[ScottW]

On Jun 27, 1:32 am, Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
wrote:
On Jun 24, 11:58 am, "ScottW" wrote:





"Soundhaspriority" wrote in message

m...

"ScottW" wrote in message
...

"George M. Middius" cmndr _ george @ comcast . net wrote in message
. ..

You just repeated your complaint that my knowledge of audio is a
disappointment to you. Not that I would begrudge you the right to bitch
about anything you choose, but I suggest your animosity towards moi is
rooted elsewhere than my supposed ignorance about audio.

Very true. Its your KDS and efforts to spread the vile
brain rot throughout RAO that I despise. I really couldn't care about your
lack of audio knowledge or even your general failure to participate
in audio topics but I do object to your self declared right to ridicule
and how it's contributed to the departure of so many.

Scott, you've mellowed a little bit, but you have a generally negative cant.

Awwww.

And why do you torture us with OT postings? What is the excuse for your
multi-year rant?

You for one.

I tried to plant a tree a while back. I blogged about the experience of a
newbie recording jazz in the Village. While some people replied that they
enjoyed the posts, there was very little follow-up discussion.

Since few people here are into recording...did you expect otherwise?

I concluded that most people are here to argue.

How long did that take?

One dish on the menu of argumentation is the misbehavior of others.

With the exception of the nihilistic Arny Krueger and the pestiferous Brian
McCarty, the participants in r.a.o. are well-meaning people, perhaps with a
little too much stomach acid. But I think we fall short in fulfillment of our
obligations in the use of a public resource. So I have a thought:

Let's establish a modest goal. Let's try to make 40% of the posts on this
group about audio.

You get George to agree and I'll abide.

So tell me: is George responsible for your behavior, or am I?

Niether, I do what I want in the circumstances.
Doesn't make either of you less
assholes in this circumstance.


But he has to make up for 10 years of OT.

That could take a while.

You, for example, took a little over a year to make up for it.

That gives him 4 years of noththing but audio.

That means that you're done.

Check the archives and get back to me.
I expect a complete tally independently audited.


I think the group will go generally
dead with the occasional silly newb question popping up or another find
in the endless cantata quest but you'll get what you wish for.

Damn.

You don't mean that, while the volume will suffer, the noise will be
reduced?

How many people want a group with one new post/week
with responses coming weeks later?

This is a threat?

Its an observation.

That would mean, for example, that if you do an OT post, or if I bitch about
McCarty, or if George bitches about you, most of the time, we should follow
with an audio-related post.

Note to Jenn....you're only allowed 40% Test posts. Better get those
filters straight quick.

Good one!

Congrats!

Hm. Why do you oppose test posts? It will keep the volume on RAO up.

They're boring. I'm opposed to your boring posts too, note.

ScottW

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Jun 27, 6:34 pm, ScottW wrote:
On Jun 27, 1:32 am, Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!

Hm. Why do you oppose test posts? It will keep the volume on RAO up.

They're boring. I'm opposed to your boring posts too, note.

Scintillating.

Another English word that has apparently taken on a new definition.

[ScottW]

On Jun 27, 9:45 pm, Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
wrote:
On Jun 27, 6:34 pm, ScottW wrote:

On Jun 27, 1:32 am, Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
Hm. Why do you oppose test posts? It will keep the volume on RAO up.

They're boring. I'm opposed to your boring posts too, note.

Scintillating.

Another English word that has apparently taken on a new definition.

Main Entry: scintillating
Function: adjective
Date: 1846
: brilliantly lively, stimulating, or witty a scintillating
conversation

Nope. You're wrong and not scintillating at all.

ScottW

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Jun 28, 12:22 pm, ScottW wrote:
On Jun 27, 9:45 pm, Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!

wrote:
On Jun 27, 6:34 pm, ScottW wrote:

On Jun 27, 1:32 am, Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
Hm. Why do you oppose test posts? It will keep the volume on RAO up.

They're boring. I'm opposed to your boring posts too, note.

Scintillating.

Another English word that has apparently taken on a new definition.

Main Entry: scintillating
Function: adjective
Date: 1846
: brilliantly lively, stimulating, or witty a scintillating
conversation

Nope. You're wrong and not scintillating at all.

I was, of course, referring to the fact that you apparently believe
your OT posts to be something other than selfish and boring.

