http://www.miragespeakers.com/mediac...RVERRelease.pd
f

"Audio Products International confirmed today that the company's
recent successful verdict in a U.S. patent lawsuit, brought against
them by Robert W. Carver, is now final.

"On April 3, 2003, a jury of the Federal Court in Seattle invalidated
all patent claims asserted against Audio Products by Mr. Carver.
During a two and a half week trial, the jury considered Mr.
Carver's allegations that Audio Products had infringed certain
claims of two of his U.S. patents relating to small box subwoofer
technology.

"The Court entered judgment in Audio Products' favor on April 15,
2003. Carver also failed in an attempt to have the judge overturn
the jury's findings and subsequently declined to appeal the
decision. The Court will be awarding costs to Audio Products.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

http://www.miragespeakers.com/mediac...RVERRelease.pd
f

"Audio Products International confirmed today that the company's
recent successful verdict in a U.S. patent lawsuit, brought against
them by Robert W. Carver, is now final.

"On April 3, 2003, a jury of the Federal Court in Seattle invalidated

I haven't followed this, and can't get to the article.
Did you follow the case, and is it your opinion that Carver's claims were
without merit?

Robert Morein said:

[snip]

I have a question about the subject. How, and why, did Carver get a
desert or deserts? Which ones -- big ones like the Atacama or Sahara,
or little ones like they have in Utah? And how are the deserts seen to
be "just"? I've never heard of an unjust desert, so does that mean it
was very easy to find ones that are "just"?

George M. Middius wrote:


Robert Morein said:

[snip]

I have a question about the subject. How, and why, did Carver get a
desert or deserts? Which ones -- big ones like the Atacama or Sahara,
or little ones like they have in Utah? And how are the deserts seen to
be "just"? I've never heard of an unjust desert, so does that mean it
was very easy to find ones that are "just"?












It sounds like the writer of the post about just deserts is having Lawrence of
Arabia style aspirations. (I recommend the soundtrack from Lawrence of Arabia*
- a very well done score by Maurice Jarre)*
Or it could be that he just likes to gtive human qualities to inanimate
objects. Hasn't he also said that Google and/or his computer talk to him? His
current concerns with justice may also reflect his current legal problems.


*Obligatory audio reference - audio post.



Bruce J. Richman

On 06 Dec 2003 16:58:18 GMT, (Bruce J. Richman)
wrote:

George M. Middius wrote:


Robert Morein said:

[snip]

I have a question about the subject. How, and why, did Carver get a
desert or deserts? Which ones -- big ones like the Atacama or Sahara,
or little ones like they have in Utah? And how are the deserts seen to
be "just"? I've never heard of an unjust desert, so does that mean it
was very easy to find ones that are "just"?












It sounds like the writer of the post about just deserts is having Lawrence of
Arabia style aspirations. (I recommend the soundtrack from Lawrence of Arabia*
- a very well done score by Maurice Jarre)*
Or it could be that he just likes to gtive human qualities to inanimate
objects. Hasn't he also said that Google and/or his computer talk to him? His
current concerns with justice may also reflect his current legal problems.

No, maybe he's back to talking about the military. Perhaps he's trying
to tell us something about his record?

(Yes, I can take a page from the Arnold Krueger Handbook of Divisive
Discourse)

dave weil said:

I have a question about the subject. How, and why, did Carver get a
desert or deserts? Which ones -- big ones like the Atacama or Sahara,
or little ones like they have in Utah? And how are the deserts seen to
be "just"? I've never heard of an unjust desert, so does that mean it
was very easy to find ones that are "just"?

Or it could be that he just likes to gtive human qualities to inanimate
objects. Hasn't he also said that Google and/or his computer talk to him? His
current concerns with justice may also reflect his current legal problems.

No, maybe he's back to talking about the military. Perhaps he's trying
to tell us something about his record?

It's too bad Krooger is such a coward. Otherwise, he'd have had the
stones to shoot himself in the foot in order to get sent home.


(Yes, I can take a page from the Arnold Krueger Handbook of Divisive
Discourse)

Speaking of which, Turdborg is still worshiping at the altar of
Blaming One's Enemies. As he whined to Earl Geddes after grossly
misunderstanding a simple explanation:

One of these days Earl you're going to learn that communications failures
reflect on both the reader and the writer.

