| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Note to Eddie the Dim
So there can be no mistake here is the reason for listener training.
1.2.2 PCABX provides formal listener training based on relevant listening challenges of increasing difficulty, such as is provided at http://www.pcabx.com/training/index.htm . These challenges simultaneously educate, test and self-qualify the listener and his listening equipment. The goal of this training is the production of "Severe Listeners" who reliably detect large, small and subtle audible differences between audio products. http://www.pcabx.com/product/index.htm is a list of audio products currently available for audition at www.pcabx.com. The fact that other organizations, such as those previously mentioned use listener training should tell you that it works. Of course this kind of truth is not something I expect you to acknowldege. |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
ScottW said:
Except for amplifiers and CD or DVD players this training isn't worth the disk space it occupies. Further PCABX training is flawed due to uncontrolled reproduction variables. Clearly stated on the web site is the fact that it is not intended to replace properly designed listening tests. Production of "severe listenrs" is not a goal, btw. Try again. Try what? "Severe listeners" is another way of saying better listeners, which is a goal. |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
ScottW wrote Production of "severe listeners" is not a goal, btw. LoL ! |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
ScottW wrote:
wrote: So there can be no mistake here is the reason for listener training. 1.2.2 PCABX provides formal listener training based on relevant listening challenges of increasing difficulty, such as is provided at http://www.pcabx.com/training/index.htm . These challenges simultaneously educate, test and self-qualify the listener and his listening equipment. The goal of this training is the production of "Severe Listeners" who reliably detect large, small and subtle audible differences between audio products. http://www.pcabx.com/product/index.htm is a list of audio products currently available for audition at www.pcabx.com. Except for amplifiers and CD or DVD players this training isn't worth the disk space it occupies. Scott, this just shows how much you've missed about the PCABX web site. Answer these questions if you can, Scott: (1) What kind of product tests are demonstrated at the PCABX web site, IOW which kinds of products are demonstrated? (2) Are there any tests of DVD players at the PCABX web site? If not, where do you get off mentioning them in relation to it? Further PCABX training is flawed due to uncontrolled reproduction variables. Name those variables and state how they are totally uncontrolled. Production of "severe listenrs" is not a goal, btw. As far as who is concerned? Try again. Indeed. |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote So there can be no mistake here is the reason for listener training. 1.2.2 PCABX provides formal listener training based on relevant listening challenges of increasing difficulty, such as is provided at http://www.pcabx.com/training/index.htm . What do I do ? I downloaded some tones and they all went tooiiinnggg toooiinnngg tooooiiinnnggg booiinnggg ..... boooiiinggg .... boooiiinnggg And then another page is asking if I want to make donation to paypal. The **** is thattt ? These challenges simultaneously educate, test and self-qualify the listener and his listening equipment. The goal of this training is the production of "Severe Listeners" who reliably detect large, small and subtle audible differences between audio products. http://www.pcabx.com/product/index.htm is a list of audio products currently available for audition at www.pcabx.com. The fact that other organizations, such as those previously mentioned use listener training should tell you that it works. Of course this kind of truth is not something I expect you to acknowldege. |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
Eddie keeps digging deeper:
What do I do ? I downloaded some tones and they all went tooiiinnggg toooiinnngg tooooiiinnnggg booiinnggg ..... boooiiinggg .... boooiiinnggg That's the sound of your own incompetence. And then another page is asking if I want to make donation to paypal. The **** is thattt ? Inability to formulate a complete question, noted. Ask a grownup. |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
EddieM wrote:
wrote So there can be no mistake here is the reason for listener training. 1.2.2 PCABX provides formal listener training based on relevant listening challenges of increasing difficulty, such as is provided at http://www.pcabx.com/training/index.htm . What do I do ? I downloaded some tones and they all went tooiiinnggg toooiinnngg tooooiiinnnggg booiinnggg ..... boooiiinggg .... boooiiinnggg OK, so you missed all of the musical sounds. And then another page is asking if I want to make donation to paypal. The **** is thattt ? A part of some other web site, bozo-breath. |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
