[Andre Jute]

Steven R. Rochlin wrote:

Jute,

There is no "confession." Enjoy the Music.com does not sell advertising
in exchange for positive reviews. Where is your proof?

Name one adverse review of an advertiser. Name one adverse review of
obvious **** product. Steven R. Rochlin's EnjoyTheMusic is a free
magazine on the internet. It has no subscription income. Its only
income is from advertisers. After a decade in business, Steven R.
Rochlin's EnjoyTheMusic has not found one product it did not like.
EnjoyTheMusic daily promotes products that have no audiophile benefit
or effect whatsoever. That tells its own sorry tale of dishonesty,
hypocrisy and corruption.

Obviously agree with Alan and Ayn that you have lost the plot.

A disgraced sex tourist and a superannuated brothel-keeper. This is
about your morality, Rochlin. Doesn't it strike you as significant that
the only defenders you can find are the scum of the earth? It strikes
the rest of us as extremely telling that, after I exposed the only
people who support you as deeply immoral, you still can find no better
character references than this scum.

Please show proof of your accusation "Rochlin, for instance, has told us he
has no answer to the overwhelming evidence that his
EnjoyTheMusic.ShillForAdvertisers breaks all the codes and laws honored by
decent advertisers and publishers; his excuse is that he thinks such
accusations are good advertising for him. Rochlin's confession stands on the
public record." Remember that we want hard evidence, not false accusations
and you own delusional outcomes.

Here is the original charge:

Andre Jute wrote:
Rochlin: far from "helping audiophiles" as you claim,
you are a parasite on high fidelity, pushing bland and
incompetent **** because the makers pay you for
advertising on your silly site and for the number of
foolish audiophiles who read your one-sided
travesties of reviews. You are a sales hack, pure
and simple, but one without the balls to open up
an emporium on the high street. --- Andre Jute

Here is the substance of Rochlin's reply:
Enjoy the Music.com reviews/mentions far more products/manufacturers who
have never advertised than those who have. If you take the time to see the
hundreds of reviews, and thousands of products within our show reports, you
would note that only a very, very small fraction advertise.

This is an admission of every charge against you, Steven R. Rochlin,
and against your shill operation, EnjoyTheMusic.

You stand accused of being "a parasite on high fidelity, pushing bland
and incompetent **** because the makers pay you for adverising on your
silly site".

Your answer is that you push the bland and incompetent **** of many
others as well. Of course you do, so that you can say to them, "Look,
here is a lying review that flatters your useless ****. Advertise with
me and I'll never stop flattering your useless ****."

You, Steven R. Rochlin, seem unaware of the rules of decent, honest
publication. It is not up to me to educate you. My business is
condemning you for failing to inform yourself and to act according to
the principles of decency, honesty and truthfulness which guarantee a
free, independent press. Robert Morein, who is more forgiving than I
am, has given you some sources he consulted on hand of what I wrote
earlier. You may start there.

You say "he has told us" and where have i said that?

At the point where you tried to sneer the accusation out of court
without an argument. Now, belatedly, you are trying to bluster your way
out of a pit you dug for yourself. Look it up.

Show proof "all the codes and laws honored by decent advertisers" so define
them and show point by point proof accordingly.

You have just made my case against you! It is not me who requires to
know these things. It is you. If you don't make an effort to discover
the bounds of acceptable behaviour in your trade, and you weren't born
with innate decency, of course you will go off the rails and open
yourself up to this sort of condemnation. You are not improving matters
by admitting publicly that *after ten years* you do not know what the
professional terms of reference are.

BTW: got a good chuckle from the posting about my writings not appearing in
print magazines, as if appearing in print was manna from heaven versus the
Internet. My writings have appeared in quite a few print magazines. Of
course you would have been aware of this if you had conducted proper
research.

Provide a list of magazines and dates so that we may weigh your
contribution and the quality of the magazines. In each case indicate
whether or not you received an actual sum of money from the magazine in
return for the article.

