perform.


(4) Problems related to the fact that musical performers *are* often
very
sensitive listeners for *musical* differences, but not technical
differences. IOW, if you want to know that a note is off key, ask a
musician. If you want to know if it has audible nolinear distortion,
find a
trained technical listener.





This is in fact true of small minority of the universe from which the
actual test subjects were drawn but not of the particular test
subjects. He then proceeded to claim that other named subgroups from
the universe were also either hearing-impaired or capable of impairing
their hearing (singers).

He didn't claim it, he posted data as did others to confirm it.


He did not at this time or at any later point succeed in identifying
the test subjects.

Since he didn't know he posted info on a variety of musicans, at no time did
he say that they were in fact the people you claim to have studied.

Subject Krueger offered further unscientific, spurious or personally
insulting reasons for doubting the results:
"(1) Classical musicians are basically performers of retro-music.
That they would prefer retro-technology makes perfect sense."
This is of course impossible in tests where the subjects cannot see the
machines under test.
"(2) Said blind tests were set by Andre Jute. Therefore we know for
sure that
they are biased against modern technology."
A common smear tactic from subject Krueger's armory.
"(3) Aformentioned hearing problems that [are] endemic among
performers who must endure extraordinary SPLs as they perform."
Note "endemic" and "extraordinary SPLs" (sound pressure
levels), neither of which is justified by any evidence he proffered
either at this point or later.

These points were then argued with subject Krueger by team leader Jute
but Krueger snipped Jute's arguments and claimed:
" Bottom line, Jute has properly addressed (none) (zero) (nada)
critical points. Therefore they stand."
"snip empty rhetoric"

IOW, he told the truth and made you look foolish again.

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.audio.tubes/browse_frm/thread/9f37729ce5c847/db0142000dfc0120?q=%22Jute+has+properly+addressed+ (none)+(zero)+(nada)+critical%22&rnum=3#db0142000d fc0120

CONCLUSIONS OF THE FIRST TEST
All three strands of the hypothesis were proved correct as stated
1. Subject Krueger does not understand or honour the scientific method.
He did not ask for the specifics of the test subject.
2. Subject Krueger wants to win so badly that he uses illegitimate
means to win arguments.
3. Subject Krueger will not admit error.


Complete and utter bull**** from the mind of Andre Jute.


SECOND TEST
At this point it was decided to discover how far subject Krueger would
carry his denial of error. He was publicly bluntly confronted with
posing as an expert when he didn't know what the subject was.

Another lie, he simply posted reasons why any such test was likely to be
flawed.

A new
thread was started for this purpose in which proof was demanded of his
statements in relation to the test subjects, which were still not
identified him:
"Classical performers hearing-damaged" - Arny Kruger Lie No. 51281
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.a...9730fa608eb787

The result was a great deal more personal abuse directed at subject
Krueger's interlocutors. Having been advised that he had not been
informed of the specifics of the test group, he still did not request
information about the particular test group. Instead he went at random
through a wide variety of performers from the huge possible universe,
attempting to prove with data he found on Google that the outcome of
the tests described in the original article "Tubes are the
paradigm" could not be true. He continued to insist that he was the
ultimate expert on the subject. Here is his final admission, after more
than 200 messages in various threads, of his error, complete with
further personal abuse:

"The definition of a lie is knowingly telling a falsehood. However,
Jute accuses me of lying because I talked about musicians:
'...without knowing who they are or what they play or where.'
Therefore, Jute has stipulated that I spoke in ignorance, not malice.
Therefore Jute is either ignorant of the meaning of simple English
words or is he himself lying."
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.a...53f45437 e3c5

Six hours after subject Krueger finally admitted "I spoke in
ignorance" he was once more in denial, telling one of his followers:
"It definitely separated the posers from the players," implying
that he won the argument. He furthermore deliberately restricted
dissemmination of his message admitting ignorance to only one of the
newsgroups in the debate; it was the only one of his messages he so
restricted.

CONCLUSIONS OF THE SECOND TEST
All the conclusions of the first test were confirmed:


You confirmed that you are not technically competent to conduct such tests
and that you don't understnd the meaing of the word lie.