Not everything written in English is perfectly understood by all competent
readers of English.

In other words, when Krooger fails to explain himself properly and
somebody misunderstands him, it's the other person's fault for not
listening Kroofully enough. Similarly, when Krooger fails to
understand somebody, it's the other person's fault for not explaining
in stupid enough terms.

Ever notice how both Arny and McKelvy seem to be unable to start a new thread
without ****ing up the title with typos?

Boon

Marc Phillips wrote:


Ever notice how both Arny and McKelvy seem to be unable to start a new thread
without ****ing up the title with typos?

Boon







Yes. Has anybody ever seen the 2 of them together in the same place? Or could
it be that one of them doesn't really exist?



Bruce J. Richman

"Robert Morein" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...


http://www.miragespeakers.com/mediac...RVERRelease.pd
f

"Audio Products International confirmed today that the company's
recent successful verdict in a U.S. patent lawsuit, brought against
them by Robert W. Carver, is now final.

"On April 3, 2003, a jury of the Federal Court in Seattle invalidated

I haven't followed this, and can't get to the article.

There's also one on the Stereophile site.

Did you follow the case,

To some degree.

and is it your opinion that Carver's claims were without merit?

For sure. IMO Carver was bullying small subwoofer producers to pay him
royalties on a patent that ignored an unreasonable amount of prior art. For
example, Carver claimed that his patent covered all woofers with Xmax of a
certain amount, say 0.6 inches. (I can't remember the precise amount.) Yet
Carver himself had developed and sold speakers that incorporated woofers
with Xmax greater than 0.6 inches prior to his patent being applied for. So
had a number of major competitors. It was a ludicrous patent. The patent
office's examiners seem to have become more liberal in recent years.

AFAIK, Carver's strategy for this patent was to demand royalties from first
small, and then increasingly large speaker manufacturers. Obviously, the
small producers caved-in regardless of what they thought of the patent,
because it was cheaper to pay the royalties than to pay the lawyers to fight
it. API were the first people approached by Carver who thought they had
enough volume to justify the costs of fighting the patent.

BTW Bose has been known to take a similar approach. However, many of their
patents seem to have greater merits.

IMO API deserves a big "Thanks" from all audiophiles and speaker
manufactures for obtaining a reasonable court decision that benefits
*everybody* (but Carver!) at their own expense.

"Arny Krueger" wrote:




"Robert Morein" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...


http://www.miragespeakers.com/mediac...RVERRelease.pd
f

"Audio Products International confirmed today that the company's
recent successful verdict in a U.S. patent lawsuit, brought against
them by Robert W. Carver, is now final.

"On April 3, 2003, a jury of the Federal Court in Seattle invalidated

I haven't followed this, and can't get to the article.

There's also one on the Stereophile site.

Did you follow the case,

To some degree.

and is it your opinion that Carver's claims were without merit?

For sure. IMO Carver was bullying small subwoofer producers to pay him
royalties on a patent that ignored an unreasonable amount of prior art. For
example, Carver claimed that his patent covered all woofers with Xmax of a
certain amount, say 0.6 inches. (I can't remember the precise amount.) Yet
Carver himself had developed and sold speakers that incorporated woofers
with Xmax greater than 0.6 inches prior to his patent being applied for. So
had a number of major competitors. It was a ludicrous patent. The patent
office's examiners seem to have become more liberal in recent years.

AFAIK, Carver's strategy for this patent was to demand royalties from first
small, and then increasingly large speaker manufacturers. Obviously, the
small producers caved-in regardless of what they thought of the patent,
because it was cheaper to pay the royalties than to pay the lawyers to fight
it. API were the first people approached by Carver who thought they had
enough volume to justify the costs of fighting the patent.

BTW Bose has been known to take a similar approach. However, many of their
patents seem to have greater merits.

IMO API deserves a big "Thanks" from all audiophiles and speaker
manufactures for obtaining a reasonable court decision that benefits
*everybody* (but Carver!) at their own expense.

Yes they do. But, my understanding is that there were other manufacturers on
the 'defense' team.