As a man who lives up to his word, and has proof to back it up, just
published an article concerning newsgroups and discussion boards.
http://www.enjoythemusic.com/magazine/

For a start, you are not living up to your word about appearing in a
*print* magazine. Your example regards EnjoyTheMusic, a free, internet,
giveaway "magazine" of the most doubtful reputation for editorial
judgement and probity, and one furthermore under your direct control
and ownership. This is vanity publishing pure and simple.

The article itself is a bland piece of zero-information ****, a
self-advertisement for your despicable shill for advertisers,
EnjoyTheMusic. If you can sell that to the editor of any reputable
print magazine with subscribers who pay for the content, that editor is
passing-out drunk. We know it isn't going to happen because you aren't
a writer, you don't know **** about audio, you don't know **** about
editing a magazine, you don't know **** about publishing, all you know
about is making a fast buck.

Patrick Turner is spot on concerning the Newsgroup when he says, "However,
kangaroo courts on news groups are appalling net practice and mostly boring
to most who never know whether or not to believe the evidence presented, or
ignore it since they've had pleasant dealings with the accused, or who have
not time to read the long posts containing so called truth about the
accused.

Patrick is often right. In that case, Steven R. Rochlin, why did you
participate for years in the kangaroo courts that the Magnequest Scum
conducted? Why are you now hiding on protected conferences with that
disgraced slime? Why doesn't your so-called article tell the truth
about some of those moderated conferences, that they were paid for by
scum like the disgraced Magnequest boss Michael LaFever so that he
wouldn't have to answer for his crimes. Why is it that Steven R.
Rochlin prefers those conferences? Is it because he does not like to be
called to account for his crimes against fidelity?

There is always a small minority of folks who dig dirt up about someone, or
make up a dirt story then forever use this dirt to flog a victim because
they dared to challenge whatever the minority may have said. There is always
a minority who like to dish out the torment but who loathe being tormented
themselves."

Again, this describes you well, Rochlin, in the days when you ran with
the Magnequest Scum. (Thanks, Patrick. That's good stuff!)

Like you Patrick, i'd love to be here for the vacuum tube though basically
stand clear of the news groups. Too much "BS factor," and that was my
complaint a week or so ago.

Rochlin, you don't know **** about tubes, you don't know **** about
electronics, you don't know **** about audio, you have no taste and you
have no culture, and you have a confounded cheek to set your own
compromised self up as our judge.

"Hardly anyone is talking tubes or hi-fi anymore." -- Patrick Turner

Then, Steven R. Rochlin, take your tacky advertisements for your tacky
little shillsheet somewhere else and we won't need all this space to
tell you and your diseased friends that you are not wanted.

Patrick, you may want to try the various moderated audio/music discussion
boards. The single to noise ratio is much higher. Rarely visit the
Newsgroups as Jute plus all the sock puppets are wonderful examples of the
wild wild West.

Moderated groups where the moderators have been told who pays for the
existence of the group. Moderated groups where it is permissable to
abuse any manufacturer except the insiders, who paid for the group
directly or indirectly. Moderated groups where it is impossible to say
that Rochlin and his EnjoyTheMusic are shills for the least deserving
advertisers. That in itself turns those moderated groups into
despicable mouthpieces for greedy undesirables like Steven R. Rochlin.
Run there, Steve-baby, don't walk.

Enjoy the Music,

All the more when you're gone.

Steven R. Rochlin
http://www.EnjoyTheMusic.ShillForAdvertisers

Where you can find:
[more shills for advertisers]

[Steven R. Rochlin]

Andre,

Thank you for admitting you have zero proof on all accounts. The
remainder of your libelous personal attack against myself and other
Newsgroup members simply reinforces why many people choose moderated groups
(some of which have zero advertisers btw so there goes your conspiracy
theory).

Enjoy the Music.com has given negative reviews to advertisers, try doing
some research. Also seek out resources of print magazine for my articles.
Your lack of effort in conducting said research further proves your lack of
desire to learn the truth. Instead, you appear to continually conduct
personal attacks on others without proof or merit to further whatever agenda
you desire at that given moment.