4. Subject Krueger does not understand or honour the scientific method.
Having been clearly and repeatedly told that he did know all the
necessary facts, he still did not ask for the specifics of the test
subjects, he still pontificated as if he were an authority, regardless
of the fact that he could not say an authority on what.
5. Subject Krueger wants to win so badly that he uses illegitimate
means to win arguments, and personal abuse to intimidate those who
defeat him in straight argument.

More of that famous Jute "projection," whereupon you ascribe your traints
to others.


6. Subject Krueger does not admit fallibility.

Sure he does but only when he's wrong.

When forced under severe
pressure to admit a gross error, he tries to limit dissemmination of
his admission, he tries to shift blame for it onto those who have
proved the error and within hours claims a victory, denying that he
committed the error.

Since no error was committed, no reason to claim that he made one. He was
not giving a specific reason why such a test as you claim to have conducted
was invalid, but why the general category of "musicians" was not a good one.


COMPLETE REPORT
The full analysis with tables containing message counts and time
intervals will be available at the end of February. The appendix of
psycho-textual analysis will be available in May.
E&OE
JT, MH, RN, JK, supervised by AJ

Thank you for that self serving heap of crapola where you show yourself once
again to be an unmitigated liar.

"Robert Morein" wrote in message

"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...
FLAME WARRIOR
Preliminary report of
AN INTERNET EXPERIMENT IN LOW RESOURCE MOTIVATIONAL
RESEARCH
Whoever Jute is, and regardless of his ethics, he ranks
at the very top of literary skills on usenet. Sometimes I
put a lot of work into a post, but Jute's efforts dwarf
mine.

Morein, just about everybody's efforts at anything worthwhile dwarf your's.

Robert Morein wrote:

What does this guy actually do in real life?



Write posts like yours and then fap fap fap over them.


Adam

wrote in message
nk.net...


Thank you for that self serving heap of crapola where you show yourself
once again to be an unmitigated liar.


"At least" Arny is a mitigated liar, being that he is insane.

"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...
FLAME WARRIOR
Preliminary report of
AN INTERNET EXPERIMENT IN LOW RESOURCE MOTIVATIONAL RESEARCH


BACKGROUND
Mr Arny Krueger describes himself on audiophile newsgroups as an
engineer or a sound recording engineer. His professional qualifications
are not known.

That is not true. We know that he has contributed to
the design of the Omni ashtray.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
"Robert Morein" wrote in message

"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...
FLAME WARRIOR
Preliminary report of
AN INTERNET EXPERIMENT IN LOW RESOURCE MOTIVATIONAL
RESEARCH
Whoever Jute is, and regardless of his ethics, he ranks
at the very top of literary skills on usenet. Sometimes I
put a lot of work into a post, but Jute's efforts dwarf
mine.

Morein, just about everybody's efforts at anything worthwhile dwarf
your's.
Arny, I present to you the gift of a small edit. In the above sentence,
"your's" should be "yours". In fact, the contractive form you used does not
exist for the word "your." Your writing is, in fact, very typical of an
engineer. You have things to say, but at best, your prose is utilitarian.
More often, it is simply defective.

wrote:
"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...
Mr Arny Krueger describes himself on audiophile newsgroups as...
a sound recording engineer.

A job he does for his church, not an occupation.

Except that on r.a.p. a few months back. Arny Krueger did indeed
claim that this actviity qualified him as a "professional" recording
engineer, due to the cash value of the work he donated to his
church free of charge.

Once again, Mr. McKelvy, your unquestioned faith leads you astray.
All you needed to do was enter "Krueger" + "professional" +
"engineer" in the Google search engine and you would have found the
relevant threads.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

"Robert Morein" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
"Robert Morein" wrote in message

"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...
FLAME WARRIOR
Preliminary report of
AN INTERNET EXPERIMENT IN LOW RESOURCE MOTIVATIONAL
RESEARCH
Whoever Jute is, and regardless of his ethics, he ranks
at the very top of literary skills on usenet. Sometimes
I put a lot of work into a post, but Jute's efforts
dwarf mine.

Morein, just about everybody's efforts at anything
worthwhile dwarf your's.

Arny, I present to you the gift of a small edit.

Lame attempt at obfuscation.

"John Atkinson" wrote in message
oups.com...

wrote:
"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...
Mr Arny Krueger describes himself on audiophile newsgroups as...
a sound recording engineer.