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

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...



http://www.miragespeakers.com/mediac...RVERRelease.pd
f

[snip]

IMO API deserves a big "Thanks" from all audiophiles and speaker
manufactures for obtaining a reasonable court decision that benefits
*everybody* (but Carver!) at their own expense.

I agree.

Robert Morein said:

a reasonable court decision

I agree.

Isn't it peculiar that Krooger has a deep emotional investment in a
civil case that has nothing to do with him, but he completely ignored
one that will cost him thousands of dollars?

I mean peculiar for a sane human being, of course. For Krooger, I
guess this dichotomy is par for the fantasia course.

How, and why, did Carver get a
desert or deserts? Which ones -- big ones like the Atacama or Sahara,
or little ones like they have in Utah?

Obviously, he's referring to little ones. That's why they're called "just"
deserts. As in "just" little ones. See?

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


Robert Morein said:

a reasonable court decision

I agree.

Isn't it peculiar that Krooger has a deep emotional investment in a
civil case that has nothing to do with him, but he completely ignored
one that will cost him thousands of dollars?

I mean peculiar for a sane human being, of course. For Krooger, I
guess this dichotomy is par for the fantasia course.

Yes, but I'd like to know what happened to that case.
Did it just fizzle?

"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message
...
Marc Phillips wrote:


Ever notice how both Arny and McKelvy seem to be unable to start a new
thread
without ****ing up the title with typos?

Boon


Yes. Has anybody ever seen the 2 of them together in the same place? Or
could
it be that one of them doesn't really exist?



Bruce J. Richman

You mean I've been bashing Arny McCarty a.k.a. Mike Krueger all this time?

Sorry, Kennedy was shot by a lone gunman.

Robert Morein said:

Isn't it peculiar that Krooger has a deep emotional investment in a
civil case that has nothing to do with him, but he completely ignored
one that will cost him thousands of dollars?

I mean peculiar for a sane human being, of course. For Krooger, I
guess this dichotomy is par for the fantasia course.

Yes, but I'd like to know what happened to that case.
Did it just fizzle?

You haven't been listening. Put your ear to the ground and you'll
detect the crumbling of the Kroo-hovel.

"George M. Middius" wrote in message

Robert Morein said:

a reasonable court decision

I agree.

Isn't it peculiar that Krooger has a deep emotional investment in a
civil case that has nothing to do with him, but he completely ignored
one that will cost him thousands of dollars?

Wrong on several counts.

Bob, I'm beginning to think you seriously thought you were going to win your
suit against Drexel University.

Now that's scary!

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

Robert Morein said:

a reasonable court decision

I agree.

Isn't it peculiar that Krooger has a deep emotional investment in a
civil case that has nothing to do with him, but he completely ignored
one that will cost him thousands of dollars?

Wrong on several counts.

Bob, I'm beginning to think you seriously thought you were going to win
your
suit against Drexel University.

Now that's scary!

Actually, we did win at the trial level, on all counts, judge Esther
Sylvester presiding in the Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia.
At the appeals level, Pennsylvania Superior Court, the decision was 2-1
against us. The President Judge held the dissenting opinion in our favor.
But no, I did not expect to win. I did it as a mental catharsis, and
possibly to change common law.

As far as the substance of the complaint against you, Arny, it would be a
pretty severe way to teach you that you are a nasty guy. You have much to
offer the world, if you learn to be tolerant. If the court condemns you for
your errant speech, you may learn that verbal aggression has a cost. Even
when it does not have a judicial penalty, verbal aggression keeps you from
effectively advocating your beliefs. A friend can change one's opinion. An
enemy seldom does.

"Robert Morein" wrote in message


As far as the substance of the complaint against you, Arny, it would
be a pretty severe way to teach you that you are a nasty guy.

You think that would be a news flash to me Morein?

You really ARE delusional!

You have much to offer the world, if you learn to be tolerant.

Yup, those are those are my guys with the brown shirts that go around
knocking on people's doors, arresting them, and throwing them in jail.

Yup, that's me who starts all the "Bob Morein is a bad scientist" threads.

If the court condemns you for your errant speech, you may learn that verbal
aggression has a cost.

Glad to see you're retrenching on your former comments that made it sound
like my loss was a done deal.

