Inquiry re "Soundhaspriority"
Robert Morein
Graham, a resident of the U.K., who posts as "Soundhaspriority." This is a
fact-finding inquiry that solicits opinions and additions from all the
people known to post to r.a.o. Contributions from identities that are not
known to this author will not be accepted for addition.
Mr. Graham has so far expressed an interest in two subjects:
1. "Tweaks", or minor adjustments, to audio reproduction systems, that he
claims work by methods other than those known to acoustical physics and
electronics.
2. A "cream", which applied to eyeglasses, speakers, etc. is said to improve
audio reproduction by methods unknown to acoustical physics and
electronics.
Mr. Graham has said, "I do have tweaks for glasses, including aspecial cream
that you apply to your eyeglasses to improve the sound you hear from your
audio system. It's not free though, and certainly not cheap." This
statement suggests that Mr. Graham has a proprietary interest in this
product. We do not know the specifics of this interest, if there is one.
It appears that George Middius and Dave Weil consider Mr. Graham an
unmitigated fraud. This has resulted in a thread heavily into adhominem
attacks between Middius and Weil, on one side, and Mr. Graham on the other.
The author of this post, Robert Morein, has asked Mr. Graham for an
explanation of how this cream works. Mr. Graham responded by stating that my
knowledge of science is not current, and therefore, that I am incapable of
understanding the "theory", which involves quantum mechanics. I responded
that my knowledge of science is current, and that I am very familiar with
quantum mechanics. Mr. Graham then indicated that he could not tell me,
because the "theory" is proprietary. Mr. Graham lambasts Dave Weil for not
understanding the "theory", but no theory has been presented.
Therefore, we have a "cream", which is alleged by Mr. Graham to work, but
without any explanation of how.
Several questions present themselves:
1. Is Mr. Graham using this newsgroup to advertise a product he sells? If
so, does he violate the newsgroup charter? There certainly is a newsgroup
for audio sales -- rec.audio.marketplace.
2. Your opinions are solicited regarding Mr. Graham's offerings:
a. His "free tweaks", such as the aspirin-and-pinhole, or the cutting
off of the corners of clothing labels
b. His offering of the "cream".
3. Is Mr. Graham to be believed? If not:
a. Does Mr. Graham believe himself that these methods and offerings
work?
b. Is Mr. Graham a fraud, in the sense of awareness that these methods
and offerings do not work, but advocating and promoting them nevertheless?
All of you are invited to respond: John Atkinson, Arny, Mike McKelvy, Sander
deWaal, George Middius, Dave Weil, Andre Jute, Ludovic Mirabel, Paul Packer,
Trevor Wilson, Francois Yves LeGal, "Shhhh! I'm Listening", Scott Wheeler,
Jenn, Bret Ludwig, Howard Ferstler, "Fella", "Walt",
"Goofball_star_dot_etal", etal :)
The results will be tallied, excluding individuals I do not know, to avoid
"rigging."
PLEASE IGNORE/DO NOT RESPOND TO ADHOMINUM RESPONSES. I will tally all the
answers. "Adhominum" will distract from the purpose.
George M. Middius
Robert Morein said:
> It appears that George Middius and Dave Weil consider Mr. Graham an
> unmitigated fraud.
That's not quite accurate. I don't believe Shovels is a fraud because I
don't believe he actually intends to deceive people with his "tweaks".
Rather, I believe he is an egomaniac and a troll whose only interest is
provoking people into frenzied exchanges of insults and unresolvable verbal
combat.
He would qualify as a fraud, I suppose, if he were trying to sell something
or otherwise get people to make an investment of time or money in an
enterprise. (I note in passing that by this definition, various Audio 'Borgs
qualify as frauds. They actively try to recruit people to participate in
"test" rituals, and there has been some nudging about purchasing an aBxism
torture box or a cable comparator.)
--
A day without Krooger is like a day without arsenic.
George M. Middius
Robert Morein said:
> 1. Is Mr. Graham using this newsgroup to advertise a product he sells? If
> so, does he violate the newsgroup charter? There certainly is a newsgroup
> for audio sales -- rec.audio.marketplace.
No, he's not trying to sell anything. Yet, anyway.
> 2. Your opinions are solicited regarding Mr. Graham's offerings:
> a. His "free tweaks", such as the aspirin-and-pinhole, or the cutting
> off of the corners of clothing labels
Nobody, including Shovels, believes there is any merit to such activities.
> b. His offering of the "cream".
Shovels clearly has a talent for BSing. The "cream" idea seems to have just
popped out of his overactive cerebellum when he saw somebody say "speaker
placement".
> 3. Is Mr. Graham to be believed? If not:
> a. Does Mr. Graham believe himself that these methods and offerings
> work?
No.
> b. Is Mr. Graham a fraud, in the sense of awareness that these methods
> and offerings do not work, but advocating and promoting them nevertheless?
Not a fraud, just a mischief maker.
> PLEASE IGNORE/DO NOT RESPOND TO ADHOMINUM RESPONSES. I will tally all the
> answers. "Adhominum" will distract from the purpose.
That's "ad hominem", Bobo.
Sander deWaal
said:
>That's "ad hominem", Bobo.
If irony killed, LoT;S ;-) ©
--
- Never argue with idiots, they drag you down their level and beat you with experience. -
Fella
>
>
> Several questions present themselves:
> 1. Is Mr. Graham using this newsgroup to advertise a product he sells? If
> so, does he violate the newsgroup charter? There certainly is a newsgroup
> for audio sales -- rec.audio.marketplace.
>
No he does not sell anything, IMO. I beleive he has been abusive and
confrontational with almost everbody here, that's not the hallmark of a
salesman, IMO.
> 2. Your opinions are solicited regarding Mr. Graham's offerings:
> a. His "free tweaks", such as the aspirin-and-pinhole, or the cutting
> off of the corners of clothing labels
Now why would you think anyone would have any kind of a differing
opinion on that stuff?
> b. His offering of the "cream".
I guess I missed this one, cream, I'll look it up, I don't really read
his mile long rants anymore.
>
> 3. Is Mr. Graham to be believed? If not:
> a. Does Mr. Graham believe himself that these methods and offerings
> work?
Yes, I beleive he sincerely beleives all that stuff. His over-defensive
and bitter attacking stance tells of a man ridiculed all his life for
beleiving in and actively and shamelessly advocating such unconventional
(read: looney tunes) stuff like that.
> b. Is Mr. Graham a fraud, in the sense of awareness that these methods
> and offerings do not work, but advocating and promoting them nevertheless?
If 3a = yes, then 3b = no, else reverse.
BTW: SHP, when I called that spanish guy a troll I was not taking a
stance on whether or not directionality exists in cables. His initial
post had all the ingredients to start up a cockfight between the so
called borgs and normals, exotic high end stuff endorsed by a high end
"ragazine" leaving him cold was supposed to be the boiling point, a borg
was supposed to come out saying look what those ragazines make people
buy, etc, and us normals were supposed to start defending the high end
exotica, etc, and the directionality of his rca's was the icing on the
cake, as it were. We were to have a bout and he was to snicker there on
the sidelines. He was confirming this scenario with his dumb "Hav'nt
seen so much bitching since I saw a couple of women knock seven bells
out of each other in my local bar" too eager, too early victory rant.
George M. Middius
Sander deWaal said:
> >That's "ad hominem", Bobo.
> If irony killed, LoT;S ;-) Š
Spoken like a tweako-freako nitwit. Didn't you say you love tube gear,
Clyde? When I think of tubes, my blood pressure shoots up. Get a life.
Learn to write. Arnii is a very smart guy.
Robert Morein
"George M. Middius" <cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net> wrote
in message news:ecld22hib3kv7ik2p...@4ax.com...
>
>
> Robert Morein said:
>
>> 1. Is Mr. Graham using this newsgroup to advertise a product he sells? If
>> so, does he violate the newsgroup charter? There certainly is a newsgroup
>> for audio sales -- rec.audio.marketplace.
>
> No, he's not trying to sell anything. Yet, anyway.
>
http://www.belt.demon.co.uk/newsletter/vol0202/vol0202.html
It appears that "PWB Electronics" is a profit making enterprise, and that
Richard Graham writes a newsletter they publish. They do state, ""What
follows is an introduction to the P.W.B. Newsletters by Dr. Richard Graham
and his personal view of developments at P.W.B. Electronics. We would like
to point out to readers that the P.W.B. Newsletters are compiled, edited and
produced by Dr. Richard Graham - completely independently of P.W.B.
Electronics. P.W.B. Electronics do not have or exercise any editorial
control over the Newsletters."
Whether this is a complete statement of the facts of the matter is up for
question. If the contents of the newsletter are, in the vast preponderance,
favorable to the interests of PWB, then it is irrelevant whether the Belts
exercise control over it.
In his correspondence with me, Mr. Graham has given his credentials as a
Ph.D in applied mathematics from the University of Leeds. However, he states
in http://www.belt.demon.co.uk/intro.html that "My own background in
Medicine, Child Development Research and Psychological Treatments influenced
my decision to start the Newsletter."
Sander deWaal
>>> 1. Is Mr. Graham using this newsgroup to advertise a product he sells? If
>>> so, does he violate the newsgroup charter? There certainly is a newsgroup
>>> for audio sales -- rec.audio.marketplace.
>> No, he's not trying to sell anything. Yet, anyway.
>Please examine http://www.belt.demon.co.uk/ and
>http://www.belt.demon.co.uk/newsletter/vol0202/vol0202.html
>It appears that "PWB Electronics" is a profit making enterprise, and that
>Richard Graham writes a newsletter they publish. They do state, ""What
>follows is an introduction to the P.W.B. Newsletters by Dr. Richard Graham
>and his personal view of developments at P.W.B. Electronics. We would like
>to point out to readers that the P.W.B. Newsletters are compiled, edited and
>produced by Dr. Richard Graham - completely independently of P.W.B.
>Electronics. P.W.B. Electronics do not have or exercise any editorial
>control over the Newsletters."
Is John Atkinson "selling" Stereophile in this newsgroup?
Robert Morein
"Sander deWaal" <nos...@wanadoo.nl> wrote in message
news:2pud22d4bng971mpq...@4ax.com...
that one next.
George M. Middius
Robert Morein said:
> > No, he's not trying to sell anything. Yet, anyway.
> It appears that "PWB Electronics" is a profit making enterprise, and that
> Richard Graham writes a newsletter they publish. They do state, ""What
> follows is an introduction to the P.W.B. Newsletters by Dr. Richard Graham
> and his personal view of developments at P.W.B. Electronics.
I must have missed part of your evidence trail. I thought you deduced
Shovels is Graham *because* of that citation on the PWB site. Is there an
independent link between the Graham person and the RAO persona?
To my mind, however, whether Graham is Shovels doesn't necessarily affect
the issue of fraudulence. Yes, there's a Web site that purports to sell
various items. Two buts to consider: First, there's no independent
evidence that anybody has actually bought any of that stuff. Second,
Shovels (whether it's Graham or somebody else) has not tried to sell the
stuff on RAO, and it wasn't Shovels who posted the link to the Belts' site
-- it was you. So even if you have a dead-certain ID of Shovels as Graham,
you still haven't demonstrated any attempt to defraud victims.
ScottW
"Robert Morein" <now...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:hM6dnXd8ScIyYrvZ...@giganews.com...
Bob, Could you please flag your psychotic inquisitions as OT...
or at least RD... (really dumb)?
I'm a bit busy of late. Thanks,
ScottW
ScottW
"George M. Middius" <cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net> wrote
If he is here hoping to get some pub for his site...Morein is as usual,
unwittingly abetting his efforts.
BTW...nice to see you had a good nap.
ScottW
Robert Morein
"George M. Middius" <cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net> wrote
>
>
> Robert Morein said:
>
>> > No, he's not trying to sell anything. Yet, anyway.
>
>> It appears that "PWB Electronics" is a profit making enterprise, and
>> that
>> Richard Graham writes a newsletter they publish. They do state, ""What
>> follows is an introduction to the P.W.B. Newsletters by Dr. Richard
>> Graham
>> and his personal view of developments at P.W.B. Electronics.
>
> I must have missed part of your evidence trail. I thought you deduced
> Shovels is Graham *because* of that citation on the PWB site. Is there an
> independent link between the Graham person and the RAO persona?
>
> To my mind, however, whether Graham is Shovels doesn't necessarily affect
> the issue of fraudulence. Yes, there's a Web site that purports to sell
> various items. Two buts to consider: First, there's no independent
> evidence that anybody has actually bought any of that stuff. Second,
> Shovels (whether it's Graham or somebody else) has not tried to sell the
> stuff on RAO, and it wasn't Shovels who posted the link to the Belts' site
> -- it was you. So even if you have a dead-certain ID of Shovels as Graham,
> you still haven't demonstrated any attempt to defraud victims.
>
Just to be clear, I am not trying to show anything. The evidence is the
Robert Morein
"George M. Middius" <cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net> wrote
>
>
> Robert Morein said:
>
>> > No, he's not trying to sell anything. Yet, anyway.
>
>> It appears that "PWB Electronics" is a profit making enterprise, and
>> that
>> Richard Graham writes a newsletter they publish. They do state, ""What
>> follows is an introduction to the P.W.B. Newsletters by Dr. Richard
>> Graham
>> and his personal view of developments at P.W.B. Electronics.
>
> I must have missed part of your evidence trail. I thought you deduced
> Shovels is Graham *because* of that citation on the PWB site. Is there an
> independent link between the Graham person and the RAO persona?
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Path:
border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: soundhas...@yahoo.com
Newsgroups: rec.audio.opinion
Subject: Re: Reward for ID: Soundhaspriority
Date: 12 Mar 2006 18:39:47 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 44
Message-ID: <1142217587.2...@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
References: <ddOdneNyAMR4qInZ...@giganews.com>
<YsOdnaAz56jj1InZ...@giganews.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 218.208.12.68
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1142217599 32102 127.0.0.1 (13 Mar 2006 02:39:59
GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups...@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 02:39:59 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <YsOdnaAz56jj1InZ...@giganews.com>
User-Agent: G2/0.2
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; fr)
Opera 8.50,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
X-HTTP-Via: HTTP/1.0 BaycomCache20[C0A80E38] (Traffic-Server/5.2.4 [uScM])
Complaints-To: groups...@google.com
Injection-Info: j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com; posting-host=218.208.12.68;
posting-account=nwgr4A0AAADrsDB6S1xcSNl87xDc5ZEF
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com rec.audio.opinion:802504
Robert Morein wrote:
> It appears most likely that "Soundhaspriority" is actually one Richard
> Graham, who gives his address as 9a Marden Road. London N17 6NE, with an
> email of richar...@blueyonder.co.uk.
Fine, you sussed me out. So what do you want now Bob, a dog biscuit?
(BTW, do I still get the $50 bucks for handing in my personal info to
you? I mean, I did go to the trouble to give you a web site link and
all.... That's worth something, when you think about it...)
> Mr. Graham, you must cease and desist from further false endorsements in
> my
> name.
Mr. Morein, I officially declare that you cease and desist from further
falsifications of our conversations, regarding your testing and
approval of: The L-Shape, under audio applications. I realize that you
have mental problems, but I don't think his magistrate will find them
persuasive enough to be a defense, so you should realize that you are
courting a libel suit.
> Mr. Graham uses the title "Dr." Does anyone know if he has been awarded
> such
> a degree from an accredited institution?
Yes, I do. University of Leeds, Dept. of Applied Mathematics. Now how
much do I get for that?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> To my mind, however, whether Graham is Shovels doesn't necessarily affect
> the issue of fraudulence. Yes, there's a Web site that purports to sell
> various items. Two buts to consider: First, there's no independent
> evidence that anybody has actually bought any of that stuff. Second,
> Shovels (whether it's Graham or somebody else) has not tried to sell the
> stuff on RAO, and it wasn't Shovels who posted the link to the Belts' site
> -- it was you. So even if you have a dead-certain ID of Shovels as Graham,
> you still haven't demonstrated any attempt to defraud victims.