Arny Krueger wrote: ScottW wrote: wrote: Except for amplifiers and CD or DVD players this training isn't worth the disk space it occupies. Scott, this just shows how much you've missed about the PCABX web site. Answer these questions if you can, Scott: (1) What kind of product tests are demonstrated at the PCABX web site, IOW which kinds of products are demonstrated? amps, soundcards, coders&decoders & minidisc (2) Are there any tests of DVD players at the PCABX web site? If not, where do you get off mentioning them in relation to it? Sorry... thanks for pointing out the PCABX is useless for the vast majority of audio equipment sources in use today. Further PCABX training is flawed due to uncontrolled reproduction variables. Name those variables and state how they are totally uncontrolled. Why don't you tell me how you are controlling the noise level of my PC at work. It sucks BTW. As comparison... when you made ABX boxes... didn't you try to make sure they didn't have an audible influsion on the signal they switched? Production of "severe listenrs" is not a goal, btw. As far as who is concerned? What do you think sever listeners will accomplish? Whatever that is.. is the goal. Production of severe listeners who do nothing seems pretty silly to me. Like selling street racers in a country without roads. Such is genius of PCABX. ScottW |
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
"ScottW" wrote in message oups.com... What do you think sever listeners will accomplish? Whatever that is.. is the goal. Production of severe listeners who do nothing seems pretty silly to me. Like selling street racers in a country without roads. Such is genius of PCABX. Its more like selling garbage trucks in a country without landfills. ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
ScottW wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote: ScottW wrote: wrote: Except for amplifiers and CD or DVD players this training isn't worth the disk space it occupies. Scott, this just shows how much you've missed about the PCABX web site. Answer these questions if you can, Scott: (1) What kind of product tests are demonstrated at the PCABX web site, IOW which kinds of products are demonstrated? amps, soundcards, coders&decoders & minidisc OK, so you can read after all, Scott. (2) Are there any tests of DVD players at the PCABX web site? If not, where do you get off mentioning them in relation to it? Sorry... thanks for pointing out the PCABX is useless for the vast majority of audio equipment sources in use today. In your delusional fantasies, Scoot. Further PCABX training is flawed due to uncontrolled reproduction variables. Name those variables and state how they are totally uncontrolled. Why don't you tell me how you are controlling the noise level of my PC at work. It sucks BTW. Irrelevant. As comparison... when you made ABX boxes... didn't you try to make sure they didn't have an audible influsion on the signal they switched? If you mean did we fix our client's equipment like you want me to fix yours, the answer is no. Production of "severe listenrs" is not a goal, btw. As far as who is concerned? What do you think sever listeners will accomplish? What's a sever listener, Scott - one who cuts a lot? Whatever that is.. is the goal. Production of severe listeners who do nothing seems pretty silly to me. Oh, you meant severe listeners. Severe listeners are very reliably sensitive to audible differences among audio products. Can you think of a use for people like that? Like selling street racers in a country without roads. Are you saying that you aren't interested in having the audible differences between audio products be reliably detected, Scott? Such is genius of PCABX. Thank you! ;-) |
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
|
Arny Krueger wrote: ScottW wrote: Arny Krueger wrote: ScottW wrote: (1) What kind of product tests are demonstrated at the PCABX web site, IOW which kinds of products are demonstrated? amps, soundcards, coders&decoders & minidisc OK, so you can read after all, Scott. (2) Are there any tests of DVD players at the PCABX web site? If not, where do you get off mentioning them in relation to it? Sorry... thanks for pointing out the PCABX is useless for the vast majority of audio equipment sources in use today. In your delusional fantasies, Scoot. Then why haven't you provided any in your tests? Further PCABX training is flawed due to uncontrolled reproduction variables. Name those variables and state how they are totally uncontrolled. Why don't you tell me how you are controlling the noise level of my PC at work. It sucks BTW. Irrelevant. I named the