A job he does for his church, not an occupation.

Except that on r.a.p. a few months back. Arny Krueger did indeed
claim that this actviity qualified him as a "professional" recording
engineer, due to the cash value of the work he donated to his
church free of charge.

Once again, Mr. McKelvy, your unquestioned faith leads you astray.
All you needed to do was enter "Krueger" + "professional" +
"engineer" in the Google search engine and you would have found the
relevant threads.

Well excuse the **** out of me for missing that tid bit.
I still don't see how that makes my statement incorrect. It is not his
occupation it is something he does for his church. He may in fact be as
qualified as a professional, neither yo nor I have any decent evidence of
his abilities in that area. The one snippet he posted is hardly enough
evidence on which to base a conclusion.

wrote:
"John Atkinson" wrote in message
oups.com...
wrote:
"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...
Mr Arny Krueger describes himself on audiophile newsgroups as...
a sound recording engineer.

A job he does for his church, not an occupation.

Except that on r.a.p. a few months back. Arny Krueger did indeed
claim that this actviity qualified him as a "professional" recording
engineer, due to the cash value of the work he donated to his
church free of charge.

Well excuse the **** out of me for missing that tid bit.
I still don't see how that makes my statement incorrect.

Arny Krueger himself has contradicted you, is all I am pointing out.

It is not his occupation it is something he does for his church.

Personally I agree, However, Arny Krueger has violently objected
when that point has been made to him.

He may in fact be as qualified as a professional, neither yo nor I have
any decent evidence of his abilities in that area.

Its not his abilities that disqualify AK as a professional recording
engineer, it's the fact that no-one pays him money to make
recordings. :-)

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

wrote in message
ups.com...

wrote:
"John Atkinson" wrote in message
oups.com...
wrote:
"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...
Mr Arny Krueger describes himself on audiophile newsgroups as...
a sound recording engineer.

A job he does for his church, not an occupation.

Except that on r.a.p. a few months back. Arny Krueger did indeed
claim that this actviity qualified him as a "professional" recording
engineer, due to the cash value of the work he donated to his
church free of charge.

Well excuse the **** out of me for missing that tid bit.
I still don't see how that makes my statement incorrect.

Arny Krueger himself has contradicted you, is all I am pointing out.

It is not his occupation it is something he does for his church.

Personally I agree, However, Arny Krueger has violently objected
when that point has been made to him.

He may in fact be as qualified as a professional, neither yo nor I have
any decent evidence of his abilities in that area.

Its not his abilities that disqualify AK as a professional recording
engineer, it's the fact that no-one pays him money to make
recordings. :-)

And that's one less bad mastering job I have to be stuck with

"John Atkinson" wrote in message
oups.com...

wrote:
"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...
Mr Arny Krueger describes himself on audiophile newsgroups as...
a sound recording engineer.

A job he does for his church, not an occupation.

Except that on r.a.p. a few months back. Arny Krueger did indeed
claim that this actviity qualified him as a "professional" recording
engineer, due to the cash value of the work he donated to his
church free of charge.

I actually fell for this ruse and tried to find a relevant post.

http://groups.google.com/groups?q=pr...fe=off&num=10&

I guess Atkinson will have to provide a URL to make a believer out of me.

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...
FLAME WARRIOR
Preliminary report of
AN INTERNET EXPERIMENT IN LOW RESOURCE MOTIVATIONAL RESEARCH


BACKGROUND
Mr Arny Krueger describes himself on audiophile newsgroups as an
engineer or a sound recording engineer. His professional qualifications
are not known.

That is not true. We know that he has contributed to
the design of the Omni ashtray.
Also, "coasters" made of CDs that burned unsatisfactorily.
All of Krueger's designs have a single orginal element: a hole in the
middle.

On Sun, 18 Dec 2005 16:57:08 -0500, "Robert Morein"
wrote:


"Andre Jute" wrote in message
roups.com...
FLAME WARRIOR
Preliminary report of
AN INTERNET EXPERIMENT IN LOW RESOURCE MOTIVATIONAL RESEARCH

Whoever Jute is, and regardless of his ethics, he ranks at the very top of
literary skills on usenet. Sometimes I put a lot of work into a post, but
Jute's efforts dwarf mine.