>
I'm not trying to show that he has. I am intrigued by the sudden switch from
apparently innocent suggestions, to, "I do have tweaks for glasses,
including aspecial cream that you apply to your eyeglasses to improve the
sound you hear from your
audio system. It's not free though, and certainly not cheap."
This sounds like a commercial solicitation.
George M. Middius
Robert Morein said:
> > Is there an independent link between the Graham person and the RAO persona?
> > It appears most likely that "Soundhaspriority" is actually one Richard
> > Graham, who gives his address as 9a Marden Road. London N17 6NE, with an
> > email of richar...@blueyonder.co.uk.
> Fine, you sussed me out.
OK then. So that's who he is. All we need now is for Terrierborg to tell
us we're wasting our time trying to pin him down. ;-)
> > you still haven't demonstrated any attempt to defraud victims.
> I'm not trying to show that he has. I am intrigued by the sudden switch from
> apparently innocent suggestions, to, "I do have tweaks for glasses,
> including aspecial cream that you apply to your eyeglasses to improve the
> sound you hear from your audio system. It's not free though, and certainly not cheap."
> This sounds like a commercial solicitation.
More like a possible prelude to a solicitation.
I wonder if there was once a real person named Jamie Benchimol.....
Arny Krueger
[dot] net> wrote in message
> Rather, I believe he is
> an egomaniac and a troll whose only interest is provoking
> people into frenzied exchanges of insults and
> unresolvable verbal combat.
Kind of like George Middius, eh?
ScottW
"George M. Middius" <cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net> wrote
>
>
> Robert Morein said:
>
>> > Is there an independent link between the Graham person and the RAO
>> > persona?
>
>> > It appears most likely that "Soundhaspriority" is actually one Richard
>> > Graham, who gives his address as 9a Marden Road. London N17 6NE, with
>> > an
>> > email of richar...@blueyonder.co.uk.
>
>> Fine, you sussed me out.
>
> OK then. So that's who he is. All we need now is for Terrierborg to tell
> us we're wasting our time trying to pin him down. ;-)
Why do you need me to bring some sense into your senseless
existence? Let me guess... you're allying with Morein so you
exercise your mommyf'er schtick again?
Sure..that makes sense.
ScottW
George M. Middius
A dialect more cryptic than Krooglish, and from another self-styled
"engineer". ;-)
> > OK then. So that's who he is. All we need now is for Terrierborg to tell
> > us we're wasting our time trying to pin him down. ;-)
> Why do you need me to bring some sense into your senseless
> existence?
Is that what I said? I'll bet Krooger loves you for paraphrasing my words.
> Let me guess... you're allying with Morein so you
> exercise your mommyf'er schtick again?
> Sure..that makes sense.
If that makes sense, I'd guess you must have been conked on the head
again. Hope you recover.
elm...@pacificcoast.net
stalwarts are taking time
to debate this stuff is high comedy of a theatre of the absurd
variety.. There is a French
term for two people who share delusions: "folie a deux". This is folie
a dozen or more,
I don't thinh he's trying to sell anything. The idea that anyone would
buy this
passeth my understanding. But then didn't someone once sell pebbles by
mail?
Ludovic Mirabel
paul packer
elm...@pacificcoast.net wrote:
> I'm sorry to say that but the mere fact that the RAO
> stalwarts are taking time
> to debate this stuff is high comedy of a theatre of the absurd
> variety.. There is a French
> term for two people who share delusions: "folie a deux". This is folie
> a dozen or more,
> I don't thinh he's trying to sell anything. The idea that anyone would
> buy this
> passeth my understanding. But then didn't someone once sell pebbles by
> mail?
> Ludovic Mirabel
The frightening part is, if he were trying to sell something it would
at least be proof of his sanity. As it is, we have only proof to the
contrary. When he first started posting, I took it for a joke and was
just about to join in. Then I realized he was serious and instantly
went into shock. I would have recovered by now, for I recover well from
psychic trauma, except that rational, intelligent people, who staunchly
resist notions like, say, that a great spiritual teacher was put to
death two thousand years ago, are prepared to seriously examine ideas
far more far-fetched because some goose cunningly pricks their egos and
challenges them to broaden their horizons. Well, I for one intend to
keep my horizons narrow, and my sanity intact, and regale Mr. Sound's
tweaks with the howls of laughter they so richly deserve.
GeoSynch
> Mr. Graham has so far expressed an interest in two subjects:
...
> 2. A "cream", which applied to eyeglasses, speakers, etc. is said to improve
> audio reproduction by methods unknown to acoustical physics and electronics.
....
> Therefore, we have a "cream", which is alleged by Mr. Graham to work, but
> without any explanation of how.
Here's the crap, uh I mean cream, in question. written about by Greg Weaver in
Soundstage way back when:
http://www.soundstage.com/synergize/synergize071999.htm
And here a few links tying in the P.W.B. newsletter to the original article by
Weaver:
http://clusty.com/search?input-form=simple-clusty&query=soundstage+weaver+tweak+cream+foil
BTW, it appears Weaver lost his credibility and his gig at Soundstage following
this brouhaha.
GeoSynch
Robert Morein
"GeoSynch" <SpamS...@Casablanca.com> wrote in message
news:NPSVf.8597$Bj7....@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
believes? Do you think he has a commercial interest in the "cream" ?
Arny Krueger
> Thanks for the additional info. What do you think Mr.
> Graham personally believes?
Of course not.
> Do you think he has a
> commercial interest in the "cream" ?
I seriously doubt that a truely commercial interest (i.e., significant
profit) is even possible.
footlong
There is much current contention on rec.audio.opinion regarding Mr. Richard
Graham, a resident of the U.K., who posts as "Soundhaspriority."
Huh? Did I miss something? It's pretty clear that SHP is the same person who
was posting as Bob Ladburry in R.A.T. last
month, but I'm unfamaliar with the Richard Graham identity. Where'd that come
from?
<much snippage>
To answer the question:
SHP is a troll. He's made pretty solid foes out of everybody on
both sides of the aisle. He has no consistent point
of view, he just likes to argue and hurl abuse.
In partitular, don't think for a minute that he's a
subjectivist and believes in the tweaks he presents -
I mean, c'mon a picture of a four legged animal
slipped under your amp? He just posts them to send up
the "magic clock" people.
Basicaly, he's like the clown in the dunk tank at the
fair. It doesn't matter what insults he hurls or who
he directs them at - the important part is to get
everybody to line up and pay for a shot at him. And
when you hit the mark and dunk him in the tank (which
happpens *alot*) he just gets back up and continues
where he left off.
Which is to say, don't take him seriously. He's a
clown. If you want to take a whack at his human
pinata impersonation, by all means go ahead. But
don't let him get your goat.
//Walt
dave weil
<now...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>It appears that George Middius and Dave Weil consider Mr. Graham an
>unmitigated fraud.
That is not the case at all. I don't really give him any credence,
since he doesn't seem to know very much about audio products based on
his ignorance of turntable grounding straps. Since he decided to
attack me virtually out of the blue, I've decided to toy with him for
a while, giving him a bit back what he's inflicted on the newsgroup.
But I also wouldn't call him a fraud, just a troller.
I did go the the Belt newsletter to see what he was prattling about,
and it's obvious that those folks only buy into tweaks when it comes
from their little club (you know, the one with the secret handshake).
They can believe that applying a stain-removing chemical to a small
spot on a table can seriously impact the sound of a system (and as
long as they believe it does, I maintain that it *does* affect the
sound, because you can't separate the mind from the sound once the
mind has decided something sounds the way it does), but he can't buy
into the idea that placing four tuned and braced wooden enclosures can
affect the sound of a system simply because someone else sussed out
that particular tweak.
So it's fun to play with the guy just to see how wild off-the-mark he
can get. He doesn't get references to Jonathan Swift and he doesn't
understand the comic use of a homophone. So he's a rather dull little
boy indeed. And now he's decended into the IKWYABWAI territory. He's
following a pretty predictable curve. I'd imagine that he's just
whiling away a typical dull British pre-spring.
dave weil
<now...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>2. Your opinions are solicited regarding Mr. Graham's offerings:
> a. His "free tweaks", such as the aspirin-and-pinhole, or the cutting
>off of the corners of clothing labels
> b. His offering of the "cream".
My opinion is that tweaks work if you believe in them. And I've
thought that it's a subtext of his point all along, whether he
explictly is intending it or not.
I don't think he's "offering the cream", except to offer it as a way
to intrude on YOUR "tweak". He can't stand to be left out in the cold.
dave weil
[underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net> wrote:
>Sander deWaal said:
>
>> >That's "ad hominem", Bobo.
>
>> If irony killed, LoT;S ;-) Š
>
>Spoken like a tweako-freako nitwit.
Plus, he's a homophonephobe.
Walt
Robert Morein
"footlong" <thecreamof...@pants.com> wrote in message
news:442805CA...@pants.com...
> Robert Morein wrote:
>
> There is much current contention on rec.audio.opinion regarding Mr.
> Richard
> Graham, a resident of the U.K., who posts as "Soundhaspriority."
>
> Huh? Did I miss something? It's pretty clear that SHP is the same person
> who
> was posting as Bob Ladburry in R.A.T. last
> month, but I'm unfamaliar with the Richard Graham identity. Where'd that
> come
> from?
His real name is Richard Graham, residing at 9a Marden Road. London N17 6NE,
with an
email of richar...@blueyonder.co.uk.
This was established by reading the posted PWB newsletters, authored by
Graham under his own name, and his admission as a post to r.a.o., which I
reposted further up in this thread.
>
> <much snippage>
>
> To answer the question:
>
> SHP is a troll. He's made pretty solid foes out of everybody on
> both sides of the aisle. He has no consistent point
> of view, he just likes to argue and hurl abuse.
>
> In partitular, don't think for a minute that he's a
> subjectivist and believes in the tweaks he presents -
> I mean, c'mon a picture of a four legged animal
> slipped under your amp? He just posts them to send up
> the "magic clock" people.
>
> Basicaly, he's like the clown in the dunk tank at the
> fair. It doesn't matter what insults he hurls or who
> he directs them at - the important part is to get
> everybody to line up and pay for a shot at him. And
> when you hit the mark and dunk him in the tank (which
> happpens *alot*) he just gets back up and continues
> where he left off.
>
> Which is to say, don't take him seriously. He's a
> clown. If you want to take a whack at his human
> pinata impersonation, by all means go ahead. But
> don't let him get your goat.
>
Please read further up this thread, to get an idea of his relationship with
PWB.
So you do not think he has a commercial interest in the PWB products?
GeoSynch
>> And here a few links tying in the P.W.B. newsletter to the original article
>> by Weaver:
>> http://clusty.com/search?input-form=simple-clusty&query=soundstage+weaver+tweak+cream+foil
> Thanks for the additional info. What do you think Mr. Graham personally
> believes? Do you think he has a commercial interest in the "cream" ?
He must be seriously down on his luck if he's still trying to peddle those
potions
and lotions seven years hence. As they say, what's old is new.
GeoSynch
Steven Sullivan
So, the question, 'how much of a credulous boob do you have to be to get fired
from an audiophile publication' now has an answer?
___
-S
"Excuse me? What solid proof do you have that I'm insane?" - soundhaspriority
Walt
> "footlong" <thecreamof...@pants.com> wrote in message
> news:442805CA...@pants.com...
>
>>Robert Morein wrote:
>>
>> There is much current contention on rec.audio.opinion regarding Mr.
>>Richard
>> Graham, a resident of the U.K., who posts as "Soundhaspriority."
>>
>>Huh? Did I miss something? It's pretty clear that SHP is the same person
>>who
>>was posting as Bob Ladburry in R.A.T. last
>>month, but I'm unfamaliar with the Richard Graham identity. Where'd that
>>come
>>from?
>
>
> His real name is Richard Graham, residing at 9a Marden Road. London N17 6NE,
> with an
> email of richar...@blueyonder.co.uk.
>
> This was established by reading the posted PWB newsletters, authored by
> Graham under his own name, and his admission as a post to r.a.o., which I
> reposted further up in this thread.
>
>><much snippage>
> Please read further up this thread, to get an idea of his relationship with
> PWB.
> So you do not think he has a commercial interest in the PWB products?
Who? Richard Graham, or SHP? I'm not convinced that they're the same
person. Your evidence is that you accused SHP of being Richard Graham,
and SHP said "Fine, you sussed me out." But I'm quite sure that if I
accused SHP of being the Queen of England he'd tell me that he was.
Didn't you ever come across one of those logic puzzles where everybody
from a certain island always lies, another always tells the truth and
another is completely random? Dealing with him is kind of like that.
OTOH, it appears likely that SHP has been reading the pwb website.
What's not clear is whether Richard Graham himself believes the crap he
writes or whether the whole thing is just an elaborate practical joke.
//Walt
Robert Morein
"Walt" <walt_...@SHOESyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:nAUVf.803$hi2...@news.itd.umich.edu...
http://www.belt.demon.co.uk/newsletter/vol0202/vol0202.html#Responses%20from%20an%20Internet%20Audio%20Web%20Site,
written by Richard Graham
The phrase "sound has priority" occurs three times.
In this link, http://www.belt.demon.co.uk/newsletter/vol0301/vol0301.html
the phrase occurs six times.
Mr. Richard Graham believes very strongly that affixing a foil sticker
imprinted with the phrase "sound has priority" on the face of audio
equipment, improves the sound. He writes about this extensively. The
indivdual posting as "soundhaspriority" admits that he is that person. Also,
the person posting is unusually voluble. Individuals capable of posting with
his use of language are extremely rare. I am myself a writer, and it is my
judgement that the subtext and style of the newsletters conforms very
closely to the posts. In private correspondence with Mr. Graham, he has not
denied that he is "soundhaspriority."
Somewhere else in this forum, someone reposted some text, author Richard
Graham, where Mr. Graham states that he has adopted the pseudonym
"soundhaspriority", presumably as an extension of what he believes. For if
one believes that sticking a piece of foil with the name on it has power,
then one can certainly believe in the power of the name.
Walt, I don't know if I've satisfied you, but this is the best that usenet
can provide. Only the power of the subpoena can do better, but subpoena is
available on for filed suits. Here in the U.S., you may be interested to
know, a person can be convicted of murder, solely on the basis of
circumstantial evidence. No body, fingerprints, blood, or DNA is required.
It happened two years ago; the man was sentenced to life in prison. The term
"circumstantial" is sometimes used as derogatory to the information, but it
is actually just a classification, one that is still taken seriously by the
law.
Sander deWaal
>>>>> 1. Is Mr. Graham using this newsgroup to advertise a product he sells?
>>>>> If
>>>>> so, does he violate the newsgroup charter? There certainly is a
>>>>> newsgroup
>>>>> for audio sales -- rec.audio.marketplace.
>>>> No, he's not trying to sell anything. Yet, anyway.
>>>Please examine http://www.belt.demon.co.uk/ and
>>>http://www.belt.demon.co.uk/newsletter/vol0202/vol0202.html
>>>It appears that "PWB Electronics" is a profit making enterprise, and that
>>>Richard Graham writes a newsletter they publish. They do state, ""What
>>>follows is an introduction to the P.W.B. Newsletters by Dr. Richard Graham
>>>and his personal view of developments at P.W.B. Electronics. We would like
>>>to point out to readers that the P.W.B. Newsletters are compiled, edited
>>>and
>>>produced by Dr. Richard Graham - completely independently of P.W.B.
>>>Electronics. P.W.B. Electronics do not have or exercise any editorial
>>>control over the Newsletters."
>> Is John Atkinson "selling" Stereophile in this newsgroup?
>Sander, may I have your help in keeping this thread on topic? We could do
>that one next.