variable and this is the best you can do? Perhaps if you specified approve PCs for playing back the files or insisted people copied the files to CD for playback on approved audio systems but you don't do that. You think people can evaluate audible amplifier differences with a ghetto blaster? As comparison... when you made ABX boxes... didn't you try to make sure they didn't have an audible influsion on the signal they switched? If you mean did we fix our client's equipment like you want me to fix yours, the answer is no. You are stupid. In those cases the clients equipment was under evaluation... in this case the equipment in question is test equipment... nothing at all to do with the equipment under evaluation. You might was well be measuring microohms with a megameter you moron. Production of "severe listenrs" is not a goal, btw. As far as who is concerned? What do you think sever listeners will accomplish? What's a sever listener, Scott - one who cuts a lot? Anything to obfuscate you're way out, eh Arny? Typical response when someone shows your pride and joy isn't what you claim. Whatever that is.. is the goal. Production of severe listeners who do nothing seems pretty silly to me. Oh, you meant severe listeners. Severe listeners are very reliably sensitive to audible differences among audio products. Can you think of a use for people like that? Is Harmon international hiring your desciples? If not, then no. I don't think it is of interest to average audiophiles. In fact, I agree that subjecting oneself to such training risks diminishing their ability to sit back, relax, and enjoy the music. Like selling street racers in a country without roads. Are you saying that you aren't interested in having the audible differences between audio products be reliably detected, Scott? Listener training is fine for folks who are interested if they understand the risks. PCABX for equipment evaluation is as bad an example of snake oil as any in the audio world today. ScottW |
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
|
ScottW wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote: ScottW wrote: Arny Krueger wrote: ScottW wrote: (1) What kind of product tests are demonstrated at the PCABX web site, IOW which kinds of products are demonstrated? amps, soundcards, coders&decoders & minidisc OK, so you can read after all, Scott. (2) Are there any tests of DVD players at the PCABX web site? If not, where do you get off mentioning them in relation to it? Sorry... thanks for pointing out the PCABX is useless for the vast majority of audio equipment sources in use today. In your delusional fantasies, Scoot. Then why haven't you provided any in your tests? Laziness. Further PCABX training is flawed due to uncontrolled reproduction variables. Name those variables and state how they are totally uncontrolled. Why don't you tell me how you are controlling the noise level of my PC at work. It sucks BTW. Irrelevant. I named the variable and this is the best you can do? Scottie, you seem to know that your PC at work is noisy. Why don't you control it? Why do you need my help to do the right thing? Perhaps if you specified approve PCs for playing back the files or insisted people copied the files to CD for playback on approved audio systems but you don't do that. I do it implicitly. I provide http://www.pcabx.com/training/index.htm which says: "If you have difficulty completing any samples rated "Difficult" or easier, please consider upgrading your playback system including loudspeakers, sound card, amplifier and listening environment. Please see the sidebar titled 'What Makes A Good Sound System For PCABX?'." You think people can evaluate audible amplifier differences with a ghetto blaster? Pardon me for thinking that people can read. As comparison... when you made ABX boxes... didn't you try to make sure they didn't have an audible influsion on the signal they switched? If you mean did we fix our client's equipment like you want me to fix yours, the answer is no. You are stupid. Really Scotty? I've just proven that you can read. Why should I take advice from an illiterate like you? In those cases the clients equipment was under evaluation... in this case the equipment in question is test equipment... nothing at all to do with the equipment under evaluation. I test the suitability of people's systems implicitly. I provide http://www.pcabx.com/training/index.htm . |
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Arny Krueger" said:
Really Scotty? I've just proven that you can read. Why should I take advice from an illiterate like you? Oh dear. -- "Audio as a serious hobby is going down the tubes." - Howard Ferstler, 25/4/2005 |
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message news 
Really Scotty? I've just proven that you can read. Why should I take advice from an illiterate like you? You're really ****ed up, my dear Arny. Cheers, Margaret |