Even when it does not have a judicial penalty,
verbal aggression keeps you from effectively advocating your beliefs.

Verbal aggression from me is simply me defending myself from various lies
and unfair attacks.

A friend can change one's opinion. An enemy seldom does.

You seriously think that you, Middius, or the rest are going to change their
opinions, Morein?

You really ARE delusional!

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


As far as the substance of the complaint against you, Arny, it would
be a pretty severe way to teach you that you are a nasty guy.

You think that would be a news flash to me Morein?

You really ARE delusional!

You have much to offer the world, if you learn to be tolerant.

Yup, those are those are my guys with the brown shirts that go around
knocking on people's doors, arresting them, and throwing them in jail.

Yup, that's me who starts all the "Bob Morein is a bad scientist" threads.

If the court condemns you for your errant speech, you may learn that
verbal
aggression has a cost.

Glad to see you're retrenching on your former comments that made it sound
like my loss was a done deal.

Even when it does not have a judicial penalty,
verbal aggression keeps you from effectively advocating your beliefs.

Verbal aggression from me is simply me defending myself from various lies
and unfair attacks.

No, it's not. It perpetrates a vicious circle. In some cases, as in your
court case, it cannot be justified even by the above argument.

A friend can change one's opinion. An enemy seldom does.

You seriously think that you, Middius, or the rest are going to change
their
opinions, Morein?

Not their opinions about your beliefs.
However, they might surprise you with their own openness for change. Give it
a try.

You really ARE delusional!

Arny, in the above statement, you're continuing with the hyperbole which so
characterizes you. If you want to make a point that would be understood by a
third party reading this thread, I suggest you state that I am unrealistic
in my expectations.

"Robert Morein" wrote in message

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


As far as the substance of the complaint against you, Arny, it would
be a pretty severe way to teach you that you are a nasty guy.

You think that would be a news flash to me Morein?

You really ARE delusional!

You have much to offer the world, if you learn to be tolerant.

Yup, those are those are my guys with the brown shirts that go around
knocking on people's doors, arresting them, and throwing them in
jail.

Yup, that's me who starts all the "Bob Morein is a bad scientist"
threads.

Morein apparently is apparently so delusional that he can't recognize a
send up of his own behavior!

Verbal aggression from me is simply me defending myself from various
lies and unfair attacks.

No, it's not. It perpetrates a vicious circle. In some cases, as in
your court case, it cannot be justified even by the above argument.

Show us how you do it, Morein. So far you've done a great job of escalating
the heat between us, by the exact means I parodied above. BTW, was your
insight removed surgically at an early age?

Robert Morein said to ****-for-Brains:

A friend can change one's opinion. An enemy seldom does.

Krooger is surrounded by enemies. Therefore he will never have to
change his mind.

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

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


As far as the substance of the complaint against you, Arny, it would
be a pretty severe way to teach you that you are a nasty guy.

You think that would be a news flash to me Morein?

You really ARE delusional!

You have much to offer the world, if you learn to be tolerant.

Yup, those are those are my guys with the brown shirts that go around
knocking on people's doors, arresting them, and throwing them in
jail.

Yup, that's me who starts all the "Bob Morein is a bad scientist"
threads.

Morein apparently is apparently so delusional that he can't recognize a
send up of his own behavior!

Verbal aggression from me is simply me defending myself from various
lies and unfair attacks.

No, it's not. It perpetrates a vicious circle. In some cases, as in
your court case, it cannot be justified even by the above argument.

Show us how you do it, Morein. So far you've done a great job of
escalating
the heat between us, by the exact means I parodied above. BTW, was your
insight removed surgically at an early age?

Arny,
You religous people have a very interesting saying: "God's light can
shine through any window." I can understand why you would discount me as a
source for sound advice. However, I suggest you take my suggestion to your
pastor, describe it to him without attribution, explain that you are
fighting with us, and ask him for advice.

"George M. Middius" wrote in message
news
Robert Morein said to ****-for-Brains:

A friend can change one's opinion. An enemy seldom does.

Krooger is surrounded by enemies. Therefore he will never have to
change his mind.

You're delusional, Middius. I have tons of friends, just not many on RAO.
Given what RAO has become due to your reprehensible influence, that speaks
well for my character.