My post was/is entirely on topic.
It is an answer to your questions, in the form of a question, if you
(choose to) look carefully enough.
--
- Never argue with idiots, they drag you down their level and beat you with experience. -
elm...@pacificcoast.net
Robert Morein wrote:
> "Walt" <walt_...@SHOESyahoo.com> wrote in message
May I advise that you borrow any textbook of psychiatry from your
Public Library and read the chapter on delusions in schizophrenia. It
might save some time and bring RAO back just a little closer to audio.
Robert Morein
"Sander deWaal" <nos...@wanadoo.nl> wrote in message
news:0n8g22lmhhl5r1gvc...@4ax.com...
Robert Morein
<elm...@pacificcoast.net> wrote in message
news:1143481232....@t31g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
> Robert Morein wrote:
>> "Walt" <walt_...@SHOESyahoo.com> wrote in message
> Mr. Morein,
> May I advise that you borrow any textbook of psychiatry from your
> Public Library and read the chapter on delusions in schizophrenia. It
> might save some time and bring RAO back just a little closer to audio.
>
refer to as "magical thinking." However, I wonder if that in isolation is
indicative of psychosis. Wouldn't one have to classify all lottery ticket
buyers, and more-than-occasional gamblers, as insane?
soundhas...@yahoo.com
Robert Morein, and his many personalities, postulated:
> There is much current contention on rec.audio.opinion regarding Mr. Richard
> Graham, a resident of the U.K., who posts as "Soundhaspriority." This is a
> fact-finding inquiry that solicits opinions and additions from all the
> people known to post to r.a.o. Contributions from identities that are not
> known to this author will not be accepted for addition.
Thank you for this obsessive deconstruction of me, Mr. Morein. You've
made my job a lot, lot easier. You've demonstrated proof in black and
white, of a number of observations that I've made. Which include
these:
A. You're a troll, and not a mentally stable one at that. And despite
the many hats you wear, you're nevertheless a troll with a heck of a
lot of free time, and an obsessive personality disorder.
B. Your so-called "fact finding mission" about me, looks more like the
Spanish Inquisition. Or a witch hunt. It, and the responses to it, has
given me more laughs than I've had in years. Perhaps it looks like
"the Spanish Inquisition" because your belief system is modelled after
the religious approach, as it is with the rest of RAO. What I mean by
that is that while you or may not sincerely be attempting to seek the
truth about me ("why" you have such an obession with me is another
issue entirely between you and your psychiatrist...), you are perfectly
content with accepting personal opinions from any random number of
ignorant fools, including yourself, as "the truth". "Opinions" (in the
form of conjecture, heresay, etc.) are not "proven facts". They're
the equivalent of centuries-old fables, like you find in the Bible, by
coincidence. The non-thinking "sheep" (what I affectionately call you
and the other members here) mindlessly gobble up whatever "faux facts"
(opinions) they are spoon-fed, and they believe it without question.
You and the rest of the group don't even exhibit the capability to
discern what is and isn't a proven fact. This despite your 7 phd's,
your engineering and scientific background. Instead, you believe that
anything that "smells like a fact", such as Goofball claiming that
after finding a picture on the internet of an old lady behind her car
he has properly identified me, must be a fact.
Little Georgie (Middius), the troll you called a "mosquito" to me (and
which I agreed with your assessment of George), can for example, be
seen proving how this process works in this very thread. First, he
believed what Goofball said about me being Mrs. Belt. Which means he
didn't believe I was who I said I was. Like the true imbecile George
is, he kept referring to this picture in addressing me. Continually
reinforcing what a mindless fool he is, in doing so. But when you gave
him enough "evidence" that I was Graham, "evidence" that was never
evidence because it was simply another Goofball-esque "revelation" that
you never verified, George gobbled up your sheep chow, like the good
little non-thinker that he is. And so the pattern goes. I must have
seen at least 100 false allegations made about me before this thread.
Allegations that were never proven, but yet, perceived as "the TRUTH"
by the mindless sheep you find on RAO. There must be at least 100 more
in this thread alone! Besides you of course, Elmi..., Paul Packer,
GeoSynch, Dave Weill, Arny Krueger, ScottW, Fella, Middius,
"Footlong"/Walt, and Steven "Hey guys, I'm A Scientisisist!" Sullivan
can so far be counted among this (in this single thread alone) who have
all made false presumptions about me. And the thread appears to just be
getting off the ground! There's only one person out of all the
respondents that didn't say anything false about me in this thread.
See if you're smart enough to guess who that is? LOL!
Hint: Out of all those I dealt with on this group, he's consistently
made the least false presumptions about me. Note that I consider the
"smart" people in our society, as those who make the least presumptions
(hence the reason I consider most people I've seen here either
"imbeciles", or "true imbeciles"). Not merely those who posess the most
"knowledge", because they've studied some field or other. Because
"knowledge" is not "truth" per se, it is merely "what is known". What
may be "known" may not be "true", or does not negate other "truths"
that may seem to overlap what is known. There is a quality to
information. "Knowing" something which isn't true, is more than just
"worthless knowledge". Because it now represents "truth" in the mind of
those who accept lies as truth, but as it is a lie, it takes you
further away from the truth, and filling your mind with quality
information. Much better to be ignorant of what is true while remaining
open to the truth, than to be ignorant of the truth and have a mind
poisoned with lies, that leaves little place for truth to reside, when
it happens along. So those who are the most careful about making false
presumptions about things (ie. those who don't arrogantly dismiss
ideas they know nothing about and haven't even experimented with),
are the one's most likely to be smarter and/or wiser than the rest of
the flock. They won't have minds filled with false presumptions
(lies), and therefore closed to valid information (truth). Following my
premise, there is of course nothing stupider than to believe that you
are on a "truth seeking inquiry", when your protocol is to query a chat
group of belligerent ne'er do wells, who couldn't possibly be more
biased and prejudiced on the subject you raise, for opinions on a
person they've never met and know nothing about. But nevertheless
have no shortage of "truth" to impart over.
This speaks to a greater issue, of course, because it has always been
my contention that you and the rest of RAO use this same "religious"
approach in your understanding of audio. That is to say, you believe
whatever "truth" you are given (directly or by what you read,
indirectly), rather than finding out for yourself what is and isn't
true. Or dismissing opinions if you can't. You're ALL skeptical of
EVERYTHING, except what you have already "bought" as "the truth". In
the case of the objectivist camp, "the TRUTH" they have bought is that
just about "everything in audio sounds the same". In the case of the
subjectivists, "the TRUTH" they have bought is "things sound different,
but only the things that the majority of consumers believe sounds
different. If we never heard of it, or if it sounds implausible, it's
bogus". This is precisely what you've made of the tweaks I generously
gave you, and precisely why you will never understand much of what is
and isn't true in audio. Or in life, for that matter, since this
approach you all take is one that rules your lives. And rather petty
lives at that, I must say, judging by this thread and the level of
"conversation" it has generated, and that in most others.
C. This newsgroup is FILLED TO THE BRIM with hyper-paranoid, insecure
social misfits, who apparently have nothing better going on in their
lives, that they have to spend their days coming up with endless
theories of conjecture about someone they keep saying should be
ignored, and that they have no interest in. After a day of not reading
this group, I see a new thread about me with 35 posts in it so far,
that proves me right again.
So I can't wait to see what happens at the end of this "fact finding
mission of yours", when you tally all the so-called "facts" about me,
from the people on your list that you consider "credible", and then try
to arrive at a "factual conclusion", which you've foolishly convinced
yourself is "the truth". Had you any idea what a fool you are, Robert,
you'd understand why I'm laughing so hard at you and the rest of
your friends in this thread.
Let me see how good you're doing so far, on this "fact finding
mission" of yours!.....
> Mr. Graham has so far expressed an interest in two subjects:
>
> 1. "Tweaks", or minor adjustments, to audio reproduction systems, that he
> claims work by methods other than those known to acoustical physics and
> electronics.
Oh well. That's wrong to begin with. Bad start on your fact-finding
journey! Not the first time you've claimed to interpret my position
and gotten it wrong either (remember when you ignorantly said all my
audio concepts are based on "Eastern" philosophies? And when other RAO
members believe you, simply because you said that?).
I DO NOT believe that "tweaks" are "minor adjustments". I only believe
that YOUR tweaks are. Mine can be much more significant in the changes
they provide, than changing a completely different audio component.
I'd hardly be able to transform the entire sound of my system, as I
have, with "minor adjustments".
>
> 2. A "cream", which applied to eyeglasses, speakers, etc. is said to improve
> audio reproduction by methods unknown to acoustical physics and
> electronics.
Wow, you finally got one teeny tiny thing right, in your brilliant
interpretations. Pure accident on your part, no doubt.
> Mr. Graham has said, "I do have tweaks for glasses, including aspecial cream
> that you apply to your eyeglasses to improve the sound you hear from your
> audio system. It's not free though, and certainly not cheap." This
> statement suggests that Mr. Graham has a proprietary interest in this
> product. We do not know the specifics of this interest, if there is one.
Gosh, and you were doing so well in the first part of no. 2..... Well,
here's where you prove that you belong on this newsgroup, Bob. And I
wish you and the rest of the sheep, a happy life together.
It's been my observation that most people on this group are insecure
and paranoid, and you've just proven that about yourself, except you
have many more "psychological difficulties" than the average RAO
regular. You take a statement that I make about a product as a
"suggestion that I have a proprietary interest in it". Well, as we all
now know thanks to me, a "suggestion" is enough for the fools on RAO to
accept as "the RAO TRUTH". So once having made a "suggestion", you then
go on to say that "we" ("we" being RAO presumably, and not all the
voices in your head battling for air time), "do not know the specifics
of this interest". And would you believe that there are some who still
don't understand how a pious carpenter from Nazareth could be hailed
the world over as "the son of a God", for over 2000 years?
And with all these religious beliefs of yours Bob, you say you don't
believe in Jesus? There's a lot more evidence to "suggest" (one of
your favourite terms....) that Jesus existed, than there is in your
ridiculously stupid conjecture. How "ridiculously stupid" are you,
exactly? Here's an example:
Every single person on this newsgroup who EVER advocated ANY product in
audio, let's say Near 50m speakers, suggests they have a "proprietary
interest in the product". According to your idiotic logic, or lack
thereof, that would make you and everyone else here a shill. Welcome to
the Shill's Club, Robert.
I take it back, Francois Yves Le Imbecile was right about you. You ARE
a moron.
> It appears that George Middius and Dave Weil consider Mr. Graham an
> unmitigated fraud.
So do you (if the 5000 accusations of "liar!" that you wrote about me
are to believed), and so do most people here. Except that Weill and
Middius, or anybody else for that matter, never proved that I was a
fraud. They only spew the same BS that everyone does. I however, _have_
proven that Weill and Middius are BOTH frauds. I proved this about
Weill in a post I made today, and I proved this to you about Middius,
after having sent you the email I sent him, which he lied to the entire
group about, saying that it contained attacks against you.
That's the difference between "the absolute TRUTH" (as shown by
valid, verifiable evidence) and "the TRUTH is it is known and believed
by RAOphiles" (ie. lies, as shown by vigorous assertion, and nothing
more).
An example of "the RAO TRUTH" would be the one by Dave "Garbage Boy"
Weill, who's most intelligent response to a debate you and I were
having about this cream product that you have such a hard-on about, was
"That's a load of total bumkum" (sic). I assumed he was talking to me
since he addressed my post, but I did consider the fact that he could
have just been talking to his good pal, George the Greek, over other
activities they had "just shared together".
> This has resulted in a thread heavily into adhominem
> attacks between Middius and Weil, on one side, and Mr. Graham on the other.
And don't forget you with your "DON'T CREAM!" warning thread and
other attack threads against me, which include ad hominem attacks of
your own.
> The author of this post, Robert Morein, has asked Mr. Graham for an
> explanation of how this cream works.
I like the way you refer to yourself in the third person, Robert. It
makes the question of your sanity even less of a controversy, in case
anyone still doubts that about you. I can see now that I was wrong to
have given in to your pleas in email that I retract what you had said
to me about having tried my tweak, because of how it would compromise
your position with the IEEE, and McCarty breathing down your neck. I
lied on your behalf over what you said to me about having tried the
L-shape tweak and found that it did make a difference, because you
asked me to do so as a friend, and because I thought you had some
integrity, and I respected that. But now after all these lies you're
trying to make up about me, I see that I was wrong about you. I don't
see much difference between you being a lunatic and a troll, and your
arch-nemesis, Brian McCarty. You're a sick enough puppy that for all
I know, you ARE "Brian McCarty". aka "The other guy Robert has an
obsession with".
Go on, Morein. Send me some more emails threatening litigation for
having briefly mentioned that you tried the L-shape tweak, and found
that you did hear a change. See how much I care about that. I will
simply show the court the email you sent in which you made the
observation, along with the IP address of your ISP. You'll be laughed
out of the house, Robert, before it ever gets to trial.
> Mr. Graham responded by stating that my
> knowledge of science is not current, and therefore, that I am incapable of
> understanding the "theory", which involves quantum mechanics. I responded
> that my knowledge of science is current, and that I am very familiar with
> quantum mechanics. Mr. Graham then indicated that he could not tell me,
> because the "theory" is proprietary. Mr. Graham lambasts Dave Weil for not
> understanding the "theory", but no theory has been presented.
Wrong again. You're purposefully trying to deceive. A "debating
trade" tactic which you borrowed from your friends Krueger, Weill and
Middius. My lambasting of Weill for not understanding the theory had
nothing to do with the conversation between you and me. It referred to
another concept (the 5 pinhole paper tweak) in which Weill demanded
that I present the theory for. Then when I _did_, Weill blustered, much
like you do, and pretended to understand the theory, but the fool
didn't even understand the term used in the theory. Likewise, if he
did, he would been able to debate me on it, but instead, "Garbage Boy"
Weil tucked tail and ran like the coward he is. Or maybe he just heard
the sound of garbage trucks coming, and lost interest due to the call
of his hunger. Even though I reminded him 15 times that he never had
the education or intelligence to debate me on that.
As to the cream, I never said the "theory is proprietary", that's
again a strawman argument, which you appear quite fond of. AFAIK, the
product you have such a hard-on about works on the strengths and
weaknesses of morphic resonance energy patterns. Where things went
awry, is when you started making all these false assumptions about the
product (ie. you kept insisting the word "electret" in the name meant
it was an electret!), and you either wanted or needed proprietary
information about the product, in order to address your specific
questions. I told you I was not the inventor of the product, and its
not my job in life to supply you with detailed information about a
product that you're interested in. In fact, its not my job to supply
you with any information about any product, when you can and should
damn well do the research yourself. There was a time when I would have
been happy to supply you with any information you needed, even if it
meant me doing research on your behalf. I supplied you with many such
details and web site links regarding the theories behind the concepts I
talked with you about. That was a time when you and I once "were" able
to have reasonable conversations in email about alternative audio
concepts and products.
You can believe that after your many recent malicious attacks (not
including all the other ones in which you called me a "liar" on the
group, when you knew I was telling the truth), that time has now
passed, and I'm not interested in having serious and sincere
conversations with you on audio or anything else. Nevertheless, before
this latest attack thread of yours in which you are desperately trying
to promulgate a whole host of lies about me, I was willing to reveal
to you some of my "guesses" about the product's possible composure
and nature. Things that I never told anyone, but that I was willing to
tell you, so that you might better understand what you're talking
about, and not be so obsessive and defensive about an audio product
like the cream, simply because you haven't a clue about it.
Nevertheless, I emailed this information to you, and you're still
pretending you know nothing about the product, judging by what you've
written in this attack thread, and by the fact that you never returned
my email to continue discussing the product, outside of the hostile
environment you helped create in the thread we were discussing the
product in.