My apologies to the newsgroups that Andre Jute felt the need to crosspost,
though am sure he has been added to various Killfiles.

Enjoy the Music,

Steven R. Rochlin
http://www.EnjoyTheMusic.com

Where you can find:
Superior Audio, The Absolute Sound,
Review Magazine, The $ensible Sound,
The Audiophile Voice... and MUCH more!


"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...
Steven R. Rochlin wrote:

Jute,

There is no "confession." Enjoy the Music.com does not sell
advertising
in exchange for positive reviews. Where is your proof?

Name one adverse review of an advertiser. Name one adverse review of
obvious **** product. Steven R. Rochlin's EnjoyTheMusic is a free
magazine on the internet. It has no subscription income. Its only
income is from advertisers. After a decade in business, Steven R.
Rochlin's EnjoyTheMusic has not found one product it did not like.
EnjoyTheMusic daily promotes products that have no audiophile benefit
or effect whatsoever. That tells its own sorry tale of dishonesty,
hypocrisy and corruption.

Obviously agree with Alan and Ayn that you have lost the plot.

A disgraced sex tourist and a superannuated brothel-keeper. This is
about your morality, Rochlin. Doesn't it strike you as significant that
the only defenders you can find are the scum of the earth? It strikes
the rest of us as extremely telling that, after I exposed the only
people who support you as deeply immoral, you still can find no better
character references than this scum.

Please show proof of your accusation "Rochlin, for instance, has told us
he
has no answer to the overwhelming evidence that his
EnjoyTheMusic.ShillForAdvertisers breaks all the codes and laws honored
by
decent advertisers and publishers; his excuse is that he thinks such
accusations are good advertising for him. Rochlin's confession stands on
the
public record." Remember that we want hard evidence, not false
accusations
and you own delusional outcomes.

Here is the original charge:

Andre Jute wrote:
Rochlin: far from "helping audiophiles" as you claim,
you are a parasite on high fidelity, pushing bland and
incompetent **** because the makers pay you for
advertising on your silly site and for the number of
foolish audiophiles who read your one-sided
travesties of reviews. You are a sales hack, pure
and simple, but one without the balls to open up
an emporium on the high street. --- Andre Jute

Here is the substance of Rochlin's reply:
Enjoy the Music.com reviews/mentions far more products/manufacturers
who
have never advertised than those who have. If you take the time to see
the
hundreds of reviews, and thousands of products within our show reports,
you
would note that only a very, very small fraction advertise.

This is an admission of every charge against you, Steven R. Rochlin,
and against your shill operation, EnjoyTheMusic.

You stand accused of being "a parasite on high fidelity, pushing bland
and incompetent **** because the makers pay you for adverising on your
silly site".

Your answer is that you push the bland and incompetent **** of many
others as well. Of course you do, so that you can say to them, "Look,
here is a lying review that flatters your useless ****. Advertise with
me and I'll never stop flattering your useless ****."

You, Steven R. Rochlin, seem unaware of the rules of decent, honest
publication. It is not up to me to educate you. My business is
condemning you for failing to inform yourself and to act according to
the principles of decency, honesty and truthfulness which guarantee a
free, independent press. Robert Morein, who is more forgiving than I
am, has given you some sources he consulted on hand of what I wrote
earlier. You may start there.

You say "he has told us" and where have i said that?

At the point where you tried to sneer the accusation out of court
without an argument. Now, belatedly, you are trying to bluster your way
out of a pit you dug for yourself. Look it up.

Show proof "all the codes and laws honored by decent advertisers" so
define
them and show point by point proof accordingly.

You have just made my case against you! It is not me who requires to
know these things. It is you. If you don't make an effort to discover
the bounds of acceptable behaviour in your trade, and you weren't born
with innate decency, of course you will go off the rails and open
yourself up to this sort of condemnation. You are not improving matters
by admitting publicly that *after ten years* you do not know what the
professional terms of reference are.

BTW: got a good chuckle from the posting about my writings not appearing
in
print magazines, as if appearing in print was manna from heaven versus
the
Internet. My writings have appeared in quite a few print magazines. Of
course you would have been aware of this if you had conducted proper
research.