This futher arouses my curiousity about him. Regardless of his motives or
ethics, which I will not judge here, the demonstrated skill implies a level
of comfort and practice that can only be maintained by frequent publication.

What does this guy actually do in real life?

No doubt you've already done a Google. There's an Andre Jute who's a
thriller writer who also writes books on how to be a thriller writer,
plus appears to be have been everywhere and done everything. That
fits.

wrote in message
ups.com...


Its not his abilities that disqualify AK as a professional recording
engineer, it's the fact that no-one pays him money to make
recordings. :-)


Does that mean that he is not really a "perfeshunal komputer konsultent"?

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

All of Krueger's designs have a single orginal element: a hole in the
middle.


He nakes a unique tuird.

wrote in message
ups.com...
Its not his abilities that disqualify AK as a professional recording
engineer, it's the fact that no-one pays him money to make
recordings. :-)


Hi John,

I have it on good authority that the reverse is usually the case. People get
paid to "arniisit" by his family or caseworkers.

Cheers,

Margaret

On Sun, 18 Dec 2005 16:57:08 -0500, "Robert Morein"
wrote:


"Andre Jute" wrote in message
roups.com...
FLAME WARRIOR
Preliminary report of
AN INTERNET EXPERIMENT IN LOW RESOURCE MOTIVATIONAL RESEARCH

Whoever Jute is, and regardless of his ethics, he ranks at the very top of
literary skills on usenet. Sometimes I put a lot of work into a post, but
Jute's efforts dwarf mine.

This futher arouses my curiousity about him. Regardless of his motives or
ethics, which I will not judge here, the demonstrated skill implies a level
of comfort and practice that can only be maintained by frequent publication.

What does this guy actually do in real life?

He wrote some potboiler novels about twenty years ago, now he teaches
creative writing to college kids.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Mon, 19 Dec 2005 22:37:27 -0500, "Clyde Slick"
wrote:


He nakes a unique tuird.

What was that, Art? My monitor must be playing up again.

"John Atkinson" wrote in message
oups.com...

wrote:
"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...
Mr Arny Krueger describes himself on audiophile newsgroups as...
a sound recording engineer.

A job he does for his church, not an occupation.

Except that on r.a.p. a few months back. Arny Krueger did indeed
claim that this actviity qualified him as a "professional" recording
engineer, due to the cash value of the work he donated to his
church free of charge.

Firstly, even by Mr.Kruger's own twisted logic, his statement is
nonsense.The above, by definition does not make him a professional
recording engineer, although we should applaud the work he does for
charity. The dictionary definition of a professional is
a person who earns a living by his craft (in this case recording)
I am told that Mr Kreuger assembles computers in his daytime job

Secondly. Have you heard any of Arny's recordings???
Professional is not a word that comes to mind.


Iain

In , Stewart Pinkerton wrote :

On Sun, 18 Dec 2005 16:57:08 -0500, "Robert Morein"
wrote:


"Andre Jute" wrote in message
groups.com...
FLAME WARRIOR
Preliminary report of
AN INTERNET EXPERIMENT IN LOW RESOURCE MOTIVATIONAL RESEARCH

Whoever Jute is, and regardless of his ethics, he ranks at the very top of
literary skills on usenet. Sometimes I put a lot of work into a post, but
Jute's efforts dwarf mine.

This futher arouses my curiousity about him. Regardless of his motives or
ethics, which I will not judge here, the demonstrated skill implies a
level of comfort and practice that can only be maintained by frequent
publication.

What does this guy actually do in real life?

He wrote some potboiler novels about twenty years ago, now he teaches
creative writing to college kids.

It's not really surprising that such narcissic guy loves to replay "Dead
Poets Society" all the days of his life.
Too bad he's also confusing hedonism and epicurism. ;-)


--
"Nobody seemes to have actaully read what i wrote.
But what's new around here?"

Dave Weil, Sun, 05 Oct 2003 00:57:15

Iain Churches said:

Secondly. Have you heard any of Arny's recordings???

I've heard two. Krooger denies that the first one exists. The "debating
trade" is such a labyrinth. ;-)

Professional is not a word that comes to mind.

"Bull****! Bull****! Bull****!"