Like I already told you publically, I was not willing to reveal this
information except privately, because if my findings about the product
are correct (and I have much reason to believe they are), then it would
compromise the inventor's rights to exclusive manufacture. But now
that I see your hostile reaction, maybe that's exactly what you
wanted in the first place? More information so that you could
obliterate the manufacturer's research and market a "me-too" product
yourself, that you never designed? At this point, you've proven to be
such a lying troll, I wouldn't put it past you to do that.
> Therefore, we have a "cream", which is alleged by Mr. Graham to work, but
> without any explanation of how.
>
> Several questions present themselves:
> 1. Is Mr. Graham using this newsgroup to advertise a product he sells?
Right. Besides being a professional lunatic, it's a good thing
you're not a magistrate. But since I'm supposed to be the audio
equivalent of a "witch doctor", I guess that your little "witch hunt"
here is quite apropos. All I know is this: if I'm "guilty" of
advertising a product by the mere MENTION of it, then so are you.
You're a shill for Polk and Near loudspeakers, among other things. A
far worse shill than I, who named a product without continuing to
mention its full name or manufacturer. You gave the entire model names
and manufacturer of the loudspeakers you allegedly are trying to sell
us. (And NO, I'm not buying your crappy Polk and Near loudspeakers,
Morein. Just the kind of thing a know-nothing audiophile would buy,
because he thinks recording studios have the best and most "neutral"
equipment).
>If
> so, does he violate the newsgroup charter? There certainly is a newsgroup
> for audio sales -- rec.audio.marketplace.
Pfffffffffffffffffttttttttt!!!!!!! ROTLFMAO!!!!!!
Now I KNOW you're insane, Robert! I'm one of the only people here
in a long time, who started trying to get the group back on topic about
subjects related to audio, with my tweak contributions. This is on a
group where 98% of the posts are all flame wars. ALL of my audio posts
were turned into attack threads, just as you have done with the
discussion on eyeglass treatments that we were having. The vast
majority of the posts here are a violation of newsgroup charter. Got a
newsflash for you Morein: RAO has long since unainmously decided it
does not give a rat's ass about the newsgroup's charter. This is no
longer an audio discussion group, its a flame war group, like
alt.flame. Audio is merely occasional background chatter here, and
there are never ANY productive discussions on audio EVER. Because of
belligerent fools like yourself.
> 2. Your opinions are solicited regarding Mr. Graham's offerings:
> a. His "free tweaks", such as the aspirin-and-pinhole, or the cutting
> off of the corners of clothing labels
One would have to wonder why "free tweaks" is in quotation marks, and
then reflect a little more on the lack of your sanity. Judging by all
your other paranoid theories, you probably think the government is
living in your toilet, so you "go potty" in your bed.
> b. His offering of the "cream".
That's a blatant LIE now, since Google will show I offered NOTHING,
except FREE tweak ideas. In fact, because the cream is a commercial
product, and not a cheap one at that, I did not want to go into details
about it, lest I be called a "shill" again, by unscrupulous posters
such as yourself. This product was only _one_ of numerous ideas that I
mentioned could negate diffraction effects of eyeglass, and cause them
to become beneficial to the audiophile wearer. You ignored my
mentioning other ideas besides the cream product, some of which were
free. YOU are the one who kept pushing me to provide details about the
commercial cream product, Morein. At NO POINT did I ever offer the
product for sale, or give ANY details whatsoever about its commercial
availability. I did not even mention who manufactures it.
In contrast, YOU advocated people go blind and miss seeing their
favourite performer at a concert, in order to improve some
unquantifiable degree of acoustic degradation, due to the alleged
effects of the presence of your eyeglasses on acoustic pressure waves.
You advocated this, because all you ignorantly understand of the
physical world is your quaint, hundreds-of-years old archaic laws of
physics. Which is precisely why you engineers and engineer wanna-bes
(like your friends McKelvy and Krueger) are always advocating that
differences in audio are mostly insignificant. What is "insignificant"
Robert, is your knowledge of what produces good sound in audio. In
fact, I don't just question your mental competence, I'm questioning
your professional competence, here.
Well after having made a convincing performance here as an obsessive
lunatic, thank you for proving what a proven liar that you are, Robert.
>
> 3. Is Mr. Graham to be believed? If not:
> a. Does Mr. Graham believe himself that these methods and offerings
> work?
That's interesting, since you are on record as having SAID as much
yourself, that you believe the tweaks are sincere.
In fact, you even started a new thread just to declare this....
One of Robert Morein's personalities speaks:
"I have been involved in a private discussion with Soundhaspriority. I
intend to preserve the confidentiality of this discussion. However, I
would
like to tell you that it is my impression that he is not a troll. His
posts
are not mischief; they are expressions of deeply held beliefs, with
substantial philosophy behind them. While our viewpoints are
significantly
different, I accord him my respect, due to the cogency with which he
presents his beliefs, which stem from outside the Western framework of
logical thought."
Since multiple personality disorder does seem to be one of your
psychological failings, I can't say I'm a bit surprised about your
lack of consistency.
> b. Is Mr. Graham a fraud, in the sense of awareness that these methods
> and offerings do not work, but advocating and promoting them nevertheless?
>
Now you're talking about me being a fraud, which seems to be one of
your favourit pet words (Google shows you calling people a "fraud" no
less than 506 times). A few days ago, you publically wrote this:
One of Robert Morein's personalities speaks:
"For the record, I have no indication, nor do I assert, that Mr.
Graham's business practices are in any way fraudulent."
Now about your latest insane accusation.... am I a "fraud" as much as
YOU are a fraud for advocating that people starve themselves to death
to improve their perception of sound, or electrocute themselves by
using a cheater plug, or that people adjust their speakers according to
mystical principles of "Feng Shui", or that eating ice cream will
render your hifi system a useless piece of junk, or any of the other
crazy ideas you advocated to RAO as "Free tweaks for TRUE
AUDIOPHILES!".
"True Audiophiles" Mr. Morein? "True Lunatics" is more like it.
> All of you are invited to respond: John Atkinson, Arny, Mike McKelvy, Sander
> deWaal, George Middius, Dave Weil, Andre Jute, Ludovic Mirabel, Paul Packer,
> Trevor Wilson, Francois Yves LeGal, "Shhhh! I'm Listening", Scott Wheeler,
> Jenn, Bret Ludwig, Howard Ferstler, "Fella", "Walt",
> "Goofball_star_dot_etal", etal :)
>
> The results will be tallied, excluding individuals I do not know, to avoid
> "rigging."
> PLEASE IGNORE/DO NOT RESPOND TO ADHOMINUM RESPONSES. I will tally all the
> answers. "Adhominum" will distract from the purpose.
It's "ad hominem" idiot (the study of Latin apparently not one of
your PHDs). And it certainly didn't seem to distract from your
purppose of attacking my character when you used it against me in your
posts.
George M. Middius
Ludo said:
> Mr. Morein,
> May I advise that you borrow any textbook of psychiatry from your
> Public Library and read the chapter on delusions in schizophrenia. It
> might save some time and bring RAO back just a little closer to audio.
Ludo, I have great respect for your insights and acumen on the subject of
testing, as does, I believe, Robert. However, the topic that seems to me
to be nearest to your heart, the efficacy and pertinence of DBTs to
consumer audio, is as far removed from the core subject of this newsgroup
as are our speculations about the looney "soundhaspriority". What do you
mean? I can imagine you asking. I mean that no Normal person has any faith
in a mystical process of "tests" for selecting audio gear because its
procedures and results are wholly, completely, and utterly irrelevant to
that task. You continue to "debate" the idiot 'borgs on the subject for
your own amusement. You will never persuade any of Them to stop their
empty preaching, any more than They will persuade a Normal to forego his
senses and emotional responses to music in favor of a bloodless, otiose,
dehumanizing "test". (It's worth noting again that among that tribe of
true believers we know as the Hive, only one or two of them have ever
participated in any DBTs of any sort at any time in their pathetic lives.
Maybe only one, in fact, now that Nousiane has disappeared from Usenet.)
George M. Middius
Robert Morein said:
> It does seem that Mr. Graham engages in what mental health practitioners
> refer to as "magical thinking." However, I wonder if that in isolation is
> indicative of psychosis. Wouldn't one have to classify all lottery ticket
> buyers, and more-than-occasional gamblers, as insane?
The chance of winning (1 in 10,000,000, or whatever) is not imaginary.
It's only demented if one seriously expects to win against such odds.
soundhas...@yahoo.com
Robert Morein wrote:
<Robert Morein's psychotic inquiry snipped>
This email I received Sat., apparently from your mother or father, goes
a long way to explaining these posts of yours, Robbie:
From: "Sylvan Morein" <bluebookval...@hotmail.com> Add to
Address Book Add Mobile Alert
To: soundhas...@yahoo.com, nyo...@peoplepc.com
Subject: Robert
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2006 02:02:13 -0500
I would ask you to stop stirring up my son, Robert.
He's a sick boy. I've managed to get his medication under control
these
past few weeks and he's now pretty docile and controllable.
Don't mess it up.
Thank you for your kind assistance.
_________________________________________________________________
Don't just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
I hope you get some help before it's too late....
ScottW
soundhas...@yahoo.com wrote:
Besides you of course, Elmi..., Paul Packer,
> GeoSynch, Dave Weill, Arny Krueger, ScottW, Fella, Middius,
> "Footlong"/Walt, and Steven "Hey guys, I'm A Scientisisist!" Sullivan
> can so far be counted among this (in this single thread alone) who have
> all made false presumptions about me.
Be specific... looks like you just looked at the post list and tossed
some names around.
Exactly what is the "false presumption" I am supposed to have made?
BTW, I think it's pretty funny that Morein would call George a
mosquito behind his back. You can always tell the slimy backstabbers...
they always want to know what everyone thinks because they lack a spine
to follow their own moral compass.
ScottW
nyo...@peoplepc.com
"Arny Krueger" <ar...@hotpop.com> wrote in message
news:m4ydna3GCv5...@comcast.com...
> "George M. Middius" <cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast
> news:v1ld22h7cjm2d5jqi...@4ax.com
>
>> Rather, I believe he is
>> an egomaniac and a troll whose only interest is provoking
>> people into frenzied exchanges of insults and
>> unresolvable verbal combat.
>
> Kind of like George Middius, eh?
>
Kind of????
soundhas...@yahoo.com
ScottW wrote:
> soundhas...@yahoo.com wrote:
> Besides you of course, Elmi..., Paul Packer,
> > GeoSynch, Dave Weill, Arny Krueger, ScottW, Fella, Middius,
> > "Footlong"/Walt, and Steven "Hey guys, I'm A Scientisisist!" Sullivan
> > can so far be counted among this (in this single thread alone) who have
> > all made false presumptions about me.
>
> Be specific... looks like you just looked at the post list and tossed
> some names around.
>
It may look that way to you, but that's just another false
presumption you're making about me, isn't it.
> Exactly what is the "false presumption" I am supposed to have made?
Well... see above. You just made one! But in your case, I will retract
your name from the list. Because you're right, I just checked again,
and you didn't even mention me in your posts. I must have been
confusing you with Sullivan, since I can hardly tell the difference
between the two of you in your posts. You did however make no end of
dumb, false presumptions about me in posts outside this thread (besides
the one you just made above).
> BTW, I think it's pretty funny that Morein would call George a
> mosquito behind his back. You can always tell the slimy backstabbers...
> they always want to know what everyone thinks because they lack a spine
> to follow their own moral compass.
>
I don't follow all the kitchen sink dramas that you people play out
on this group, so I didn't know that it wasn't already public
knowledge that Morein does not think highly of Middius. Especially
since Middius is a slimy backstabber himself and I think its well known
that the dweeb traded in his moral compass for a Star Trek klingon
death ray phaser a long time ago.
> ScottW
Robert Morein
<soundhas...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1143485796.9...@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
>
> Robert Morein wrote:
>
> <Robert Morein's psychotic inquiry snipped>
>
> This email I received Sat., apparently from your mother or father, goes
> a long way to explaining these posts of yours, Robbie:
>
Sylvan Morein does not post to usenet. The post is a forgery of Brian L.
McCarty.
Regards,
Robert Morein
soundhas...@yahoo.com
Arny Krueger wrote:
> "George M. Middius" <cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast
> [dot] net> wrote in message
> news:v1ld22h7cjm2d5jqi...@4ax.com
>
> > Rather, I believe he is
> > an egomaniac and a troll whose only interest is provoking
> > people into frenzied exchanges of insults and
> > unresolvable verbal combat.
>
> Kind of like George Middius, eh?
Not at all like George Middius. Middius attacks everything and every
one that wanders into this group of trolls (you btw, are well known to
be one of the biggest trolls on usenet. Newsgroup charters are written
around the notion of keeping you out, apparently....). The fact is, I
simply posted some free ideas to try to help people with their systems,
and the overwhelming response to that was immediate provocation,
frenzied exchanges of insults and..... well what the hell on this
newsgroup _isn't_ "unresolvable verbal combat"?! You've spent 10
years trolling this group... have YOU ever resolved any combat?
Obviously not, since you're still battling the very same ideas you
were 10 years ago.
Arny Krueger
news:1143486818....@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com
> have YOU ever resolved any
> combat?
Sure, just not with the RAO trolls.
> Obviously not, since you're still battling the
> very same ideas you were 10 years ago.
I used what I learned about resistance to these ideas elsewhere, with great
sucess.
GeoSynch
> Like I already told you publically
...
> A few days ago, you publically wrote this:
....
>> PLEASE IGNORE/DO NOT RESPOND TO ADHOMINUM RESPONSES.
> It's "ad hominem" idiot
Tsk-tsk - not once, but twice.
Thanks for publicly making a mockery of yourself.
BTW, are you a hack writer who gets paid by the word rather than the quality of
the work itself?
GeoSynch
Walt
<crap snipped>
> B. Your so-called "fact finding mission" about me, looks more like the
> Spanish Inquisition.
NOOOOOOOOOOoooooooobody expects the Spanish inquisition!
> Or a witch hunt.
He turned me into a newt!
//Walt
//
// I got better...
Robert Morein
<soundhas...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1143485089.2...@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
>
> Robert Morein, and his many personalities, postulated:
>
>> There is much current contention on rec.audio.opinion regarding Mr.
>> Richard
>> Graham, a resident of the U.K., who posts as "Soundhaspriority." This is
>> a
>> fact-finding inquiry that solicits opinions and additions from all the
>> people known to post to r.a.o. Contributions from identities that are not
>> known to this author will not be accepted for addition.
>
>
> Thank you for this obsessive deconstruction of me, Mr. Morein. You've
> made my job a lot, lot easier. You've demonstrated proof in black and
> white, of a number of observations that I've made. Which include
> these:
>
Dear Mr. Richard Graham:
This is a fact finding thread. I take no position with respect to the
opinions expressed in the thread. I have brought forth certain facts for the
consideration of others, in order to facilitate their informed discussion.
Regards,
Robert Morein
soundhas...@yahoo.com
After making many "informed decisions" based on "facts", Robert Morein
wrote:
> <soundhas...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1143485089.2...@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > Robert Morein, and his many personalities, postulated:
> >
> >> There is much current contention on rec.audio.opinion regarding Mr.
> >> Richard
> >> Graham, a resident of the U.K., who posts as "Soundhaspriority." This is
> >> a
> >> fact-finding inquiry that solicits opinions and additions from all the
> >> people known to post to r.a.o. Contributions from identities that are not
> >> known to this author will not be accepted for addition.
> >
> >
> > Thank you for this obsessive deconstruction of me, Mr. Morein. You've
> > made my job a lot, lot easier. You've demonstrated proof in black and
> > white, of a number of observations that I've made. Which include
> > these:
> >
> [snip]
> Dear Mr. Richard Graham:
> This is a fact finding thread.