While my posts may be boring, they "at least" have intelligence, logic
and humor going for them.

What have you got?

LOL!

I'm so glad you broke. Now I can tell you what I think about you again.

[ScottW]

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Jun 28, 12:22 pm, ScottW wrote:
On Jun 27, 9:45 pm, Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!

wrote:
On Jun 27, 6:34 pm, ScottW wrote:

On Jun 27, 1:32 am, Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
Hm. Why do you oppose test posts? It will keep the volume on RAO up.

They're boring. I'm opposed to your boring posts too, note.

Scintillating.

Another English word that has apparently taken on a new definition.

Main Entry: scintillating
Function: adjective
Date: 1846
: brilliantly lively, stimulating, or witty a scintillating
conversation

Nope. You're wrong and not scintillating at all.

I was, of course, referring to the fact that you apparently believe
your OT posts to be something other than selfish and boring.

It's all in perspective.

While my posts may be boring, they "at least" have intelligence, logic
and humor going for them.

I never met an aficianodo grade school trash talk before.


What have you got?

LOL!

I'm so glad you broke. Now I can tell you what I think about you again.

Controlling you if even briefly has no value to me.

ScottW

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Jun 28, 7:57 pm, "ScottW" wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in oglegroups.com...





On Jun 28, 12:22 pm, ScottW wrote:
On Jun 27, 9:45 pm, Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!

wrote:
On Jun 27, 6:34 pm, ScottW wrote:

On Jun 27, 1:32 am, Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
Hm. Why do you oppose test posts? It will keep the volume on RAO up.

They're boring. I'm opposed to your boring posts too, note.

Scintillating.

Another English word that has apparently taken on a new definition.

Main Entry: scintillating
Function: adjective
Date: 1846
: brilliantly lively, stimulating, or witty a scintillating
conversation

Nope. You're wrong and not scintillating at all.

I was, of course, referring to the fact that you apparently believe
your OT posts to be something other than selfish and boring.

It's all in perspective.

Indeed.

Your perspective of your posts versus the rest of the world's
perspective of your posts.

While my posts may be boring, they "at least" have intelligence, logic
and humor going for them.

I never met an aficianodo grade school trash talk before.

While I've never met a more mangled sentence. What language is this
is? What were you trying to say?

What have you got?

LOL!

I'm so glad you broke. Now I can tell you what I think about you again.

Controlling you if even briefly has no value to me.

You didn't control me. I abided by an agreement, you broke the
agreement. Oh well.

"At least" we all know where your 'ethics,' 'morality' and 'integrity'
are. Some of us already knew, but it's still nice to have your self-
inflicted proof.

[ScottW]

On Jun 29, 10:54 am, Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
wrote:
On Jun 28, 7:57 pm, "ScottW" wrote:





"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in oglegroups.com...

On Jun 28, 12:22 pm, ScottW wrote:
On Jun 27, 9:45 pm, Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!

wrote:
On Jun 27, 6:34 pm, ScottW wrote:

On Jun 27, 1:32 am, Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
Hm. Why do you oppose test posts? It will keep the volume on RAO up.

They're boring. I'm opposed to your boring posts too, note.

Scintillating.

Another English word that has apparently taken on a new definition.

Main Entry: scintillating
Function: adjective
Date: 1846
: brilliantly lively, stimulating, or witty a scintillating
conversation

Nope. You're wrong and not scintillating at all.

I was, of course, referring to the fact that you apparently believe
your OT posts to be something other than selfish and boring.

It's all in perspective.

Indeed.

Your perspective of your posts versus the rest of the world's
perspective of your posts.

While my posts may be boring, they "at least" have intelligence, logic
and humor going for them.

I never met an aficianodo grade school trash talk before.

While I've never met a more mangled sentence.

One would think the typical person of above average intelligence
could determine and insert the appropriate missing preposition.
You're obviously not at that level.
Here, let me help.

I never met an oficianado of grade school trash talk before.

Better now?

What language is this
is? What were you trying to say?

What have you got?

LOL!

I'm so glad you broke. Now I can tell you what I think about you again.

Controlling you if even briefly has no value to me.

You didn't control me. I abided by an agreement, you broke the
agreement. Oh well.

You had an agreement. I engaged in a test.
Test conclusive. You're an audio nothing and this group
goes dead if audio is all there is to discuss.

ScottW