"Robert Morein" wrote in message


You religous people have a very interesting saying: "God's light
can shine through any window."

True Bob, but your frequent attacks shed a ton more light on you than they
shed on me.

I can understand why you would
discount me as a source for sound advice.

Then Bob, why do you keep blathering on?

However, I suggest you take
my suggestion to your pastor, describe it to him without
attribution, explain that you are fighting with us, and ask him for
advice.

Bob, if you and the rest of the usual list of RAO antagonists would quit
tossing figurative fire bombs at me and others, there would be a whole lot
more peace around here. It's as simple as that - change your own behavior
and things will change.

Let's take this recent post from "JBorg"

"JBorg" wrote in message
om

"My claim is that Susan Kroobitch is not takin in enough
dough from her nightly rounds in the back alleys there
in Detroit. What a stupid ****. Therefore here's a thing
to do: Have a gynecologist and proctologist detach, retouch
and reattach her vagina away from her asshole and stitch
them both back to their normal, original position. That
might do the trick. Then have the pastor from your local
church give that wrinkled gaping vagina his blessing by
asking her next Sunday to come forward during the mass
and order her to spread her pussy apart in front of the
congregation for everyones full view. If the pastor's cock
rise immediately after pulling his own pants down while
standing next to her, that means she has his blessing.
She is good to go, you incoherent, staggering cumstain.
That's the advice for Arnii Kroo**** the embittered
pederast."

So Bob, the guy who wrote this post is a fine example of a well-adjusted
human in your opinon? Why aren't you asking him to change his behavior?
You're just as bad as Richman - see no evil as long as its someone attacking
me or other people that you disagree with.

On Sun, 7 Dec 2003 06:20:26 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

Bob, if you and the rest of the usual list of RAO antagonists would quit
tossing figurative fire bombs at me and others, there would be a whole lot
more peace around here. It's as simple as that - change your own behavior
and things will change.

And yet, when your "enemies" are polite to you, you continue to be
rude and abusive. When asked about this, you talk about things like
"preemptive strikes".

Therefore, we can assume that your above statement is completely
disengenuous.

dave weil said:

Bob, if you and the rest of the usual list of RAO antagonists would quit
tossing figurative fire bombs at me and others, there would be a whole lot
more peace around here. It's as simple as that - change your own behavior
and things will change.

And yet, when your "enemies" are polite to you, you continue to be
rude and abusive. When asked about this, you talk about things like
"preemptive strikes".

Therefore, we can assume that your above statement is completely
disengenuous.

I think Krooger is simply lying to himself again. And, of course, he
believes his own lies.

Arny Krueger wrote:


"Robert Morein" wrote in message


You religous people have a very interesting saying: "God's light
can shine through any window."

True Bob, but your frequent attacks shed a ton more light on you than they
shed on me.

I can understand why you would
discount me as a source for sound advice.

Then Bob, why do you keep blathering on?

However, I suggest you take
my suggestion to your pastor, describe it to him without
attribution, explain that you are fighting with us, and ask him for
advice.

Bob, if you and the rest of the usual list of RAO antagonists would quit
tossing figurative fire bombs at me and others, there would be a whole lot
more peace around here. It's as simple as that - change your own behavior
and things will change.

Let's take this recent post from "JBorg"

"JBorg" wrote in message
. com

"My claim is that Susan Kroobitch is not takin in enough
dough from her nightly rounds in the back alleys there
in Detroit. What a stupid ****. Therefore here's a thing
to do: Have a gynecologist and proctologist detach, retouch
and reattach her vagina away from her asshole and stitch
them both back to their normal, original position. That
might do the trick. Then have the pastor from your local
church give that wrinkled gaping vagina his blessing by
asking her next Sunday to come forward during the mass
and order her to spread her pussy apart in front of the
congregation for everyones full view. If the pastor's cock
rise immediately after pulling his own pants down while
standing next to her, that means she has his blessing.
She is good to go, you incoherent, staggering cumstain.
That's the advice for Arnii Kroo**** the embittered
pederast."

So Bob, the guy who wrote this post is a fine example of a well-adjusted
human in your opinon? Why aren't you asking him to change his behavior?
You're just as bad as Richman - see no evil as long as its someone attacking
me or other people that you disagree with.