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
|
Arny Krueger wrote:
Correction: Really Scotty? I've just proven that you can't read. Why should I take advice from an illiterate like you? |
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
|
Sander deWaal said: Really Scotty? I've just proven that you can read. Why should I take advice from an illiterate like you? Oh dear. Thank's Mr. Dewwal for, admitting you can't understand a simple typo, I made when I prooved Scottey was a lier. Sue me for assuming you don't wear two pair's of glasses. LOl! |
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message news  Arny Krueger wrote: Correction: Really Scotty? I've just proven that you can't read. Why should I take advice from an illiterate like you? My Dear Dimbulb, This is exactly what happens when you automatically start an argument with everyone you come to contact with. You simply cannot keep track of what side you are arguing in each case and the whole thing backfires. It should also be emphasized that insults are not effective at all when you have to correct/restate/reverse them. You should study the classic Looney Tunes "duck season - rabbit season" argument before you proceed or else you may end up Daffy again. You're welcome, my dear! Cheers, Margaret |
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
|
George Middius said:
Really Scotty? I've just proven that you can read. Why should I take advice from an illiterate like you? Oh dear. Thank's Mr. Dewwal for, admitting you can't understand a simple typo, I made when I prooved Scottey was a lier. Sue me for assuming you don't wear two pair's of glasses. LOl! Relax pal, it was just irony, however. At least, you tweakos never cease to amaze me. Haw haw haw, note. -- "Audio as a serious hobby is going down the tubes." - Howard Ferstler, 25/4/2005 |
|
#20
|
|||
|
|||
|
Margaret von B. wrote:
This is exactly what happens when you automatically start an argument with everyone you come to contact with. Maggie, your inability to see yourself in the mirror noted. |
|
#21
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... Margaret von B. wrote: This is exactly what happens when you automatically start an argument with everyone you come to contact with. Maggie, your inability to see yourself in the mirror noted. Some deep doobie philosophy, I see. Party on, boys! Cheers, Margaret |
|
#22
|
|||
|
|||
|
Arny Krueger wrote: ScottW wrote: Arny Krueger wrote: ScottW wrote: Arny Krueger wrote: ScottW wrote: (1) What kind of product tests are demonstrated at the PCABX web site, IOW which kinds of products are demonstrated? amps, soundcards, coders&decoders & minidisc OK, so you can read after all, Scott. (2) Are there any tests of DVD players at the PCABX web site? If not, where do you get off mentioning them in relation to it? Sorry... thanks for pointing out the PCABX is useless for the vast majority of audio equipment sources in use today. In your delusional fantasies, Scoot. Then why haven't you provided any in your tests? Laziness. Further PCABX training is flawed due to uncontrolled reproduction variables. Name those variables and state how they are totally uncontrolled. Why don't you tell me how you are controlling the noise level of my PC at work. It sucks BTW. Irrelevant. I named the variable and this is the best you can do? Scottie, you seem to know that your PC at work is noisy. Why don't you control it? It's not really my PC, you probably don't understand how a big company supports it IT infrastructure but suffice it to say allowing individuals to customize their desktops is not an option. Why do you need my help to do the right thing? Perhaps if you specified approve PCs for playing back the files or insisted people copied the files to CD for playback on approved audio systems but you don't do that. I do it implicitly. I provide http://www.pcabx.com/training/index.htm which says: "If you have difficulty completing any samples rated "Difficult" or easier, please consider upgrading your playback system including loudspeakers, sound card, amplifier and listening environment. Are you now claiming that listener training is a substitute for system certification? Please see the sidebar titled 'What Makes A Good Sound System For PCABX?'." I saw that and it is totally inadequate. You think power supply noise levels have no impact on sound cards for just one example? You think people can evaluate audible amplifier differences with a ghetto blaster? Pardon me for thinking that people can read. As comparison... when you made ABX boxes... didn't you try to make sure they didn't have an audible influsion on the signal they switched? If you mean did we fix our client's equipment like you want me to fix yours, the answer is no. You are stupid. Really Scotty? I've just proven that you can read. Why should I take advice from an illiterate like you? I rest my case. In those cases the clients equipment was under evaluation... in this case the equipment in question is test equipment... nothing at all to do with the equipment under evaluation. I test the suitability of people's systems implicitly. I provide http://www.pcabx.com/training/index.htm . You don't test... they have a tool you provide to test. A tool that is certified by subjective human perception. What a joke. ScottW |