Pffffttttttttttttttt! Make me laugh harder, why don't you. This is a
witch hunt (or a "witch doctor" hunt...). IOW, it's as much of a joke
as you are. Since when is "blind conjecture and speculation from any
number of biased, prejudicial ignorant bigots" considered "facts" now?
> I take no position with respect to the
> opinions expressed in the thread.
You implied that I was a fraud, a shill, and took many other false
positions in your assessment of me. I think that would qualify as
"taking a position with respect to the opinions expressed in this
thread".
>I have brought forth certain facts for the
> consideration of others, in order to facilitate their informed discussion.
>
There you go making me laugh out loud again. All you brought were your
ridiculous and false presumptions about me, in order to have a flock of
mindless sheep chew on them like so much cud. That may qualify as
entertainment for trolls such as yourself, and the other trolls here,
but don't even pretend to call it an "informed discussion", since
you're not "informed" about anything. Especially don't call it "their"
informed discussion, when this obsession with me was YOURS to begin
with. This must be the fourth thread you've started, in order to
discuss me or my ideas. The email I received about you may be a
forgery, but the fact that you have a lot of psychological problems
that require medication is pretty damned credible to me.
Robert Morein
<soundhas...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1143490700.5...@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
>
[snip]
>
> There you go making me laugh out loud again. All you brought were your
> ridiculous and false presumptions about me, in order to have a flock of
> mindless sheep chew on them like so much cud.
Dear Mr. Richard Graham:
This is a fact finding thread. I presume nothing about you.
Regards,
Robert Morein
soundhas...@yahoo.com
GeoSynch, the most cleverest of the clever clever trolls, wrote this
without even having to think or read a dictionary:
> soundhaspriority about as much as spelling does:
>
> > Like I already told you publically
> ...
> > A few days ago, you publically wrote this:
> ....
> >> PLEASE IGNORE/DO NOT RESPOND TO ADHOMINUM RESPONSES.
>
> > It's "ad hominem" idiot
>
> Tsk-tsk - not once, but twice.
> Thanks for publicly making a mockery of yourself.
>
That's not possible on a group of fools, but you being one of the
biggest fools here, making a mockery of you is rather, child's
play.....
From: dictionary.com
link:
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=ad%20hominem
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ad hom·i·nem P Pronunciation Key (hm-nm, -nm)
adj.
Appealing to personal considerations rather than to logic or reason:
Debaters should avoid ad hominem arguments that question their
opponents' motives.
[Latin : ad, to + hominem, accusative of hom, man.]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ever heard of a "dictionary", troll? When you launch an ad hominem
attack on someone as you just did, for allegedly not knowing how to
spell "ad hominem" no less, I think it would kind of be a boost to
your credibility to know how to spell the term and understand what it
means, you flaming moron.
Let me guess.... you're the idiot that's paid to clean up the room
after the other idiots have partied in it? And you found out how to
operate the computer, didn't you? It looks like stupidity has a new
name now: "GeoSynch". If everyone thanked you for making a public
mockery of yourself, it would probably look a lot like that old Coca
Cola commercial.....
How does that go again?....
"I'd like to thank the "GeoSynch"
For public mockery
He puts his feet inside his mouth
It keeps him company.....
He's the Real Thing
(Total moron)
What the group wants to be
(Ignorant clods)
The height of idiocy
("Foolish" defined)
He's the Real Thing....
> BTW, are you a hack writer who gets paid by the word rather than the quality of
> the work itself?
No, you're confusing me with your failed career as a hack writer. Your
singular lack of imagination and creativity is probably what did you
in, because even for a hack writer, it sucks. So do you get paid to
troll audio newsgroups? I hope so, because you don't seem qualified for
anything else.
Walt
>>ridiculous and false presumptions about me, in order to have a flock of
>>mindless sheep chew on them like so much cud.
>
>
> Dear Mr. Richard Graham:
> This is a fact finding thread. I presume nothing about you.
Well, the first fact to establish is whether SHP is actually Richard
Graham. I guess can try asking him directly.
So, soundhaspriority, are you actually Richard Graham?
//Walt
//
//...he asks, expecting the usual incomprehensible barrage of obscenity
laden verbiage....
dave weil
>
>
>
>GeoSynch, the most cleverest of the clever clever trolls, wrote this
>without even having to think or read a dictionary:
>
>
>> soundhaspriority about as much as spelling does:
>>
>> > Like I already told you publically
>> ...
>> > A few days ago, you publically wrote this:
>> ....
>> >> PLEASE IGNORE/DO NOT RESPOND TO ADHOMINUM RESPONSES.
>>
>> > It's "ad hominem" idiot
>>
>> Tsk-tsk - not once, but twice.
>> Thanks for publicly making a mockery of yourself.
>>
>
>That's not possible on a group of fools, but you being one of the
>biggest fools here, making a mockery of you is rather, child's
>play.....
>
>From: dictionary.com
>
>link:
>
>http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=ad%20hominem
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>ad hom搏搖em P Pronunciation Key (hm-nm, -nm)
This would all be fine if he were commenting on the phrase ad hominem
- unfortunately for you, you have "publically" shown that you need to
work on your comprehension skills...
You lose.
Again.
soundhas...@yahoo.com
Garbage Boy teaches us all a lesson in comprehension skills:
> On 27 Mar 2006 12:43:51 -0800, soundhas...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> >GeoSynch, the most cleverest of the clever clever trolls, wrote this
> >without even having to think or read a dictionary:
> >
> >
> >> soundhaspriority about as much as spelling does:
> >>
> >> > Like I already told you publically
> >> ...
> >> > A few days ago, you publically wrote this:
> >> ....
> >> >> PLEASE IGNORE/DO NOT RESPOND TO ADHOMINUM RESPONSES.
> >>
> >> > It's "ad hominem" idiot
> >>
> >> Tsk-tsk - not once, but twice.
> >> Thanks for publicly making a mockery of yourself.
> >>
> >
> >That's not possible on a group of fools, but you being one of the
> >biggest fools here, making a mockery of you is rather, child's
> >play.....
> >
> >From: dictionary.com
> >
> >link:
> >
> >http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=ad%20hominem
> >
> >----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >ad hom·i·nem P Pronunciation Key (hm-nm, -nm)
LOL!
GeoSynch _was_ commenting on the phrase "ad hominem" wrt its spelling.
You see Garbage Bag Boy, this is the dead giveaway clue:
"soundhaspriority about as much as spelling does"
Look again. It's the phrase he prefaced his post with, you clueless
moron. Guess what, Dave? Yup here it comes.... " You lose. Again." By
gosh, don't you and your alleged "classical education" EVER get tired
of being made a fool of? Explain to me again how my posts are related
to "morphic resonance" why don't you? ROTFLMAO! Making fun of you is so
easy, it bores me now. Troll along, ankle biter.
soundhas...@yahoo.com
Robert Morein wrote, in all earnestness:
> Dear Mr. Richard Graham:
> This is a fact finding thread. I presume nothing about you.
>
> Regards,
> Robert Morein
If this is a "fact finding" thread Robert, than everyone on RAO,
including you, are open-minded, independent thinkers who would
recognize "truth" from "lies", who don't make any presumptions or false
allegations about me or any of my tweaks, and who are all quite wise
and intelligent, who know everything about what produces good sound in
audio, and what doesn't, and who's replies are always as profound and
insightful as any you are likely to read anywhere.
Okay, enough with the yuk-yuks. Let's see how many "presumptions" we
can avoid finding in your post:
Presumption no 1:
"Mr. Graham has so far expressed an interest in two subjects: "
I've expressed an interest in more than tweaks during my stay here thus
far (I know you're not great at math, but the "two" you mentioned is
actually just the one interest). I've also expressed an interest in
helping some people with their audio problems, and I've expressed an
interest in troll bashing (but only those who tried to attack me).
Presumption no 2:
"Mr. Graham has said, "I do have tweaks for glasses, including aspecial
cream
that you apply to your eyeglasses to improve the sound you hear from
your
audio system. It's not free though, and certainly not cheap." This
statement suggests that Mr. Graham has a proprietary interest in this
product. We do not know the specifics of this interest, if there is
one. "
I have a propietary (aka commercial) interest in any product.
Presumption no 3:
"It appears that George Middius and Dave Weil consider Mr. Graham an
unmitigated fraud. This has resulted in a thread heavily into
adhominem
attacks between Middius and Weil, on one side, and Mr. Graham on the
other. "
Middius and Weil are the only ones who consider me a fraud. Numerous
others have implied as much, inlcluding the Goofball they call
"Goofball" and who else.... wait, I'm pretty sure I remember this.....
uh.... wasn't it that obnoxious neurotic pill-popping maniac that....
gee what the heck was his na-- oh yea, YOU. It appears you also
consider me an unmitigated fraud. But don't worry, even though its 3
against 1, I can take you, Moe, Curly and the rest of the gang on with
no more than my little pinky finger....
Presumption no. 4:
"Mr. Graham responded by stating that my
knowledge of science is not current, and therefore, that I am incapable
of
understanding the "theory", which involves quantum mechanics".
That you're "incapable of understanding the theory".
Presumption no. 5:
"I responded that my knowledge of science is current, and that I am
very familiar with
quantum mechanics."
That your knowledge of science is "current", which implies you
understand all fields of science and scientific theory. Whether you've
heard of them or not. Which brings us to.....
Presumption no. 6:
That the cream is being sold and marketed as an electret, merely
because its name is "cream electret".
Presumption no. 7:
"Mr. Graham then indicated that he could not tell me, because the
"theory" is proprietary.
This is more of a lie, really, since I never said the "theory" was
proprietary.
Presumption no. 8:
"Mr. Graham lambasts Dave Weil for not
understanding the "theory", but no theory has been presented".
That I was lambasting Garbage Boy (more like roasting him over a spit,
I prefer to think....) because he did not understand the theory behind
the cream electret, when nothing could be further from the truth.
Rather, I was pissing all over our mutual friend Dave Weil, because the
moron thought that he could take apart the theory behind my 5-pinhole
paper tweak, and still have enough fight left over to make further
sick, twisted jokes about my dying mother. As we all saw, he proved to
be quite the impotent little troll, not unlike his partner, George the
Greek. In order to try to hide the fact that he was nothing more than
an ignorant nitwit with a claimed superior education than mine, he went
hiding behind one of Arny's slimy debating tactics: that of demanding
that I debunk one of his assertions (his ridiculous tweaks), when I had
never even queried him on it - or even knew that he had any at the
time.
Presumption no. 9:
"1. Is Mr. Graham using this newsgroup to advertise a product he sells?
If
so, does he violate the newsgroup charter? There certainly is a
newsgroup
for audio sales -- rec.audio.marketplace. "
Well, this is more of a "delusion" really. I mean it is risible for you
to proclaim you are on a "fact finding mission", while you're basing
your wild speculations upon nothing; a complete and total lack of
evidence. Being that there IS no evidence that I was advertising or
selling anything, and should post on RAM.
Presumption no. 10:
"b. His offering of the "cream". "
You're right. Less of a presumption, more of a flat out lie. Since you
can not prove that I was selling the cream, or advertising it in any
way.
Presumption no. 11:
"3. Is Mr. Graham to be believed?"
That you have a valid basis for believing I'm not to be believed. This
is akin to me asking "how many times have you beaten your wife, Mr.
Morein?".
Presumption no. 12:
" a. Does Mr. Graham believe himself that these methods and offerings
work? "
No -valid- basis for posing the question, particularly considering the
fact that you are already on the record as having thought otherwise.
Presumption no. 13:
" b. Is Mr. Graham a fraud, in the sense of awareness that these
methods
and offerings do not work, but advocating and promoting them
nevertheless? "
Again, no -valid- basis for posing the question.
Presumption no. 14:
The concepts behind the tweaks are based on Eastern philosophies.
Presumption no. 15:
> This is a fact-finding inquiry
Probably the biggest one of all.
> PLEASE IGNORE/DO NOT RESPOND TO ADHOMINUM RESPONSES. I will tally all the
> answers. "Adhominum" will distract from the purpose.
Well, at least you finally figured out how to spell "ad hominem" (could
you please inform GeoSynch and Dave Weil of that, while you're on your
obsessive inquiry into me. So maybe this excercise in insinuating your
various mental afflictions upon the rest of the group has done some
good after all.
Robert, sometimes, you are to me just what I am to the others: a never
ending circus freak show. For this reason, even though you say some
REALLY stupid pig-headed things, it's hard to stay mad at you. So don't
go changin' to try and please me....
Robert Morein
<soundhas...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1143502758.1...@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
>
> Robert Morein wrote, in all earnestness:
>
>> Dear Mr. Richard Graham:
>> This is a fact finding thread. I presume nothing about you.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Robert Morein
>
> If this is a "fact finding" thread Robert, than everyone on RAO,
> including you, are open-minded, independent thinkers who would
> recognize "truth" from "lies", who don't make any presumptions or false
> allegations about me or any of my tweaks, and who are all quite wise
> and intelligent, who know everything about what produces good sound in
> audio, and what doesn't, and who's replies are always as profound and
> insightful as any you are likely to read anywhere.
>
Questions have been posted with respect to your motives and beliefs.
Examination by one's peers is not always pleasant. While it is not our
intent to make this unpleasant for you, you have made a number of
extraordinary, perhaps incredible, claims regarding audio reproduction.
Naturally, we are curious about the motives of such a person. We are also
curious about "meta perceptions", ie., how other people regard you.
We do note that you appear to lack respect for your peers. This
disadvantages you in discussions with knowledgeable individuals. While some,
such as Dave Weil and George Middius have expressed antagonism toward you,
you have allowed yourself to be dominated by a need to effectively ridicule
them. I urge you to keep your responses to these individuals proportionate.
Collaborating as a group, we are better able to understand your motives
than as individuals. This is the purpose of the thread.
Regards,
Robert Morein
GeoSynch
(Note audio reference.)
>> > Like I already told you publically
>> ...
>> > A few days ago, you publically wrote this:
>> ....
>> >> PLEASE IGNORE/DO NOT RESPOND TO ADHOMINUM RESPONSES.
>> > It's "ad hominem" idiot
>> Tsk-tsk - not once, but twice.
>> Thanks for publicly making a mockery of yourself.
>That's not possible on a group of fools, but you being one of the
>biggest fools here, making a mockery of you is rather, child's
>play.....
My, my, where to begin? The Ferstlerian misplaced comma, the ham-handed
Lionelesque
IKYABWAI - which stands for I Know You Are But What Am I (you're welcome) - but
let's be charitable and call it even. For you see, if you enter "publically"
into the M-W site,
it returns the word as "publicly" although it lists "publically" as a variant.
See for instance:
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=publically
Now on to where the red mist starts to set in:
>From: dictionary.com
> http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=ad+hominem&r=66
>Ever heard of a "dictionary", troll? When you launch an ad hominem
>attack on someone as you just did, for allegedly not knowing how to
>spell "ad hominem" no less, I think it would kind of be a boost to
>your credibility to know how to spell the term and understand what it
>means, you flaming moron.
Sorry to burst your bubble, old boy, but if you would be kind enough
to click on this link
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.audio.opinion/msg/8ad861493bdb9cf2
then come back to us after you've finished that bowl of humble pie* and
wiped the egg off your face, you'll only lose some face, which is better
than losing credibility and having to "Sneeze some dust that you got buzzed on,
You know it's hard to believe..."*
(Note audio reference.)
>Let me guess.... you're the idiot that's paid to clean up the room
>after the other idiots have partied in it? And you found out how to
>operate the computer, didn't you? It looks like stupidity has a new
>name now: "GeoSynch". If everyone thanked you for making a public
>mockery of yourself, it would probably look a lot like that old Coca
>Cola commercial.....
Quite a rich, vivid imagination epiphanized from imbibing magic cream.
>How does that go again?....
Better keep your day job and leave the wince-evoking poetry well enough alone.
>> BTW, are you a hack writer who gets paid by the word rather than the quality
>> of
>> the work itself?