So now Krueger has begun another conspiracy theory that includes Mr. Morein
plus myselfr. No doubt he will be adding the names of others to this "plot" in
due time.



Bruce J. Richman

Dave Weil wrote:


On Sun, 7 Dec 2003 06:20:26 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

Bob, if you and the rest of the usual list of RAO antagonists would quit
tossing figurative fire bombs at me and others, there would be a whole lot
more peace around here. It's as simple as that - change your own behavior
and things will change.

And yet, when your "enemies" are polite to you, you continue to be
rude and abusive. When asked about this, you talk about things like
"preemptive strikes".

Therefore, we can assume that your above statement is completely
disengenuous.







I cannot, by my silence, endorse your views, Mr. Weil. I must claim explicitly
that I endorse this post and find it entirely credible and valid.



Bruce J. Richman

Bruce J. Richman said:

So now Krueger has begun another conspiracy theory that includes Mr. Morein
plus myselfr. No doubt he will be adding the names of others to this "plot" in
due time.

You guys are obviously™ under the control of my powerful mind. I am
the cliquemaster of RAO. All of your actions occur because I will it.

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


You religous people have a very interesting saying: "God's light
can shine through any window."

True Bob, but your frequent attacks shed a ton more light on you than they
shed on me.

I can understand why you would
discount me as a source for sound advice.

Then Bob, why do you keep blathering on?

However, I suggest you take
my suggestion to your pastor, describe it to him without
attribution, explain that you are fighting with us, and ask him for
advice.

Bob, if you and the rest of the usual list of RAO antagonists would quit
tossing figurative fire bombs at me and others, there would be a whole lot
more peace around here. It's as simple as that - change your own behavior
and things will change.

Let's take this recent post from "JBorg"

"JBorg" wrote in message
om

"My claim is that Susan Kroobitch is not takin in enough
dough from her nightly rounds in the back alleys there
in Detroit.

Arny,
I don't condone the post. But the reason is appeared is as follows. You
are attacking their, and my, core beliefs with respect to the rules of human
discourse. The disputes about audio are quite secondary. They are responding
with satire, in this case, vicious satire.

Unfortunately, you express your opinions as beliefs with such force that
you frequently challenge the right of others to make their own voices heard.
One primary example seems to be whether us folks on rec.audio.opinion have
the right to report on our own listening experiences, and encourage others
to have informal listening experiences, and based on that, to buy what they
like.

You have the problem that every true believer has. You want to change
the way people think, and you don't understand why it irritates them. Most
of the time, people don't want to change. If the issue is an important one,
like racial desegregation, then large numbers of like-minded people mount
moral crusades over decades, and over generations, changes of attitude
become apparent. I don't mind if you want to try to change the way I think,
but you have to be very nice, very subtle. I wouldn't key off the behavior
of the guys in rec.audio.tech. Engineers are not typically great at dealing
with people.

Rec.audio.opinion is like a party, because for us, music is about having
a good time. Some of us drink our beer warm, and others drink it cold. If
you happen to be a revolutionary, and sit in the corner, except to attack
the party goers for wearing fancy clothes and eating food with high levels
of mercury, you're not going to fit in. And yet many significant things
happen at parties. One simply has to fit in with the atmosphere.

None of the above requires that you change any of your beliefs. But any
change in audio has to come as a seduction. One has to be able to try it
without any fear of loss, be it physical or psychological. To offer your
ideas on such terms, you have to be a very good ambassador. One has to be
almost sly.

As for my attacks on your scientific methodology -- If a Seventh Day
Adventist comes knocking on my door, there are two things I can do: slam the
door, or tear his theology to shreds. They make me angry at their surety of
their "true belief." I slam the door. You pose a similar irritation, but I
can't do that. So I tear your theology to shreds. Whether you deserve that
depends upon whether I think of you as a Seventh Day Adventist, or one of my
best, dearest friends, who happens to be a Christian with a Masters in
Divinity. Yet we never argue. We've had many long hours in which we discuss
theology. Never an argument. He eventually joined the Unitarians, because he
wanted to be in a more inclusive denomination.