Arny Krueger wrote:
"John Atkinson" wrote in message
oups.com...
on r.a.p. a few months back. Arny Krueger did indeed claim that
this actviity qualified him as a "professional" recording engineer, due
to the cash value of the work he donated to his church free of charge.

I actually fell for this ruse and tried to find a relevant post.
...
I guess Atkinson will have to provide a URL to make a believer out of me.

Sure. The Google message ID is
posted by you in rec.audio.pro on Thu, 19 May 2005 23:10:22. This is
what you wrote:

"Given that people occasionally pay me for some of my audio
efforts, can't I squeek by as a professional? When they have
to hire someone to do my job at church, its a $150 gig for
him. Small pototoes in the larger view, but isn't creating
value at the rate of about $8K a year worth some kind of
standing? ;-)"

Perhaps you can explain to Mr. McKelvy that you disagree with
him regarding your "professional" status.

BTW, I am pleased to note in another message uncovered by my
search, this time in r.a.o., that my standing as an "audio
professional"
was vouchsafed by no less than Arny Krueger, on 1997/02/04 in message
.
A belated thank you, Mr. Krueger.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

"paul packer" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 19 Dec 2005 22:37:27 -0500, "Clyde Slick"
wrote:


He nakes a unique tuird.

What was that, Art? My monitor must be playing up again.

My lawwe advizes me too mayke typox sow I dont gett sueed.

"Iain Churches" wrote in message
...

I am told that Mr Kreuger assembles computers in his daytime job

Secondly. Have you heard any of Arny's recordings???
Professional is not a word that comes to mind.




Have you ever used one of his komputerz?

"Iain Churches" wrote in message
...

"John Atkinson" wrote in message
oups.com...

wrote:
"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...
Mr Arny Krueger describes himself on audiophile newsgroups as...
a sound recording engineer.

A job he does for his church, not an occupation.

Except that on r.a.p. a few months back. Arny Krueger did indeed
claim that this actviity qualified him as a "professional" recording
engineer, due to the cash value of the work he donated to his
church free of charge.

Firstly, even by Mr.Kruger's own twisted logic, his statement is
nonsense.

AFAIK, its a fabrication. I sure can't find anything that looks like it.

Secondly. Have you heard any of Arny's recordings???
Professional is not a word that comes to mind.

In fact nobody has ever heard any of Iain's recordings because there are
none. All of the recordings that Iain has taken credit for had most of the
work done on them by others. He has no legal rights to them at all. Whatever
small contribution he did make to them was performed using equipment,
artists, and venues that were obtained by others and at the expense of
others.

It's my understanding that in contrast, John Atkinson has actually made some
recordings of note. He has personally lined up artists, venues, and
equipment. Atkinson, at least some of the time personally selected, obtained
and set up the equipment, loaded and unloaded recording media of his
personal choice, was the sole technician who personally placed, adjusted,
and started and stopped the equipment.

AFAIK Atkinson has edited at least some (I think all) of his recordings
himself using editing facilities that he personally selected and/or owned,
personally mastered some or all of the recordings, and on occasion delivered
the masters for reproduction by subcontractors that he personally selected
and made the arrangements for.

There's a good chance that Atkinson even owns the copyrights to some of his
recordings, which are thus truely his.

Note that while I've explained these differences to Iain before on several
occasions, he continues to act like they don't exist. In short, he's either
BSing, or he's seriously delusional.

Iain is like I guy who slaps fenders on Jeeps in the Chrysler plant about 6
miles from my house, and tells his friends that he makes cars from start to
finish.

In contrast, there are people all over Detroit who have little garages of no
note or notice, who still build cars from bolts, nuts, raw sheet metal, mill
the metal parts, etc. Their cars may lack some refinements as compared to a
new Jeep Grand Cheokee or Dodge Magnum, but they can honestly take credit
for the finished product.

"John Atkinson" wrote in message
ups.com...

Arny Krueger wrote:
"John Atkinson" wrote in message
oups.com...
on r.a.p. a few months back. Arny Krueger did indeed claim that
this actviity qualified him as a "professional" recording engineer, due
to the cash value of the work he donated to his church free of charge.

I actually fell for this ruse and tried to find a relevant post.
...
I guess Atkinson will have to provide a URL to make a believer out of me.