>No, you're confusing me with your failed career as a hack writer.
Just can't leave the IKYABWAI rejoinders well enough alone, either?
>Your singular lack of imagination and creativity is probably what did you
>in, because even for a hack writer, it sucks.
There's that rich, vivid imagination again. You must imbibe the magic cream by
the gallon.
>So do you get paid to troll audio newsgroups?
Polly learn new word "troll." Good word "troll." Polly want cracker?
>I hope so, because you don't seem qualified for anything else.
Your purported omniscience is woefully underwhelming.
GeoSynch
paul packer
> C. This newsgroup is FILLED TO THE BRIM with hyper-paranoid, insecure
> social misfits, who apparently have nothing better going on in their
> lives, that they have to spend their days coming up with endless
> theories of conjecture about someone they keep saying should be
> ignored, and that they have no interest in. After a day of not reading
> this group, I see a new thread about me with 35 posts in it so far,
> that proves me right again.
Out of all Mr. Sound's mindless ranting, he's finally hit on something
worth discussing---or rather, not worth discussing. Why are we
endlessly speculating about this out-of-control attack droid anyway?
The fact that he's obviously well-educated and intelligent only counts
against him and makes me regret even more that they did away with the
stocks---you know, chucking rotten tomatoes at people's heads. What a
wonderful opportunity we have here, with our own village idiot to play
with. And if you think I'm being uncharacteristically uncharitable,
it's just the normal reaction to Mr. Sound's being his typical charming
self. He comes on this NG, postulates utter absurdity masquerading as
"tweaks" and then abuses anyone who dares doubt his sincerity or the
efficacy of his suggestions. We're all closed-minded imbeciles, you
see, or else we'd accept all this stuff and spend the rest of the day
sticking pin-holes in cardboard and smearing our glasses with cream
(though what this would do for the sound from my headphones I can't
imagine). Oh dear, and here I am wasting still more bandwidth on the
fellow--what am I thinking? Back, back....back to rationality.....
And to think we lambasted Arnie for ABX!
elm...@pacificcoast.net
George M. Middius wrote:
> Robert Morein said:
>
> > It does seem that Mr. Graham engages in what mental health practitioners
> > refer to as "magical thinking." However, I wonder if that in isolation is
> > indicative of psychosis. Wouldn't one have to classify all lottery ticket
> > buyers, and more-than-occasional gamblers, as insane?
>
> The chance of winning (1 in 10,000,000, or whatever) is not imaginary.
> It's only demented if one seriously expects to win against such odds.
>
>
voices
assuring you that you will win if you avoid walking on the even
number street side is..
In between there is a huge realm of irrational belief
(flatearthers, conversations with
extraterrestrials, morphic resonances) which one is tempted to
call psychotic but in all honesty the borderline is very foggy
and easily breached. And "There but for the grace of God goes I".
A sobering thought reminding one that psyche is a hard topic for
drawing firm diagnostic lines. That is probably why American
psychiatrists managed to collect in one book all the thousands of
human personality traits give each one a name and and a fee-code
number and set to work treating people out ofbeing themselves.
You remind me that my anti 'testing" of like and dislikes
stance also is not strictly informative audio. In fact I'll make a
confession. I have an anti-establishment bias. Any establishment.
Anyone trying to tell me that he "knows" that my likes and dislikes
are delusionary is an object of the best ridicuke I can muster.
And it is not my fault that most of them ARE ridiculous.
Ludovic Mirabel
.
soundhas...@yahoo.com
GeoSynch and his narcissus complex:
Oh my @$/"! God! THIS is what you call "non hack writing"?! THIS
dreadful mess we see above, is your best attack post!?? You've got to
be kidding me? I don't know where to begin criticizing you for this...
The first thing I noted, is that you look like you spent 6 hours
dressing it up, just to make "a good impression" with your risible
attempts at witty rejoinders. The time you spent might be
understandable, if the result didn't make you sound like a pretentious
third rate hack lit student working on a high school newspaper,
imagining he's Oscar Wilde. I picture you more as a cross between
Leisure Suit Larry and Pauly Shore. Just the phrase "wince evoking
poetry" makes the stomach churn. You have a remarkable ability to
produce the most boring writing I've ever seen, and yet you manage to
come across as being infatuated with your perceived talent. I hate to
say this, but you were actually better when you only had dumb one-line
quips to share. Anyone that has to try as hard as you to make an
impression, is better off not trying at all.
As bad as your writing is.... your CONTENT is actually worse. I can
only comment on the parts I read, because I didn't want to risk being
completely bored to death. This argument started because I called
Morein an idiot for his repeated misspelling of ad hominem. Then you
piped, and decided you were going to OUT-STUPID Robert, showing that
you can be an even bigger idiot, by attacking me and even "thanking me
for self-mockery", for pointing out what you in all your brilliant
command of the English language, figured was a misspelling of "ad
hominem". Then, just to show you what an idiot you really are, I gave
you a link to the biggest dictionary on line, which showed my spelling
as correct. Then, instead of eating crow, what did you do? Well.... you
showed that you can even OUT-STUPID your own badass idiot self, by
ignoring the dictionary.com reference, and referring me instead to a
link in a post where you chide someone for not spelling the phrase
correctly. And how did you spell it in that post you linked to? Exactly
the way that I told you and Robert it was spelled, namely "ad
hominem"!!
So either you're the very worst liar this group has ever produced, and
that's really saying something, or you have got to be one of the
absolute dumbest trolls I have ever seen. Which says even more. At
least you exhibit "some" kind of talent. Now after you finish eating
humble pie, crow, wiping the egg off of your face, removing your foot
from your mouth and your thumb from your posterior, would you kindly do
everyone a favour and stop boring us to death, you tailpipe-huffing
retard.
soundhas...@yahoo.com
paul packer wrote:
> Out of all Mr. Sound's mindless ranting, he's finally hit on something
> worth discussing---or rather, not worth discussing. Why are we
> endlessly speculating about this out-of-control attack droid anyway?
Since you've proven to be an "out-of-control attack droid", as your
colleagues here have, I certainly hope you don't program that question
into your computer bank. Because then some part of your mechanism is
going to figure out that you are endlessly speculating about me, go
into a continual loop, overheat and then.... KABLOOM!
No more Packy.
> The fact that he's obviously well-educated and intelligent only counts
> against him and makes me regret even more that they did away with the
> stocks---you know, chucking rotten tomatoes at people's heads.
Yes. I understand how intelligence and education is considered anathema
to stupid oafs like you; much as light can be considered the "enemy" of
darkness. So you'd better kill anyone with a candle.
paul the packer proclaims:
"Hey! He doesn't belong here! He's talking some crazy shit that we
don't know shit about, and trying to educate us about audio and shit,
in ways that offend our sense of stupidity!
Come on, let's stone him!!"
> What a
> wonderful opportunity we have here, with our own village idiot to play
> with.
Except in a village full of idiots, the village idiot is actually the
smartest one present. Just remember what was said here Paul.... Maybe
in 10 or 12 years time, you'll finally get it.
>And if you think I'm being uncharacteristically uncharitable,
> it's just the normal reaction to Mr. Sound's being his typical charming
> self.
......from a virtual village of idiots.
> He comes on this NG, postulates utter absurdity masquerading as
> "tweaks"
Some would say the "utter absurdity" comes from ignorant oafs like you
who talk about "utter absurdity masquerading as tweaks", when you
haven't ever tried any of these tweaks to see if they are absurd. But
those are the intelligent and educated people, who are only good for
stoning and throwing rotten tomatoes at.
>and then abuses anyone who dares doubt his sincerity or the
> efficacy of his suggestions.
A natural reaction.... As it is a natural reaction for you to
completely avoid chiding any one of your colleagues, or yourself for
that matter, for abusing me. (Except I don't consider half-assed
attacks from virtual glue-sniffing retards much in the way of "abuse").
> We're all closed-minded imbeciles, you see
You don't say? Can't say I ever noticed that. ;-)
<------------(notice the winky thing, Pauly? it hints at sarcasm. No, I
did not say "Sir Chasm".... but yeah sure, ok, I guess it IS a funny
sounding word....)
> or else we'd accept all this stuff and spend the rest of the day
> sticking pin-holes in cardboard and smearing our glasses with cream
If it takes you all the rest of the day to stick 5 pinholes in a piece
of paper or smear some cream on your eyeglasses, then you're right.
These tweaks are too advanced for you. But didn't I ALREADY put a
warning on all of my tweak posts, JUST for lamebrains like yourself? I
said they were for "ADVANCED audiophiles". The word "ADVANCED" is the
equivalent of "Keep away, Paul Packer!".
> (though what this would do for the sound from my headphones I can't
> imagine).
Theoretically speaking, it affects the sound you hear on your
headphones as much as from your loudspeakers. But you can't imagine
that, so its understandable that you don't try things you can't
imagine. That might risk expanding your mind. Can't have a mindless
sheep with an expanded mind, now can we?
>Oh dear, and here I am wasting still more bandwidth on the
> fellow--what am I thinking? Back, back....back to rationality.....
>
...Yes that's it, my little lamb..... back.... go back to where things
are safe and "rational" for you.... Don't wanna rock the boat now! Got
to keep up that status quo! There's learnin' afoot if you head my way,
so it's time to turn back to safer ground! Where you know where you
stand, and where no one tries to threaten your ignorant views of the
world, or challenge you to think! Let alone, LISTEN!
OH WONDERFUL PEOPLE OF RAO! REVEL IN YOUR IGNORANCE!
And be grateful that you live in free countries, where you are free to
remain closed-minded bigots for the rest of your silly lives....
And Paul? You need a shearing.
> And to think we lambasted Arnie for ABX!
...And to think, I didn't even offer my zappicated water tweak!
soundhas...@yahoo.com
Robert Morein wrote:
> <soundhas...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1143502758.1...@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
> Dear Mr. Richard Graham:
Dear Mr. Robert Nutbar:
You wrote:
> >> This is a fact finding thread. I presume nothing about you.
In my last message, I printed out no less than FIFTEEN presumptions you
made about me in your first post alone. You ignored responding to ALL
of them. So where do you get off calling this a "fact finding thread",
and that you "presume nothing about me", after I proved you presumed 15
things in your very first post? Gonna duck and run from this fact too,
Mr. Fact Finder?!
> Questions have been posted with respect to your motives and beliefs.
Uh yah.... I think that would be because YOU posed them. Remember that
little unhealthy obsession you have with me that keeps you awake nights
and clacking fervently away at your computer in the afternoons?
I've already given you my motives and beliefs in great detail, in our
email conversations. So how do you figure that empty conjecture and
ignorant speculation from people that would not have a clue as to how
their shoelaces get tied, let alone my "motivations and beliefs", would
be any more accurate than what I already informed you?
> Examination by one's peers is not always pleasant.
For you, maybe not, but for me, it's quite a riot to see a yammering
bunch of inane goofballs, taking wild stabs in the dark with a fork,
and poking each other in the eye, and other soft squishy parts of the
body. It's as though everyone became "Robert Morein" for a day. With
all of your neuroses, all of your over-analyses, and your
self-consuming obsessions. Everything except the meds. But you all
share the same insecurities anyway.
While it is not our
> intent to make this unpleasant for you, you have made a number of
> extraordinary, perhaps incredible, claims regarding audio reproduction.
> Naturally, we are curious about the motives of such a person.
> We are also
> curious about "meta perceptions", ie., how other people regard you.
>
All of this "curiousity" about "meta perceptions", and about the
"motives" for generously sharing my tweaks with you, and the
"extraordinary, perhaps incredible claims" that I make about my
understanding of audio.... but you know what I'm curious about? Why all
of this wasted energy and wasted bandwidth and wasted time.... no one's
curious about whether the tweaks actually work or not. You see, my
short-sighted, backward friend, if you knew that..... then all your
other questions about my motivations and my "extraordinary, incredible"
claims might fall into place, and make a whole lot more sense to you.
But I have to admit, the way you and your colleagues are choosing to
handle this thing, is a lot funnier than the alternative. So keep on
finding new ways to become more ignorant. Its endlessly fascinating to
me.
> We do note that you appear to lack respect for your peers.
What "peers"? I don't have any "peers" on this group? Did anyone notice
that I titled my posts "Tweaks for ADVANCED Audiophiles Only!"? Well,
I've come to realize, there ARE no "advanced" audiophiles on this
group. Only mindless ignorant sheep who think they're advanced
audiophiles. Hence, I have no peers here.
> This
> disadvantages you in discussions with knowledgeable individuals.
Really? WHAT "knowledgable individuals"?! There is absolutely no one
that I have yet seen here that is even close to having more knowledge
about what produces good sound in audio than I do. When I leave (or IF
I leave, since I'm starting to take a shine to Dave & Georgie...), the
entire groups collective knowledge of audio will diminish by about
75-80%.
Problem is, you don't even understand how to evaluate knowledge,
Robert.
>While some,
> such as Dave Weil and George Middius have expressed antagonism toward you,
Would you stop reading the group with blinkers on? You keep doing that,
and it's annoying to read your half-assed truths all the time. Pretty
much ALL regulars on this group have shown antagonism toward me Bob,
and that started from the very first responses I ever got, all the way
up to the present.
> you have allowed yourself to be dominated by a need to effectively ridicule
> them.
Well, thanks for observing that my ridicule of my opponents is
effective! That aside, what you again fail to see, is that this entire
group has allowed itself to be dominated by a need to effectively
ridicule me. I let that go for the longest time, until I decided to
defend myself, where necessary. The only reason most of the regulars
come here, is to engage in flame wars. I'm sorry if you're too
blinkered to have noticed that..... with your 5,660 attack posts and
all.....
> I urge you to keep your responses to these individuals
proportionate.
They are always proportionate to the attacks I receive. Judging by the
amount of attack posts you write against McCarty, you probably
outnumber his posts by 10 to 1.
>
> Collaborating as a group, we are better able to understand your motives
> than as individuals. This is the purpose of the thread.
Like I said before Bob, you're a riot. Since you are a group of
closed-minded ignorant bigots, who every single day of your sorry
lives, pull conjecture out of your asses and present it as "facts" that
you religiously believe in (until other newer "facts" supercede the
ones you thought were true....), you're no better able to understand my
motives than you are at understanding my tweaks.
But hey, don't let me stop you! Obsess away about me, if that's what
you wish. It's a thousand laughs and then some.
GeoSynch
>> >> > Like I already told you publically
>> >> ...
>> >> > A few days ago, you publically wrote this:
>> >> ....
>> >> >> PLEASE IGNORE/DO NOT RESPOND TO ADHOMINUM RESPONSES.
>> >> > It's "ad hominem" idiot
>> >> Tsk-tsk - not once, but twice.
If you weren't so reading comprehension-impaired, you might realize the "twice"
in the
above sentence doesn't refer to your or Morein's use of the word "ad hominem"
but
rather to your unusual spelling of the word "publicly."
>> >> Thanks for publicly making a mockery of yourself.
The above quip was merely meant to reiterate the point in case you are as thick
as a
plank, which, indeed, you turn out to be.
The "hack writer" jibe seems to have really gotten under your skin, the way you
keep
re-using it along with my other words and phrases - not very original, old boy.
Unlike others - including you, perhaps - I'm not glued to my monitor all day
long
keeping up with rao. Heck, months go by I don't even look in on it.
Unanswered comments are an implicit admission of the point(s) being made, so
thanks for all the implicit admissions you make by not responding to them
herein.
Your dearth of self-delightful withering sarcastic remarks and overreliance
on my words and phrasings indicate you're teetering on the verge of
creative bankruptcy. Seems to be time for you to return to hawking
potions and lotions and toil with foil and maybe some olive oil.
GeoSynch
paul packer
soundhas...@yahoo.com wrote:
> paul packer wrote:
>
>
> > Out of all Mr. Sound's mindless ranting, he's finally hit on something
> > worth discussing---or rather, not worth discussing. Why are we
> > endlessly speculating about this out-of-control attack droid anyway?