Robert Morein wrote:


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


You religous people have a very interesting saying: "God's light
can shine through any window."

True Bob, but your frequent attacks shed a ton more light on you than they
shed on me.

I can understand why you would
discount me as a source for sound advice.

Then Bob, why do you keep blathering on?

However, I suggest you take
my suggestion to your pastor, describe it to him without
attribution, explain that you are fighting with us, and ask him for
advice.

Bob, if you and the rest of the usual list of RAO antagonists would quit
tossing figurative fire bombs at me and others, there would be a whole lot
more peace around here. It's as simple as that - change your own behavior
and things will change.

Let's take this recent post from "JBorg"

"JBorg" wrote in message
om

"My claim is that Susan Kroobitch is not takin in enough
dough from her nightly rounds in the back alleys there
in Detroit.

Arny,
I don't condone the post. But the reason is appeared is as follows. You
are attacking their, and my, core beliefs with respect to the rules of human
discourse. The disputes about audio are quite secondary. They are responding
with satire, in this case, vicious satire.

Unfortunately, you express your opinions as beliefs with such force that
you frequently challenge the right of others to make their own voices heard.
One primary example seems to be whether us folks on rec.audio.opinion have
the right to report on our own listening experiences, and encourage others
to have informal listening experiences, and based on that, to buy what they
like.

You have the problem that every true believer has. You want to change
the way people think, and you don't understand why it irritates them. Most
of the time, people don't want to change. If the issue is an important one,
like racial desegregation, then large numbers of like-minded people mount
moral crusades over decades, and over generations, changes of attitude
become apparent. I don't mind if you want to try to change the way I think,
but you have to be very nice, very subtle. I wouldn't key off the behavior
of the guys in rec.audio.tech. Engineers are not typically great at dealing
with people.

Rec.audio.opinion is like a party, because for us, music is about having
a good time. Some of us drink our beer warm, and others drink it cold. If
you happen to be a revolutionary, and sit in the corner, except to attack
the party goers for wearing fancy clothes and eating food with high levels
of mercury, you're not going to fit in. And yet many significant things
happen at parties. One simply has to fit in with the atmosphere.

None of the above requires that you change any of your beliefs. But any
change in audio has to come as a seduction. One has to be able to try it
without any fear of loss, be it physical or psychological. To offer your
ideas on such terms, you have to be a very good ambassador. One has to be
almost sly.

As for my attacks on your scientific methodology -- If a Seventh Day
Adventist comes knocking on my door, there are two things I can do: slam the
door, or tear his theology to shreds. They make me angry at their surety of
their "true belief." I slam the door. You pose a similar irritation, but I
can't do that. So I tear your theology to shreds. Whether you deserve that
depends upon whether I think of you as a Seventh Day Adventist, or one of my
best, dearest friends, who happens to be a Christian with a Masters in
Divinity. Yet we never argue. We've had many long hours in which we discuss
theology. Never an argument. He eventually joined the Unitarians, because he
wanted to be in a more inclusive denomination.















Some can "agree to disagree" on many topics, including religiion, politics, and
audio, and still act in a socially acceptable way on RAO. A few others can
not.



Bruce J. Richman

"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message



Some can "agree to disagree" on many topics, including religiion,
politics, and audio, and still act in a socially acceptable way on
RAO. A few others can not.

Those who cannot diasgree and act in a socially acceptable way include Bruce
Richman, George Middius, and Robert Morein.

Arny Krueger wrote:


"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message



Some can "agree to disagree" on many topics, including religiion,
politics, and audio, and still act in a socially acceptable way on
RAO. A few others can not.

Those who cannot diasgree and act in a socially acceptable way include Bruce
Richman, George Middius, and Robert Morein.











Prove it. The above statement is a false claim.



Bruce J. Richman

Bruce J. Richman said to ****-for-Brains:

Some can "agree to disagree" on many topics, including religiion,
politics, and audio, and still act in a socially acceptable way on
RAO. A few others can not.

Those who cannot diasgree and act in a socially acceptable way include Bruce
Richman, George Middius, and Robert Morein.

Actually, turd-breath, there's nothing to disagree about. You are a
loathsome and despicable creature whose continued existence defies all
sense of cosmic justic. Agreed? Agreed.

