Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Tom
 
Posts: n/a
Default Congratulations to Thing

http://www.nationalmssociety.org/arr...6077&p=27&g=21


  #3   Report Post  
Arny Krueger
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"George M. Middius" wrote in message



.. You embraced the seemingly
bizarre notion that the Krooborg and its "objectivist" ilk have a
meaningful viewpoint,


This statement is so flawed that it can't be a mere grotesque error.

First off, I'm not an objectivist, I'm a subjectivist. I'm simply a
subjectivist who has progressed far enough beyond the absolute and total
naiveté that Middius preaches, to see some value in considering issues
relating to the reliability of human perceptions.

Secondly, the idea that the objectivists lack a meaningful viewpoint is
falsified by the years of effort that Middius has put into attacking it. Or
perhaps Middius wants us to believe that he truly is the reincarnation of
Don Quixote, and his zillions of diatribes against mainstream scientific
thought as applied to audio are simply jousts with slow-moving windmill
blades.



  #4   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default


the nutball posting as "George M. Middius" ranted:


Thing, you've outdone yourself. Really. I'm referring to your

fantastical
hypothesizing about JA's "true" motivation for inviting the Krooborg

to a
one-on-one debate. You embraced the seemingly bizarre notion that the
Krooborg and its "objectivist" ilk have a meaningful viewpoint, and

you
presented it entirely seriously. No trace of humor, irony, or satire

could
be found. The juxtaposition of creativity and a serious tone served

to
reinforce your peculiar notion that the Krooborg is worth saving, and

also
attempted to demean Stereophile and, by extension, the entire

E.H.E.E. It
was very creative of you, especially considering how grim and

pugnacious
you usually are.

If it had been me, I couldn't have restrained myself from adding some
humor. I might've referred to JA's imagined army of spin doctors,

working
overtime to protect the cash cow that is the E.H.E.E. from the

ravages of
the "debating trade". I'd have said the livelihoods and profit

margins of
a huge array of greedy con artists are at risk of being exposed by

the
merciless assault of Kroologic and spontaneous factuation. I'd have

hinted
at dark doings on the part of the E.H.E.E.'s contingent of fixers,

who had
"obviously" been dispatched to spread bribes throughout the ranks of
overpaid audio journalists in order to mute their reporting of the
ferocious assault to be wreaked by the Krooborg. And I'd do it all

with
galloping, overreaching, run-on sentences to convey the enormity of

the
conspiracy and the widespread panic now rippling throughout the

E.H.E.E.

But not you. In a tastefully understated presentation, you simply put
forward your ideas, banking on the inherent beauty of their

truthfulness
to propel them through the currents of controversy. Well done, Thing.

May
your respirator function flawlessly for the remainder of your

existence.



So saith Lord Atkinson, "my invitation is to debate me in person,
something you have wished for and I have felt necessary":


http://tinyurl.com/4khyj



Right there in Google, from the horse's mouth, "George": "necessary".


Enjoy!;-)

  #5   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Arny Krueger wrote:
"George M. Middius" wrote in message



. You embraced the seemingly
bizarre notion that the Krooborg and its "objectivist" ilk have a
meaningful viewpoint,


This statement is so flawed that it can't be a mere grotesque error.

First off, I'm not an objectivist, I'm a subjectivist. I'm simply a
subjectivist who has progressed far enough beyond the absolute and

total
naivet=E9 that Middius preaches, to see some value in considering

issues
relating to the reliability of human perceptions.

Secondly, the idea that the objectivists lack a meaningful viewpoint

is
falsified by the years of effort that Middius has put into attacking

it. Or
perhaps Middius wants us to believe that he truly is the

reincarnation of
Don Quixote, and his zillions of diatribes against mainstream

scientific
thought as applied to audio are simply jousts with slow-moving

windmill
blades.




Notice that "George M. Middius" ran away from that quote where Atkinson
said he felt the debate with you was "necessary"?



  #6   Report Post  
Arny Krueger
 
Posts: n/a
Default

wrote in message
ups.com
Arny Krueger wrote:
"George M. Middius" wrote in message



. You embraced the seemingly
bizarre notion that the Krooborg and its "objectivist" ilk have a
meaningful viewpoint,


This statement is so flawed that it can't be a mere grotesque error.

First off, I'm not an objectivist, I'm a subjectivist. I'm simply a
subjectivist who has progressed far enough beyond the absolute and total
naiveté that Middius preaches, to see some value in considering issues
relating to the reliability of human perceptions.


Secondly, the idea that the objectivists lack a meaningful viewpoint is
falsified by the years of effort that Middius has put into attacking it.
Or
perhaps Middius wants us to believe that he truly is the reincarnation
of
Don Quixote, and his zillions of diatribes against mainstream scientific
thought as applied to audio are simply jousts with slow-moving windmill
blades.


Notice that "George M. Middius" ran away from that quote where
Atkinson said he felt the debate with you was "necessary"?


What is new? It's a given that if you back Middius or Atkinson into a
corner, one of their dumbed-down buddies like Sackman, Scott, Weil, Rudy,
Borgma or whoever will chime in with some stupid retort.


  #7   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Arny Krueger wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com
Arny Krueger wrote:
"George M. Middius" wrote in message



. You embraced the seemingly
bizarre notion that the Krooborg and its "objectivist" ilk have a
meaningful viewpoint,

This statement is so flawed that it can't be a mere grotesque

error.