Sure. The Google message ID is
posted by you in rec.audio.pro on Thu, 19 May 2005 23:10:22. This is
what you wrote:

"Given that people occasionally pay me for some of my audio
efforts, can't I squeek by as a professional? When they have
to hire someone to do my job at church, its a $150 gig for
him. Small pototoes in the larger view, but isn't creating
value at the rate of about $8K a year worth some kind of
standing? ;-)"

Anybody with a brain can see that this is a humorous rhetorical question.
;-)

Perhaps you can explain to Mr. McKelvy that you disagree with
him regarding your "professional" status.

Any fool can see that the paragraph above is not a claim, but a
light-hearted rhetorical question intended to poke fun at people who put on
*professional* airs.

Thanks Atkinson for showing that despite your self-acclaimed literary
talents and experience, you are unable to discern such simple things. One
might think that the question marks and the smiley emoticon would be sure
indicators.

For the record, I don't care whether *anybody* thinks I'm a professional
whatever or not. The whole point of the paragraph was that I really don't
care, I just do what I do.

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

In fact nobody has ever heard any of Iain's recordings because there are
none. All of the recordings that Iain has taken credit for had most of the
work done on them by others. He has no legal rights to them at all. Whatever
small contribution he did make to them was performed using equipment,
artists, and venues that were obtained by others and at the expense of
others.

Why do you say stuff like this? Google shows you wrong in seconds, and
none of your hair-splitting about legal rights or collaborative work or
who hired the equipment changes that.

Stephen

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

"Iain Churches" wrote in message
...

"John Atkinson" wrote in message
oups.com...

wrote:
"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...
Mr Arny Krueger describes himself on audiophile newsgroups as...
a sound recording engineer.

A job he does for his church, not an occupation.

Except that on r.a.p. a few months back. Arny Krueger did indeed
claim that this actviity qualified him as a "professional" recording
engineer, due to the cash value of the work he donated to his
church free of charge.

Firstly, even by Mr.Kruger's own twisted logic, his statement is
nonsense.

AFAIK, its a fabrication. I sure can't find anything that looks like it.


THIS PURE BULL****, ARNY. I REMEMBER WELL WHEN YOU MADE THAT POST ON RAP.
BECAUSE IT STRUCK ME AS LUDICROUS AT THE TIME (AND STILL DOES TODAY).


snip remainder as too silly to comment on, and subsequently refuted).

"Arny Krueger" said:

Iain is like I guy who slaps fenders on Jeeps in the Chrysler plant about 6
miles from my house, and tells his friends that he makes cars from start to
finish.


Or someone who records the choir at his church and tells his buddies
he's a "professional recording engineer". ;-)

As of feb. 2006, I'll be working for an audio company.
Does that change my "authority" on RAO or RATubes?


In contrast, there are people all over Detroit who have little garages of no
note or notice, who still build cars from bolts, nuts, raw sheet metal, mill
the metal parts, etc. Their cars may lack some refinements as compared to a
new Jeep Grand Cheokee or Dodge Magnum, but they can honestly take credit
for the finished product.


Likewise for people like Jute, Turner and, yes, even deWaal.
They make (tube) amps, speakers, DACs, and turntables from various
"nuts and bolts" that are lying around in their junk boxes.
Some even go so far as to make their own chassis' and output
transformers.
Their products may lack the refinements of a new Ongaku or ARC, but
they can honestly take credit for the finished product.

--

"Audio as a serious hobby is going down the tubes."
- Howard Ferstler, 25/4/2005

"MINe 109" wrote in message

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

In fact nobody has ever heard any of Iain's recordings
because there are none. All of the recordings that Iain
has taken credit for had most of the work done on them
by others. He has no legal rights to them at all.
Whatever small contribution he did make to them was
performed using equipment, artists, and venues that were
obtained by others and at the expense of others.

Why do you say stuff like this? Google shows you wrong in
seconds, and none of your hair-splitting about legal
rights or collaborative work or who hired the equipment
changes that.

Look Stephen, in you usual rush to be right as opposed to being correct you
pulled your usual debating trade schtick.

You dismissed my main point as "hair splitting", and eliminated a thorough
discussion of exactly what I meant.