Prove it. The above statement is a false claim.

Of course it's false -- it was uttered by Krooger. But it is consistent
with the Beast's overall construct of anti-reality delusions, right?

"dave weil" wrote in message

On Sun, 7 Dec 2003 06:20:26 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

Bob, if you and the rest of the usual list of RAO antagonists would
quit tossing figurative fire bombs at me and others, there would be
a whole lot more peace around here. It's as simple as that - change
your own behavior and things will change.

And yet, when your "enemies" are polite to you, you continue to be
rude and abusive.

Same thing happens to me.

When asked about this, you talk about things like
"preemptive strikes".

As if you've never turned nasty with me yourself, Weil.

Therefore, we can assume that your above statement is completely
disengenuous.

Therefore it's quite clear that you're a hypocrite, Weil.

BTW Weil, you misspelled "disingenuous". Just yesterday when I wrote
"deserts" instead of "desserts" as part of the title of a purely technical
post, you joined in with Morein, Richman, and Middius in making fun of me.
So I repeat my comment Weil, as if you've never turned nasty with me
yourself!

BTW Weil, are you going to chalk this post up as an example of you being
polite to me?

LOL!

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


Bruce J. Richman said to ****-for-Brains:

Some can "agree to disagree" on many topics, including religiion,
politics, and audio, and still act in a socially acceptable way on
RAO. A few others can not.

Those who cannot diasgree and act in a socially acceptable way include
Bruce
Richman, George Middius, and Robert Morein.

Actually, turd-breath, there's nothing to disagree about. You are a
loathsome and despicable creature whose continued existence defies all
sense of cosmic justic. Agreed? Agreed.

Prove it. The above statement is a false claim.

Of course it's false -- it was uttered by Krooger. But it is consistent
with the Beast's overall construct of anti-reality delusions, right?

Reluctantly, I concur. Arny is a hardcore case.

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


You religous people have a very interesting saying: "God's light
can shine through any window."

True Bob, but your frequent attacks shed a ton more light on you than
they
shed on me.

I can understand why you would
discount me as a source for sound advice.

Then Bob, why do you keep blathering on?

However, I suggest you take
my suggestion to your pastor, describe it to him without
attribution, explain that you are fighting with us, and ask him for
advice.

Bob, if you and the rest of the usual list of RAO antagonists would quit
tossing figurative fire bombs at me and others, there would be a whole
lot
more peace around here. It's as simple as that - change your own behavior
and things will change.


Translation: Accept everything Arny says as gospel truth and things will
be
fine. Failure to accept his preachings as words from the Messiah will
result in his wrath - pitiful and pathetic to witness though it may be.

If anyone doubts this, challenge Arny on any error he makes and
experience the consequences yourself.

ScottW

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"George M. Middius" wrote in message
news
Robert Morein said to ****-for-Brains:

A friend can change one's opinion. An enemy seldom does.

Krooger is surrounded by enemies. Therefore he will never have to
change his mind.

You're delusional, Middius. I have tons of friends, just not many on RAO.
Given what RAO has become due to your reprehensible influence, that
speaks
well for my character.

Arny and George are 2 cheeks on the same ass with a crack in the middle.

ScottW

"ScottW" wrote in message
news:gIPAb.13401$yf.8820@fed1read01...

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


You religous people have a very interesting saying: "God's light
can shine through any window."

True Bob, but your frequent attacks shed a ton more light on you than
they
shed on me.

I can understand why you would
discount me as a source for sound advice.

Then Bob, why do you keep blathering on?

However, I suggest you take
my suggestion to your pastor, describe it to him without
attribution, explain that you are fighting with us, and ask him for
advice.

Bob, if you and the rest of the usual list of RAO antagonists would quit
tossing figurative fire bombs at me and others, there would be a whole
lot
more peace around here. It's as simple as that - change your own
behavior
and things will change.


Translation: Accept everything Arny says as gospel truth and things will
be
fine. Failure to accept his preachings as words from the Messiah will
result in his wrath - pitiful and pathetic to witness though it may be.

If anyone doubts this, challenge Arny on any error he makes and
experience the consequences yourself.

ScottW

Brother, tell it like it is!