First off, I'm not an objectivist, I'm a subjectivist. I'm simply

a
subjectivist who has progressed far enough beyond the absolute and

total
naivet=E9 that Middius preaches, to see some value in considering

issues
relating to the reliability of human perceptions.


Secondly, the idea that the objectivists lack a meaningful

viewpoint is
falsified by the years of effort that Middius has put into

attacking it.
Or
perhaps Middius wants us to believe that he truly is the

reincarnation
of
Don Quixote, and his zillions of diatribes against mainstream

scientific
thought as applied to audio are simply jousts with slow-moving

windmill
blades.


Notice that "George M. Middius" ran away from that quote where
Atkinson said he felt the debate with you was "necessary"?


What is new? It's a given that if you back Middius or Atkinson into a


corner, one of their dumbed-down buddies like Sackman, Scott, Weil,

Rudy,
Borgma or whoever will chime in with some stupid retort.



This debate is turning out to be quite a debacle for "Middius". First,
his prediction and wager that you would never agree to appear for the
debate now makes him appear to be an ass. Next, his hero, "Lord
Atkinson" (a "Middius term, BTW) admits that he feels the debate is
necessary, not something Atkinson deigns to do so he can trifle with
you.


No wonder "Middius" disappeared! ;-)

  #8   Report Post  
Arny Krueger
 
Posts: n/a
Default

wrote in message
oups.com
Arny Krueger wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com
Arny Krueger wrote:
"George M. Middius" wrote in message


. You embraced the seemingly
bizarre notion that the Krooborg and its "objectivist" ilk have a
meaningful viewpoint,


This statement is so flawed that it can't be a mere grotesque error.


First off, I'm not an objectivist, I'm a subjectivist. I'm simply a
subjectivist who has progressed far enough beyond the absolute and
total
naiveté that Middius preaches, to see some value in considering issues
relating to the reliability of human perceptions.


Secondly, the idea that the objectivists lack a meaningful viewpoint
is
falsified by the years of effort that Middius has put into attacking
it.


Or perhaps Middius wants us to believe that he truly is the
reincarnation of
Don Quixote, and his zillions of diatribes against mainstream
scientific
thought as applied to audio are simply jousts with slow-moving windmill
blades.


Notice that "George M. Middius" ran away from that quote where
Atkinson said he felt the debate with you was "necessary"?


What is new? It's a given that if you back Middius or Atkinson into a
corner, one of their dumbed-down buddies like Sackman, Scott, Weil,
Rudy,
Borgma or whoever will chime in with some stupid retort.


That this didn't happen yet is an indication that either they are all
sockpuppets animated by the same person who is indisposed, or that Atkinson
has pulled the prerequisite strings and is keeping them quiet to keep my
prediction from coming true this one time.

This debate is turning out to be quite a debacle for "Middius". First,
his prediction and wager that you would never agree to appear for the
debate now makes him appear to be an ass.


I think you're being way too kind. Middius is well beyond the simple
appearance of being an ass. His recent claim that I murdered my son might
have been contrived to give Atkinson to finally do the right thing after how
many years of standing idly by while Briggs/England and Middius attacked and
attacked and attacked and attacked. I suspect that Atkinson knows who
animates the Middius and Briggs/England sockpuppets, and has long had
private communications with them relating to their reprehensible activities
on RAO.

Next, his hero, "Lord
Atkinson" (a "Middius term, BTW) admits that he feels the debate is
necessary, not something Atkinson deigns to do so he can trifle with
you.


Frankly, I still don't get it but what the hey? I'm just a wild and crazy
guy (Do you remember how his caused Zelniker to go off, one of the last
times I used this common figure of speech?)


  #9   Report Post  
Michael McKelvy
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"George M. Middius" wrote in message



. You embraced the seemingly
bizarre notion that the Krooborg and its "objectivist" ilk have a
meaningful viewpoint,


This statement is so flawed that it can't be a mere grotesque error.

First off, I'm not an objectivist, I'm a subjectivist. I'm simply a
subjectivist who has progressed far enough beyond the absolute and total
naiveté that Middius preaches, to see some value in considering issues
relating to the reliability of human perceptions.

Secondly, the idea that the objectivists lack a meaningful viewpoint is
falsified by the years of effort that Middius has put into attacking it.
Or perhaps Middius wants us to believe that he truly is the reincarnation
of Don Quixote, and his zillions of diatribes against mainstream
scientific thought as applied to audio are simply jousts with slow-moving
windmill blades.


Nah, he's just a putz with a keyboard.


Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
One thing about E-bay John Royer Marketplace 18 May 5th 04 04:42 PM
Bob Morein: "I don't really have a replacement career,"Bob Moreinsaid. "It's a very gnawing thing." Sylvan Morein Audio Opinions 3 April 24th 04 01:26 PM
MA Audio HK602SX - Can you get too much of a good thing?! [email protected] Car Audio 7 January 7th 04 05:51 AM
Rant: Caraudioforums - the best thing since WebTV Mike Sims Car Audio 8 August 11th 03 01:15 AM
Carpet fastener - What is this thing? Mastermech Car Audio 0 July 7th 03 05:23 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:08 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AudioBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Audio and hi-fi"