>
> Since you've proven to be an "out-of-control attack droid",
Actually a fully in-control attack droid right now.
>as your
> colleagues here have, I certainly hope you don't program that question
> into your computer bank. Because then some part of your mechanism is
> going to figure out that you are endlessly speculating about me, go
> into a continual loop, overheat and then.... KABLOOM!
Endlessly speculating? This is Robert's thread, and I'm questioning why
he started it and why so many are contributing to it and in the process
feeding your ego. You really love all this stuff, don't you? I'll bet
you wander the streets at night hoping to be beaten up. Anything just
so as to get attention.
> > The fact that he's obviously well-educated and intelligent only counts
> > against him and makes me regret even more that they did away with the
> > stocks---you know, chucking rotten tomatoes at people's heads.
>
> Yes. I understand how intelligence and education is considered anathema
> to stupid oafs like you; much as light can be considered the "enemy" of
> darkness. So you'd better kill anyone with a candle.
So you're bringing light into our darkness, eh, Mr. Sound? I knew you
had a walloping ego, but I didn't think you had a Messiah complex.
> paul the packer proclaims:
>
> "Hey! He doesn't belong here! He's talking some crazy shit that we
> don't know shit about, and trying to educate us about audio and shit,
> in ways that offend our sense of stupidity!
>
> Come on, let's stone him!!"
I never run with the mob, except on those rare occasions, as now, when
the mob happens to be right. But I never use coarse phrases in any
case.
> > What a
> > wonderful opportunity we have here, with our own village idiot to play
> > with.
>
> Except in a village full of idiots, the village idiot is actually the
> smartest one present. Just remember what was said here Paul.... Maybe
> in 10 or 12 years time, you'll finally get it.
Probably. I'll be 10 or 12 years older, and as I'm nearly 60 now that
won't be a good thing. Alzheimers here I come!
> >And if you think I'm being uncharacteristically uncharitable,
> > it's just the normal reaction to Mr. Sound's being his typical charming
> > self.
>
> ......from a virtual village of idiots.
>
>
> > He comes on this NG, postulates utter absurdity masquerading as
> > "tweaks"
>
> Some would say the "utter absurdity" comes from ignorant oafs like you
> who talk about "utter absurdity masquerading as tweaks", when you
> haven't ever tried any of these tweaks to see if they are absurd.
Come on, Mr. Sound. Finally admit that you've been pulling our legs all
this time. Come on, it won't hurt, and you've milked it for all it's
worth anyway. What's the point of keeping a joke going long after
everyone's stopped laughing.
Come on, you got to call us all ignorant oafs several times. Be fair
now.
>But
> those are the intelligent and educated people, who are only good for
> stoning and throwing rotten tomatoes at.
>
> >and then abuses anyone who dares doubt his sincerity or the
> > efficacy of his suggestions.
>
> A natural reaction.... As it is a natural reaction for you to
> completely avoid chiding any one of your colleagues, or yourself for
> that matter, for abusing me.
Why should I, when I know you love it so much? I was going to ask them
to stop, but then I decided not to be so mean.
(Except I don't consider half-assed
> attacks from virtual glue-sniffing retards much in the way of "abuse").
Funny, I don't smell a thing. Maybe my virtual nose is blocked.
> > We're all closed-minded imbeciles, you see
>
> You don't say? Can't say I ever noticed that. ;-)
> <------------(notice the winky thing, Pauly? it hints at sarcasm. No, I
> did not say "Sir Chasm".... but yeah sure, ok, I guess it IS a funny
> sounding word....)
>
>
> > or else we'd accept all this stuff and spend the rest of the day
> > sticking pin-holes in cardboard and smearing our glasses with cream
>
> If it takes you all the rest of the day to stick 5 pinholes in a piece
> of paper or smear some cream on your eyeglasses, then you're right.
> These tweaks are too advanced for you. But didn't I ALREADY put a
> warning on all of my tweak posts, JUST for lamebrains like yourself? I
> said they were for "ADVANCED audiophiles". The word "ADVANCED" is the
> equivalent of "Keep away, Paul Packer!".
Indeed. And you can be sure I'll take due note in the future. Your
version of "ADVANCED" looks somewhat like walking backwards to me.
> > (though what this would do for the sound from my headphones I can't
> > imagine).
>
> Theoretically speaking, it affects the sound you hear on your
> headphones as much as from your loudspeakers.
Oh Mr. Sound--stop, stop! OK, yes, it was a good joke, but please, no
more....
>But you can't imagine
> that, so its understandable that you don't try things you can't
> imagine. That might risk expanding your mind. Can't have a mindless
> sheep with an expanded mind, now can we?
>
> >Oh dear, and here I am wasting still more bandwidth on the
> > fellow--what am I thinking? Back, back....back to rationality.....
> >
>
> ...Yes that's it, my little lamb..... back.... go back to where things
> are safe and "rational" for you.... Don't wanna rock the boat now! Got
> to keep up that status quo! There's learnin' afoot if you head my way,
> so it's time to turn back to safer ground! Where you know where you
> stand, and where no one tries to threaten your ignorant views of the
> world, or challenge you to think! Let alone, LISTEN!
>
> OH WONDERFUL PEOPLE OF RAO! REVEL IN YOUR IGNORANCE!
Thus speaketh the prophet. He who has ears to hear, let him hear.
dave weil
>LOL!
>
>GeoSynch _was_ commenting on the phrase "ad hominem" wrt its spelling.
>You see Garbage Bag Boy, this is the dead giveaway clue:
>
>"soundhaspriority about as much as spelling does"
>
>Look again. It's the phrase he prefaced his post with, you clueless
>moron. Guess what, Dave? Yup here it comes.... " You lose. Again." By
>gosh, don't you and your alleged "classical education" EVER get tired
>of being made a fool of? Explain to me again how my posts are related
>to "morphic resonance" why don't you? ROTFLMAO! Making fun of you is so
>easy, it bores me now. Troll along, ankle biter.
Look at what he quoted AGAIN and see which word you misspelled -
TWICE.
Then get back to me...
dave weil
>So either you're the very worst liar this group has ever produced, and
>that's really saying something, or you have got to be one of the
>absolute dumbest trolls I have ever seen. Which says even more. At
>least you exhibit "some" kind of talent. Now after you finish eating
>humble pie, crow, wiping the egg off of your face, removing your foot
>from your mouth and your thumb from your posterior, would you kindly do
>everyone a favour and stop boring us to death, you tailpipe-huffing
>retard.
Damn. That has to be the limpest-wristed assault ever.
dave weil
>
>Well, at least you finally figured out how to spell "ad hominem" (could
>you please inform GeoSynch and Dave Weil of that, while you're on your
>obsessive inquiry into me. So maybe this excercise in insinuating your
>various mental afflictions upon the rest of the group has done some
>good after all.
Try closing the parentheses, dick.
Robert Morein
<soundhas...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1143535898.4...@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
>
> Robert Morein wrote:
>
>> <soundhas...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1143502758.1...@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>> Dear Mr. Richard Graham:
>
>
> Dear Mr. Robert Nutbar:
>
> You wrote:
>
>> >> This is a fact finding thread. I presume nothing about you.
>
> In my last message, I printed out no less than FIFTEEN presumptions you
> made about me in your first post alone. You ignored responding to ALL
> of them.
Dear Mr. Richard Graham:
No presumptions were made. To respond to your post would defeat the
purpose of this thread.
Regards,
Robert Morein
Walt
> Robert Morein wrote, in all earnestness:
<edited for brevity - much snippage>
>>Dear Mr. Richard Graham:
>> This is a fact finding thread. I presume nothing about you.
>
> If this is a "fact finding" thread Robert, than everyone on RAO,
> including you, are open-minded, independent thinkers who would
> recognize "truth" from "lies", who don't make any presumptions or false
> allegations about me...
>
> "Mr. Graham has so far expressed an interest in two subjects: "
>
> I've expressed an interest in more than tweaks during my stay here thus
> far ...
>
>
> "... This
> statement suggests that Mr. Graham has a proprietary interest in this
> product... "
>
> I have a propietary (aka commercial) interest in any product.
>
> "It appears that George Middius and Dave Weil consider Mr. Graham an
> unmitigated fraud...."
>
> Middius and Weil are the only ones who consider me a fraud....
> "Mr. Graham then indicated that he could not tell me, because the
> "theory" is proprietary.
>
> This is more of a lie, really, since I never said the "theory" was
> proprietary.
> "Mr. Graham lambasts Dave Weil for not
> understanding the "theory", but no theory has been presented".
>
> That I was lambasting Garbage Boy (more like roasting him over a spit,
> I prefer to think....) because he did not understand the theory behind
> the cream electret...
>
> "... Is Mr. Graham using this newsgroup to advertise a product he sells?"
> ...there IS no evidence that I was advertising or
> selling anything, and should post on RAM.
> "3. Is Mr. Graham to be believed?"
> That you have a valid basis for believing I'm not to be believed...
Ok, the poster formerly known as soundhaspriority is one and the same as
Mr. Richard Graham, or at least he responds in the first person when
addressed as such. It appears that Mr. Morein was correct about that
conjecture.
So this thread was not a complete waste of time. (Ok, that's certainly
open for debate...)
//Walt
Steven Sullivan
> > C. This newsgroup is FILLED TO THE BRIM with hyper-paranoid, insecure
> > social misfits, who apparently have nothing better going on in their
> > lives, that they have to spend their days coming up with endless
> > theories of conjecture about someone they keep saying should be
> > ignored, and that they have no interest in. After a day of not reading
> > this group, I see a new thread about me with 35 posts in it so far,
> > that proves me right again.
> Out of all Mr. Sound's mindless ranting, he's finally hit on something
> worth discussing---or rather, not worth discussing. Why are we
> endlessly speculating about this out-of-control attack droid anyway?
and get back to all the informative, accurate, genial posting about
audio that characterizes RAO on an average day? HEAR, HEAR!
> The fact that he's obviously well-educated and intelligent only counts
> against him and makes me regret even more that they did away with the
> stocks---you know, chucking rotten tomatoes at people's heads.
He writes like an American. (If he's not, that should make
him pretty angry.)
> And to think we lambasted Arnie for ABX!
Yeah, that *was* stupid of you. How about you give that a rest?
ABX is a form of DBT, and you don't see people who actually do,
you know, *science* and stuff, 'lambasting' those too often.
___
-S
"Excuse me? What solid proof do you have that I'm insane?" - soundhaspriority
George M. Middius
Stupey Sillybot engages his envy gland and starts drooling uncontrollably.
> ABX is a form of DBT, and you don't see people who actually do,
> you know, *science*
We don't see such people on RAO at all. You're certainly not a scientist.
In fact, why don't you give us a refresher on how many aBxism rituals, or
any DBT exercises, you've participated in? How many have you designed, or
witnessed, or monitored? Where were they? When did they occur? Where were
the results published?
--
A day without Krooger is like a day without arsenic.
Walt
> Oh my @$/"! God! blah is blah blah blah "blah blah writing"?! THIS
> blah blah we see above, is blah blah blah post!?? blah blah to
> be blah me? I blah blah blah to blah blah blah blah this...
> blah blah blah I noted, is blah blah blah blah blah blah 6 hours
> blah it up, blah to blah "a blah impression" blah blah risible
> blah at blah rejoinders. blah blah blah blah blah be
> understandable, if blah blah blah blah blah blah blah a pretentious
> blah blah blah blah blah blah on a blah blah newspaper,
> blah blah blah Wilde. I blah blah blah as a blah between
> blah blah blah blah blah Shore. blah blah blah "blah evoking
> poetry" blah blah blah churn. blah blah a blah blah to
> blah blah blah blah blah blah blah seen, blah yet blah blah to
> blah blah as blah blah blah blah blah talent. I blah to
> blah this, blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah one-line
> blah to share. blah blah blah to blah as blah as blah to blah an
> impression, is blah blah blah blah at all.
>
> As blah as blah blah is.... blah blah is blah worse. I can
> blah blah on blah blah I read, blah I blah blah to blah being
> blah blah to death. blah blah blah blah I called
> blah an blah blah blah blah blah of ad hominem. blah you
> piped, blah blah blah blah blah to blah Robert, blah that
> blah blah be an blah blah idiot, by blah me blah blah "blah me
> blah self-mockery", blah blah blah blah blah in blah blah brilliant
> blah of blah blah language, blah blah a blah of "ad
> hominem". Then, blah to blah blah blah an blah blah blah are, I gave
> blah a blah to blah blah blah on line, blah blah my spelling
> as correct. Then, blah of blah crow, blah blah blah do? Well.... you
> blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah self, by
> blah blah blah reference, blah blah me blah to a
> blah in a blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah phrase
> correctly. blah blah blah blah blah it in blah blah blah blah to?
> Exactly
> blah blah blah I blah blah blah blah it blah spelled, blah "ad
> hominem"!!
>
> So blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah produced, and
> blah blah blah something, or blah blah blah to be blah of the
> blah blah blah I blah blah seen. blah blah blah more. At
> blah blah blah "some" blah of talent. blah blah blah blah eating
> blah pie, crow, blah blah blah blah of blah face, blah blah foot
> blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah posterior, blah blah blah do
> blah a blah blah blah blah us to death, blah tailpipe-huffing
> retard.
Get a life, pal.
//Walt
elm...@pacificcoast.net
is a
form of DBT". Yes: war is a form of diplomacy, a stormtrooper is a form
of a policeman, scientology is a form of science, and bastardy is a
form
of legitimacy.
Regards from Ludovic Mirabel
elm...@pacificcoast.net
Paul Packer says:
"Come on, Mr. Sound. Finally admit that you've been pulling our
legs all
this time. Come on, it won't hurt, and you've milked it for all it's
worth anyway. What's the point of keeping a joke going long after
everyone's stopped laughing"
I held the leg pull impression too. But the evidence convinced
me. He has
a new science on offer and *he actually believes it*.
Ludovic Mirabel
soundhas...@yahoo.com
paul packer wrote:
> soundhas...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > paul packer wrote:
> >
> >
> > > Out of all Mr. Sound's mindless ranting, he's finally hit on something
> > > worth discussing---or rather, not worth discussing. Why are we
> > > endlessly speculating about this out-of-control attack droid anyway?
> >
> > Since you've proven to be an "out-of-control attack droid",
>
> Actually a fully in-control attack droid right now.
You do have "control issues", don't you Pauly? Does not controlling
people make you nervous... frightened perhaps? Really? Interesting.
<insert jotting down sfx>
> >as your
> > colleagues here have, I certainly hope you don't program that question
> > into your computer bank. Because then some part of your mechanism is
> > going to figure out that you are endlessly speculating about me, go
> > into a continual loop, overheat and then.... KABLOOM!
>
> Endlessly speculating? This is Robert's thread, and I'm questioning why
> he started it
So did I. I long concluded that it certainly wasn't because he was
trying to get at any "truths" about me. Robert already knew the answers
to the questions he was asking about my motivations, identity, and
beliefs, since I had told him in private long before now. If he was at
all after the truth, and did not want empty speculative presumptions,
he'd have responded to the 15 presumptions I showed that he made in
his very first post. He ignored all of that. So trust me, this thread
is NOT about a "fact finding mission" on those issues. I believe it was
so that he could manipulate less smarter people like you into
responding, and play with you, to satisfy his craving for "anarchy".
> and why so many are contributing to it and in the process
> feeding your ego.
> You really love all this stuff, don't you?
Are you jealous because they're not talking about you? I'm sorry
you feel that way. But nevertheless... interesting. <insert jotting
down sfx>
For me, "love" is a mite too strong a word there, buddy. I'd say
it's.... "interesting". <insert jotting down sfx>
> I'll bet
> you wander the streets at night hoping to be beaten up.