Provide a list of magazines and dates so that we may weigh your
contribution and the quality of the magazines. In each case indicate
whether or not you received an actual sum of money from the magazine in
return for the article.

As a man who lives up to his word, and has proof to back it up, just
published an article concerning newsgroups and discussion boards.
http://www.enjoythemusic.com/magazine/

For a start, you are not living up to your word about appearing in a
*print* magazine. Your example regards EnjoyTheMusic, a free, internet,
giveaway "magazine" of the most doubtful reputation for editorial
judgement and probity, and one furthermore under your direct control
and ownership. This is vanity publishing pure and simple.

The article itself is a bland piece of zero-information ****, a
self-advertisement for your despicable shill for advertisers,
EnjoyTheMusic. If you can sell that to the editor of any reputable
print magazine with subscribers who pay for the content, that editor is
passing-out drunk. We know it isn't going to happen because you aren't
a writer, you don't know **** about audio, you don't know **** about
editing a magazine, you don't know **** about publishing, all you know
about is making a fast buck.

Patrick Turner is spot on concerning the Newsgroup when he says,
"However,
kangaroo courts on news groups are appalling net practice and mostly
boring
to most who never know whether or not to believe the evidence presented,
or
ignore it since they've had pleasant dealings with the accused, or who
have
not time to read the long posts containing so called truth about the
accused.

Patrick is often right. In that case, Steven R. Rochlin, why did you
participate for years in the kangaroo courts that the Magnequest Scum
conducted? Why are you now hiding on protected conferences with that
disgraced slime? Why doesn't your so-called article tell the truth
about some of those moderated conferences, that they were paid for by
scum like the disgraced Magnequest boss Michael LaFever so that he
wouldn't have to answer for his crimes. Why is it that Steven R.
Rochlin prefers those conferences? Is it because he does not like to be
called to account for his crimes against fidelity?

There is always a small minority of folks who dig dirt up about someone,
or
make up a dirt story then forever use this dirt to flog a victim because
they dared to challenge whatever the minority may have said. There is
always
a minority who like to dish out the torment but who loathe being
tormented
themselves."

Again, this describes you well, Rochlin, in the days when you ran with
the Magnequest Scum. (Thanks, Patrick. That's good stuff!)

Like you Patrick, i'd love to be here for the vacuum tube though
basically
stand clear of the news groups. Too much "BS factor," and that was my
complaint a week or so ago.

Rochlin, you don't know **** about tubes, you don't know **** about
electronics, you don't know **** about audio, you have no taste and you
have no culture, and you have a confounded cheek to set your own
compromised self up as our judge.

"Hardly anyone is talking tubes or hi-fi anymore." -- Patrick Turner

Then, Steven R. Rochlin, take your tacky advertisements for your tacky
little shillsheet somewhere else and we won't need all this space to
tell you and your diseased friends that you are not wanted.

Patrick, you may want to try the various moderated audio/music discussion
boards. The single to noise ratio is much higher. Rarely visit the
Newsgroups as Jute plus all the sock puppets are wonderful examples of
the
wild wild West.

Moderated groups where the moderators have been told who pays for the
existence of the group. Moderated groups where it is permissable to
abuse any manufacturer except the insiders, who paid for the group
directly or indirectly. Moderated groups where it is impossible to say
that Rochlin and his EnjoyTheMusic are shills for the least deserving
advertisers. That in itself turns those moderated groups into
despicable mouthpieces for greedy undesirables like Steven R. Rochlin.
Run there, Steve-baby, don't walk.

Enjoy the Music,

All the more when you're gone.

Steven R. Rochlin
http://www.EnjoyTheMusic.ShillForAdvertisers

Where you can find:
[more shills for advertisers]

[[email protected]]

Andrew Jute McCoy outgassed:

same crap, different day.

http://www.fantasticfiction.co.uk/m/andrew-mccoy/

Its fantasy world lacks imagination, truth, even spirit.

Give it a rest, idiot...

Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA

[Sander deWaal]

"Andre Jute" said:


Moderated groups where the moderators have been told who pays for the
existence of the group. Moderated groups where it is permissable to
abuse any manufacturer except the insiders, who paid for the group
directly or indirectly. Moderated groups where it is impossible to say
that Rochlin and his EnjoyTheMusic are shills for the least deserving
advertisers. That in itself turns those moderated groups into
despicable mouthpieces for greedy undesirables like Steven R. Rochlin.
Run there, Steve-baby, don't walk.


I am a moderator on a Dutch electronics forum, and a visitor in some
other Dutch DIY audio forums.
I can assure you that on "my" forum, posts with any commercial intent
are removed at once, even if they're by employers of the companies
that support the site by allowing us to place banners.
That is forum policy and clearly stated in our FAQ.

Also, on the other forums I visit, commercial posts are frowned upon,
and usually removed, unless the poster has something of value to add
to the discussion.
E.g. some people at Hypex offer valuable and useable information when
there are questions about their (use of) products, and often on other
subjects as well.
We know they're posting there as individuals with an interest in DIY,
who happen to work for an audio company.
Heck, I even work for an audio company myself (not that it is of any
use to anyone, since it is PA and not DIY- or tube related).
In case a conflict of interests would rise, if even remotely, I step
out of the discussion.

I don't know how this is done in other DIY forums all over the world,
but I hardly believe it is as bad as you suggest it to be.

--
"All amps sound alike, but some sound more alike than others".

[Sander deWaal]

"Andre Jute" said:


You and I aren't talking about the same conferences, Sander. I intended
nothing as general -- by a hundred miles! -- as you're reading into my
words.


OK, point taken.

I have never visited Audio Asylum, so I have no opinion about it.
My incidental visits to DIY and TNT would indicate that they also have
a strict policy about commercial posts and interests.

A propos reading: I am rereading Morgan Jones "Valve amplifiers" these
days, how much can one forget after several years? Recommended stuff!
Next on the pile: Self's 2 books.

--
"All amps sound alike, but some sound more alike than others".

[Jon Yaeger]

Steven,

I reckon you'd have about the same success trying to teach a rabbit calculus
as trying to reason with Jute. To him, facts are always superfluous -- he
lives a sad life of delusion & fantasy.

Save your time for something else . . .

Jon

[paul packer]

On 18 Jul 2006 13:49:29 -0700, "Andre Jute" wrote:

. When I've put you in the gutter, I shall arrive in person forcefully to express my contempt for
you.

Aren't we lucky that Google saves all this stuff?

[Steven R. Rochlin]

Jon,

Thanks for your post and it appears you are correct. Jute decided to make
himself part of my research, so he aided in proving the merit and comments
within my recent editorial.

It saddens me to see these newsgroups having very high noise content
consisting of personal attacks, etc. Over a decade ago the newsgroups were a
great place filled with high signal ratio. In some ways i take
Rec.Audio.Tube a bit personally as a few of us helped to make it a reality,
since it was not a newsgroup at the time and we wanted more rec.audio
groups. Over the years have not participated much on the newsgroups and have
preferred moderated boards. Perhaps the day will come when posts by Jute
will be the only thing on the audio newsgroups, as everyone will have
migrated to moderated boards.

Thanks again for your post, it is appreciated.

Enjoy the Music,

Steven R. Rochlin
http://www.EnjoyTheMusic.com

Where you can find:
Superior Audio, The Absolute Sound,
Review Magazine, The $ensible Sound,
The Audiophile Voice... and MUCH more!

"Jon Yaeger" wrote in message
...
Steven,

I reckon you'd have about the same success trying to teach a rabbit
calculus
as trying to reason with Jute. To him, facts are always superfluous -- he
lives a sad life of delusion & fantasy.

Save your time for something else . . .

Jon

[Prune]

"Andre Jute" wrote in
oups.com:
A disgraced sex tourist and a superannuated brothel-keeper. This is

Heh, neat. The only other time I've come across the word "superannuated"
was in James' The Aspern Papers. Thanks for confirming it's not yet, er,
superannuated