In my book Stephen that shows you once again to be a deceptive troll.

If you want to be responsive to the issues I raised Stephen, then do so.
Otherwise you can make an even bigger fool of yourself on your own.

"Sander deWaal" wrote in message


As of feb. 2006, I'll be working for an audio company.
Does that change my "authority" on RAO or RATubes?


In contrast, there are people all over Detroit who have
little garages of no note or notice, who still build
cars from bolts, nuts, raw sheet metal, mill the metal
parts, etc. Their cars may lack some refinements as
compared to a new Jeep Grand Cheokee or Dodge Magnum,
but they can honestly take credit for the finished
product.


Likewise for people like Jute, Turner and, yes, even
deWaal.
They make (tube) amps, speakers, DACs, and turntables
from various "nuts and bolts" that are lying around in
their junk boxes.
Some even go so far as to make their own chassis' and
output transformers.
Their products may lack the refinements of a new Ongaku
or ARC, but they can honestly take credit for the
finished product.

Agreed, depsite the snarky stuff I had to delete.

"Arny Krueger" said:

"Sander deWaal" wrote in message


As of feb. 2006, I'll be working for an audio company.
Does that change my "authority" on RAO or RATubes?


In contrast, there are people all over Detroit who have
little garages of no note or notice, who still build
cars from bolts, nuts, raw sheet metal, mill the metal
parts, etc. Their cars may lack some refinements as
compared to a new Jeep Grand Cheokee or Dodge Magnum,
but they can honestly take credit for the finished
product.


Likewise for people like Jute, Turner and, yes, even
deWaal.
They make (tube) amps, speakers, DACs, and turntables
from various "nuts and bolts" that are lying around in
their junk boxes.
Some even go so far as to make their own chassis' and
output transformers.
Their products may lack the refinements of a new Ongaku
or ARC, but they can honestly take credit for the
finished product.


Agreed, depsite the snarky stuff I had to delete.


All good and well, but what's your answer to the question I posted on
top? This one, to be exact:

As of feb. 2006, I'll be working for an audio company.
Does that change my "authority" on RAO or RATubes?

--

"Audio as a serious hobby is going down the tubes."
- Howard Ferstler, 25/4/2005

"Sander deWaal" wrote in message


All good and well, but what's your answer to the question
I posted on top? This one, to be exact:

As of feb. 2006, I'll be working for an audio company.

Congratuations!

Does that change my "authority" on RAO or RATubes?

Only if an immediate brain transplant is part of the employment agreement.
;-)

IOW, I don't expect your audio knowlege to increase or decrease dramatically
on that day.

Stewart Pinkerton, Postman of Spam, wrote:
On Sun, 18 Dec 2005 16:57:08 -0500, "Robert Morein"
wrote:


"Andre Jute" wrote in message
roups.com...
FLAME WARRIOR
Preliminary report of
AN INTERNET EXPERIMENT IN LOW RESOURCE MOTIVATIONAL RESEARCH

Whoever Jute is, and regardless of his ethics, he ranks at the very top of
literary skills on usenet. Sometimes I put a lot of work into a post, but
Jute's efforts dwarf mine.

This futher arouses my curiousity about him. Regardless of his motives or
ethics, which I will not judge here, the demonstrated skill implies a level
of comfort and practice that can only be maintained by frequent publication.

What does this guy actually do in real life?

He wrote some potboiler novels about twenty years ago, now he teaches
creative writing to college kids.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Nope, I don't teach creative writing, though it is true that my
textbooks in writing are prescribed texts in various such courses.
Others of my books are prescribed in other courses. A novel of mine was
once prescribed as a text in a course at an English university for
high-level civil servants, soldiers and policemen in the anti-terrorist
branches; it was taught by Brigadier Richard Clutterbuck.

I'm interested in where we can find your college-level textbooks,
Pinkerton.

Some of my books, including novels and technical texts, with reviews,
can be found at
http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/THE%20WRITER'S%20HOUSE.html
The Times clearly didn't consult Pinkothicko before they wrote:
"Jute has clearly conducted a great deal of research into everything he
describes, investing the novel with an air of prophecy. His moral and
ecological concerns are important.." -- Times Literary Supplement

Andre Jute
Interdisciplinary. Bend over, Pinko.