|
#23
|
|||
|
|||
|
"ScottW" wrote in message oups.com... Arny Krueger wrote: Scottie, you seem to know that your PC at work is noisy. Why don't you control it? It's not really my PC, you probably don't understand how a big company supports it IT infrastructure but suffice it to say allowing individuals to customize their desktops is not an option. Of course Arny understands. He is a Perfesionel Komputer Constultent ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
|
#24
|
|||
|
|||
|
Scottie said: It's not really my PC, you probably don't understand how a big company supports it IT infrastructure but suffice it to say allowing individuals to customize their desktops is not an option. Where did you get that idea? I always customize my desktop. Maybe you're thinking of installing apps that update the registry. That's a privilege often restricted to admins. |
|
#25
|
|||
|
|||
|
Clyde Slick wrote: "ScottW" wrote in message oups.com... Arny Krueger wrote: Scottie, you seem to know that your PC at work is noisy. Why don't you control it? It's not really my PC, you probably don't understand how a big company supports it IT infrastructure but suffice it to say allowing individuals to customize their desktops is not an option. Of course Arny understands. He is a Perfesionel Komputer Constultent Hey, Art, here's more material for your endless stream of oh-so-clever posts: http://tinyurl.com/b76sg |
|
#26
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote in message oups.com... Clyde Slick wrote: "ScottW" wrote in message oups.com... Arny Krueger wrote: Scottie, you seem to know that your PC at work is noisy. Why don't you control it? It's not really my PC, you probably don't understand how a big company supports it IT infrastructure but suffice it to say allowing individuals to customize their desktops is not an option. Of course Arny understands. He is a Perfesionel Komputer Constultent Hey, Art, here's more material for your endless stream of oh-so-clever posts: http://tinyurl.com/b76sg Have you had any succes racing monkey bikes? http://tinyurl.com/bgpqm ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
|
#27
|
|||
|
|||
|
Clyde Slick wrote: wrote in message oups.com... Clyde Slick wrote: "ScottW" wrote in message oups.com... Arny Krueger wrote: Scottie, you seem to know that your PC at work is noisy. Why don't you control it? It's not really my PC, you probably don't understand how a big company supports it IT infrastructure but suffice it to say allowing individuals to customize their desktops is not an option. Of course Arny understands. He is a Perfesionel Komputer Constultent Hey, Art, here's more material for your endless stream of oh-so-clever posts: http://tinyurl.com/b76sg Have you had any succes racing monkey bikes? http://tinyurl.com/bgpqm Ah! I see you've been inspired that 'material'. Now, just drop trou, refill the bowl and you're ready to post again in the unique Sackman tradition! |
|
#28
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote in message oups.com... Clyde Slick wrote: wrote in message oups.com... Clyde Slick wrote: "ScottW" wrote in message oups.com... Arny Krueger wrote: Scottie, you seem to know that your PC at work is noisy. Why don't you control it? It's not really my PC, you probably don't understand how a big company supports it IT infrastructure but suffice it to say allowing individuals to customize their desktops is not an option. Of course Arny understands. He is a Perfesionel Komputer Constultent Hey, Art, here's more material for your endless stream of oh-so-clever posts: http://tinyurl.com/b76sg Have you had any succes racing monkey bikes? http://tinyurl.com/bgpqm Ah! I see you've been inspired that 'material'. Now, just drop trou, refill the bowl and you're ready to post again in the unique Sackman tradition! I don't want to interrupt your dinner, I have manners, you know. ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
|
#29
|
|||
|
|||
|
"George M. Middius" cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote in message ... Scottie said: It's not really my PC, you probably don't understand how a big company supports it IT infrastructure but suffice it to say allowing individuals to customize their desktops is not an option. Where did you get that idea? I always customize my desktop. I bet Scottie is a "special employee". Every company has them. :-) Cheers, Margaret |
|
#30
|
|||
|
|||
|
ScottW wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote: ScottW wrote: I named the variable and this is the best you can do? Scottie, you seem to know that your PC at work is noisy. Why don't you control it? It's not really my PC, you probably don't understand how a big company supports it IT infrastructure but suffice it to say allowing individuals to customize their desktops is not an option. So why not use some other PC for your PCABX testing? Why do you need my help to do the right thing? Perhaps if you specified approve PCs for playing back the files or insisted people copied the files to CD for playback on approved audio systems but you don't do that. I do it implicitly. I provide http://www.pcabx.com/training/index.htm which says: "If you have difficulty completing any samples rated "Difficult" or easier, please consider upgrading your playback system including loudspeakers, sound card, amplifier and listening environment. Are you now claiming that listener training is a substitute for system certification? Please see the sidebar titled 'What Makes A Good Sound System For PCABX?'." I saw that and it is totally inadequate. One what grounds? You think power supply noise levels have no impact on sound cards for just one example? What impact might power supply noise have on sound cards? You think people can evaluate audible amplifier differences with a ghetto blaster? Pardon me for thinking that people can read. Note that Scotty does not want to take responsibility for his own actions and property. I test the suitability of people's systems implicitly. I provide http://www.pcabx.com/training/index.htm . You don't test... they have a tool you provide to test. Thanks Scotty for admitting that I provide people with a tool for testing the suitibility of their PC for PCABX testing. A tool that is certified by subjective human perception. What's wrong with that? What a joke. So far Scotty, that's what your complaints have been - a joke. |
|
#31
|
|||
|
|||
|
Arny Krueger wrote Margaret von B. wrote: This is exactly what happens when you automatically start an argument with everyone you come to contact with. Maggie, your inability to see yourself in the mirror noted. Your inability to smell for yourself that you are a well-formed matter discharged from the bowel through the anus during defecation |
|
#32
|
|||
|
|||
|
EddieM wrote: Arny Krueger wrote Margaret von B. wrote: This is exactly what happens when you automatically start an argument with everyone you come to contact with. Maggie, your inability to see yourself in the mirror noted. Your inability to smell for yourself that you are a well-formed matter discharged from the bowel through the anus during defecation And you are the product of The Immaculate Defecation, eh? |
|
#33
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 07:34:47 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote: What a joke. So far Scotty, that's what your complaints have been - a joke. Well, he DOES live down the road from Neverland. |
|
#34
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote EddieM wrote: Arny Krueger wrote Margaret von B. wrote: This is exactly what happens when you automatically start an argument with everyone you come to contact with. Maggie, your inability to see yourself in the mirror noted. Your inability to smell for yourself that you are a well-formed matter discharged from the bowel through the anus during defecation And you are the product of The Immaculate Defecation, eh? Thing, could you provide some reasons why you get so ferociously enraged when someone liken Arnii to a well-formed feces ? |
|
#36
|
|||
|
|||
|
"EddieM" says to Kroogourd...
Your inability to smell for yourself that you are a well-formed matter discharged from the bowel through the anus during defecation snicker |
|
#37
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Arny Krueger" wrote ...
A part of some other web site, bozo-breath. Mikey - is this your adult? You and Thing must be SO proud. |
|
#38
|
|||
|
|||
|
Surf wrote:
"EddieM" says to Kroogourd... Your inability to smell for yourself that you are a well-formed matter discharged from the bowel through the anus during defecation snicker From Eddie's fecal obsession with pandering to Surf's fecal obsession. |
|
#39
|
|||
|
|||
|
Surf wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote ... A part of some other web site, bozo-breath. Mikey - is this your adult? Just Eddie is yours, Surf. |
|
#40
|
|||
|
|||
|
Arnii Krooborg said: obsession. Thanks for admitting Mr. Krooger that you are a dimbulb. |
| Reply |
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Share Your Snake Oil Story... | Pro Audio | |||
| Share Your Snake Oil Story... | Audio Opinions | |||
| Power Filtration | Audio Opinions | |||
| Pure Note Cerulean Audiophile Cables. 50%-off Summer SALE. | Marketplace | |||
| Computers vs. Recorders | Pro Audio | |||
Linear Mode