Not particularly, but then, neither am I frightened about going out
into the streets at night, as you are. You do seem to have a lot of
fears and insecurities, don't you? Interesting. <insert jotting down
sfx>
> Anything just
> so as to get attention.
Don't you mean "anything to divert your gaze from the truth"? After
all, YOU are the one refusing to acknowledge that I had no
responsibility for putting up this thread, or any of the other posts
people wish to write about me. So besides having "control issues" in
your life, you also have problems accepting responsibility for
yourself. Interesting. <insert jotting down sfx>
>
> > > The fact that he's obviously well-educated and intelligent only counts
> > > against him and makes me regret even more that they did away with the
> > > stocks---you know, chucking rotten tomatoes at people's heads.
> >
> > Yes. I understand how intelligence and education is considered anathema
> > to stupid oafs like you; much as light can be considered the "enemy" of
> > darkness. So you'd better kill anyone with a candle.
>
> So you're bringing light into our darkness, eh, Mr. Sound?
You're not the sharpest tack in the box, are you, Mr. Slacker? Let me
see if I can talk more slowly for you: W h a t I s a i d w a s . . .
. "you'd better kill anyone with a candle". If I'm the one with the
candle, and I am, then you're the one trying to snuff me out. Do you
need this concept illustrated on a DVD to understand it? It's pretty
clear to most others here, who nevertheless have the minds of children,
that I am not able to bring light into this pit of darkness.... for
those who would snuff it out. Do you see hordes of people eager to try
my tweaks? No? Therefore, no light comes through. "Ding!" Why is that
concept not clear enough to you, I ask? Are you supposed to be in the
"special students" class?
>I knew you
> had a walloping ego, but I didn't think you had a Messiah complex.
My ego is no bigger than what you trolls feed it with, and how you
perceive of what it is. In case my silly opinion means anything to you,
I originally thought I was just a guy that wanted to share some tweaks
with people that I thought we're really cool. Sure, I knew that the
so-called "objectivists" (or "gearheads", as I prefer) don't believe
in "tweaks" (apart from speaker positioning and room treatments, which
I hardly call "tweaks"), so I didn't excpect they'd be interested.
I thought the remainder might, because the tweaks are free after all,
use household materials or available ingenuity, and take on average 30
seconds to implement. But, you and your crew of narrow-minded bigots
certainly taught me a lot about the state of 'audiophilia' today.
No kidding home theatre and cute little mini-stereos are the cutting
edge in hi fidelity these days. Given how willfully ignorant the
audiophiles here have all proven themselves to be, I do feel a little
like an audio guru, now that you mention it. Compared to what people
here know about how to improve an audio system and what I know, I can
walk on water. But if I am the Audio Jesus of RAO, then it's because
you made me that. Just like the "original Jesus", fancy that.
> > paul the packer proclaims:
> >
> > "Hey! He doesn't belong here! He's talking some crazy shit that we
> > don't know shit about, and trying to educate us about audio and shit,
> > in ways that offend our sense of stupidity!
> >
> > Come on, let's stone him!!"
>
> I never run with the mob, except on those rare occasions, as now, when
> the mob happens to be right. But I never use coarse phrases in any
> case.
False. And I've seen this one before, Jack. The "Please don't lump
me in with this group of ignorant morons, I'm special" approach. The
last time, I believe it was "Goofball" that tried it on me. I proved
he wasn't "special", or anything close to a "genius", as some regard
him to be. He was a fool, no less a fool than you. I have a vague
recollection of your little contributions to the attacks against me,
and you are definitely a mob member. Look at yourself in the mirror.
Notice the pinstripe suit, the thick pinky ring, the greasy pompadour,
the garlic breath, the permanent sneer? That means you're a wise guy.
> > Some would say the "utter absurdity" comes from ignorant oafs like you
> > who talk about "utter absurdity masquerading as tweaks", when you
> > haven't ever tried any of these tweaks to see if they are absurd.
>
> Come on, Mr. Sound. Finally admit that you've been pulling our legs all
> this time. Come on, it won't hurt, and you've milked it for all it's
> worth anyway. What's the point of keeping a joke going long after
> everyone's stopped laughing.
> Come on, you got to call us all ignorant oafs several times. Be fair
> now.
I will admit the full truth of what I've been doing soon enough.
Trust me, you won't miss it. But whether you believe it or not will
be as always, up to you. I was scheduled to do so a while ago, but you
see.... every time the moment comes, people like Morein and his witch
hunt against me just make it too tempting to stick around further.
Because you may have stopped laughing, but who says I have?
> > A natural reaction.... As it is a natural reaction for you to
> > completely avoid chiding any one of your colleagues, or yourself for
> > that matter, for abusing me.
>
> Why should I, when I know you love it so much?
You just asked ME to "be fair". That would be why your words have no
weight. It makes you look like a meaningless hypocrite to whine about
the attacks I've returned, when I'm the one who has been attacked
from the beginning.
> (Except I don't consider half-assed
> > attacks from virtual glue-sniffing retards much in the way of "abuse").
>
> Funny, I don't smell a thing. Maybe my virtual nose is blocked.
That means you're ready to graduate to tail-huffer.
> > If it takes you all the rest of the day to stick 5 pinholes in a piece
> > of paper or smear some cream on your eyeglasses, then you're right.
> > These tweaks are too advanced for you. But didn't I ALREADY put a
> > warning on all of my tweak posts, JUST for lamebrains like yourself? I
> > said they were for "ADVANCED audiophiles". The word "ADVANCED" is the
> > equivalent of "Keep away, Paul Packer!".
>
> Indeed. And you can be sure I'll take due note in the future. Your
> version of "ADVANCED" looks somewhat like walking backwards to me.
I'm perfectly serious when I say, "don't worry, that's a normal
reaction you're having". For a non-thinking imbecile, I mean. Or
let's just use the "friendlier" version and say "for someone who
isn't an ADVANCED audiophile". This is why I have to laugh when
people like you say things about me that are perfectly, diametrically
opposite to what in fact is actually true. Speaking of what is actually
true, there's an entire world of audio knowledge you're not aware
of, and never will be. You don't have to be aware of how something
works to know that it does, which is why my tweaks are not really only
for ADVANCED audiophiles. But I admit, you do have to be open-minded in
order to get your empty head past the logistics of the tweak. So I
suppose you may also consider the tweaks a "test for open-mindedness".
Needless to say, you failed with flying colours.
>
> > > (though what this would do for the sound from my headphones I can't
> > > imagine).
> >
> > Theoretically speaking, it affects the sound you hear on your
> > headphones as much as from your loudspeakers.
>
> Oh Mr. Sound--stop, stop! OK, yes, it was a good joke, but please, no
> more....
The joke is you thinking it's a joke. Remeber what I said about why I
have to laugh when people like you say things about me that are
perfectly, diametrically opposite to what in fact is actually true?
> > OH WONDERFUL PEOPLE OF RAO! REVEL IN YOUR IGNORANCE!
>
> Thus speaketh the prophet. He who has ears to hear, let him hear.
ALL here have ears to hear. ALL here are technically capable of hearing
the effects of my tweaks (with the exception of Robert Morein....). But
let's try to imagine how significant Jesus would be, if instead of
taking him seriously, everyone just laughed him off and threw stones at
him? Well some did. But long after he died, they took him seriously,
didn't they? The infidels finally "saw the truth" that Jesus was
offering. Perhaps that will happen long after I'm gone.
soundhas...@yahoo.com
GeoSynch, proud of the fact that he just beat the others for the crown,
wrote:
> >> >> > Like I already told you publically
> >> >> ...
> >> >> > A few days ago, you publically wrote this:
> >> >> ....
> >> >> >> PLEASE IGNORE/DO NOT RESPOND TO ADHOMINUM RESPONSES.
>
> >> >> > It's "ad hominem" idiot
>
> >> >> Tsk-tsk - not once, but twice.
>
> If you weren't so reading comprehension-impaired, you might realize the "twice"
> in the
> above sentence doesn't refer to your or Morein's use of the word "ad hominem"
> but
> rather to your unusual spelling of the word "publicly."
You're kidding me, right? You mean in trying to play "gotcha!" with
me, you and your friend Garbage Bag Boy Weill, created all this
brouhaha, all these long tirades, trying to tell me I'm a moron
because I spelled "publically" incorrectly? I'm amazed that I'd
have to go through this again with you, trying to familiarize you with
a dictionary..... READ, you freaking moron. READ:
===================================================================
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=publically
1 entry found for publically.
publically
adv : in a manner accessible to or observable by the public; openly;
"she admitted publicly to being a communist" [syn: publicly, in public]
[ant: privately]
Source: WordNet ® 2.0, © 2003 Princeton University
===================================================================
"GeoSynch", or whatever the heck your real name is, I have tell you....
I've seen some REALLY stupid people in my stay here, who've said
some REALLY stupid things. You my friend, you top them all. Congrats.
You're "King of the RAO Fools" for today.
> >> >> Thanks for publicly making a mockery of yourself.
>
> The above quip was merely meant to reiterate the point in case you are as thick
> as a plank, which, indeed, you turn out to be.
You're kidding me, right? You mean in trying to play "gotcha!" with
me, you and your friend Garbage Bag Boy Weill, created all this
brouhaha, all these long tirades, trying to tell me I'm a moron
because I spelled "publically" incorrectly? I'm amazed that I'd
have to go through this again with you, trying to familiarize you with
a dictionary..... READ, you freaking moron. READ:
===================================================================
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=publically
1 entry found for publically.
publically
adv : in a manner accessible to or observable by the public; openly;
"she admitted publicly to being a communist" [syn: publicly, in public]
[ant: privately]
Source: WordNet ® 2.0, © 2003 Princeton University
===================================================================
"GeoSynch", or whatever the heck your real name is, I have tell you....
I've seen some REALLY stupid people in my stay here, who've said
some REALLY stupid things. You my friend, you top them all. Congrats.
You're "King of the RAO Fools" for today.
> The "hack writer" jibe seems to have really gotten under your skin, the way you
> keep
> re-using it along with my other words and phrases - not very original, old boy.
Let me get this straight: You're attacking me for the "hack writer"
jibe not being "original, old boy", when YOU are the idiot who came up
with the "hack writer jibe"? You've already been crowned "King of the
Fools" for today. Are you trying for the year?
> Unanswered comments are an implicit admission of the point(s) being made, so
> thanks for all the implicit admissions you make by not responding to them
> herein.
With impeccable "Kroologic" like that, I have no reservations about
having named you "King of RAO Fools" for a day. Using your advanced
logic, you have just admitted that you are the group's largest
imbecile, have an eating disorder that requires you to stuff your face
with Moon Pies all day long, you think the square root of pi is
"cherry", and you get your jollies poking your dog with a fork.
Thanks for all the implicit admissions you just made, GeoStink. You
have just told us everything we need to know about you.
<fanciful follies snipped>
>Seems to be time for you to return to hawking
> potions and lotions and toil with foil and maybe some olive oil.
And your incontrovertible evidence of that is where exactly? I don't
see it anywhere. Did you check your rectum? That seems to be where you
keep your brains.
soundhas...@yahoo.com
Garbage Bag Boy presents us more examples of his "classical education"
and "audio expertise":
Didn't misspell anything twice. Sorry amateur troll. You're wrong.
You lose. Again. But you're used to people playing "kick the can"
with your fat ass, aren't you, Garbage Bag Boy?
> Tell us again how turntables don't have grounding straps
Okay, Garbage Boy. Turntables don't have grounding straps. Have you
ever SEEN a turntable, you imbecile? LOL! Too bad you have such a
masochistic desire to see yourself humiliated like this all the time.
You lose.
Again.
And by the way, making you my personal punching bag is getting a little
played. I've shown countless times what a liar you are, and countless
times what a stupid goof you are, who doesn't ever know what he's
blabbing about. How many times do you want me to make a fool out of
you? Take the advice from your manager: stay down for the count
already, ya dumbass loser!
soundhas...@yahoo.com
Robert Morein wrote:
> <soundhas...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1143535898.4...@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > Robert Morein wrote:
> >
> >> <soundhas...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >> news:1143502758.1...@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
> >
> >
> >> Dear Mr. Richard Graham:
> >
> >
> > Dear Mr. Robert Nutbar:
> >
> > You wrote:
> >
> >> >> This is a fact finding thread. I presume nothing about you.
> >
> > In my last message, I printed out no less than FIFTEEN presumptions you
> > made about me in your first post alone. You ignored responding to ALL
> > of them.
>
> Dear Mr. Richard Graham:
> No presumptions were made.
I see. So I just finished proving to you that 15 different presumptions
were made by you alone, in your first post alone, and without offering
a grain of evidence to prove otherwise, you now claim to me in response
that "no presumptions were made". Well congrats, you're definitely a
RAO regular!
Or perhaps you consider yourself a hypnotist, and the mere "suggestion"
that "no presumptions were made by you", can substitute for evidence
that proves this? Well, I'm sorry to have to inform you Robert....
I'm not the hypnotizable type. It didn't work.
My 15 examples of PROOF that all you are doing is making foolish
presumptions, stands. So your so-called "fact finding mission" is a
joke. But I say you know that already. I don't think you're taking
any of this any more seriously than I am. You talked to me about the
"anarchy of RAO", and I think this is merely an intellectual excercise
for you to prove your hypothesis by igniting the elements of anarchy,
with this witch hunt in my name. I think you're playing with the
little RAO puppets as much as I am, Rob. So for that, I give you a big
juicy know-it-all wink ---> ;->
>To respond to your post would defeat the
> purpose of this thread.
Of course. As everyone knows, when you're on a "fact finding mission"
about someone, you don't do something stupid like ask the person in
question for facts about their motives or background. No, you gather up
some of the biggest fools that Usenet has ever seen, every one of which
has attacked the person in question, and then you prod and poke them
for their personal opinions about that person, encouraging as much
blind speculation and wild conjecture as you can muster out of them.
And then you tally the whole mess and call it "A Fact Report On SHP".
I'm sorry to even suggest that we look at the TRUTH about what's
going on. "Truth" would defeat the purpose of this thread. As you were,
oh wise "truth seeker" you.
p.s. Speaking of "truth", I'd like to take this moment to point out
an observation of my own. With all the time that you and the rest of
the group of fools are wasting here, trying to figure out what I'm
about, you could have simply taken 30 seconds out to experiment with
one of my tweaks and find out what its about, and if I'm the troll
you say I am. But I certainly wouldn't want to abate your love of
audio, your desire to improve your sound for free, or even just your
scientific curiousity, by interrupting your little obsessive chat
session about me. So do carry on...
soundhas...@yahoo.com
Walt wrote:
> Ok, the poster formerly known as soundhaspriority is one and the same as
> Mr. Richard Graham, or at least he responds in the first person when
> addressed as such. It appears that Mr. Morein was correct about that
> conjecture.
>
> So this thread was not a complete waste of time. (Ok, that's certainly
> open for debate...)
>
> //Walt
"Wasting time" is basically ALL that you and your RAO buds do here. You
certainly don't come here to learn anything new about audio, and in
fact become hostile when the mere whiff of education hangs in the air.
So just don't pretend that you don't have time to waste. You in
particulary, have PLENTY of time to waste. You wouldn't be in this
thread if you didn't, you wouldn't have stalked me if you didn't.
You just don't have time to waste on tweaks that frighten you. And
you're going to prove me right again "showing how you don't have
time to waste", by responding to me.
soundhas...@yahoo.com
> Get a life, blah.
>
> //Walt
Let me see if I got this straight: You're an audio newsgroup junkie
troll, to whom posting on Usenet IS your life, and like the troll you
are, for no good reason whatsoever, you just took all that time to
carefully insert a thousand "blahs" in the words of my post. And then
you tell tell ME to "get a life"?! How very insane of you.
George M. Middius
Ludo said:
> > Come on, Mr. Sound. Finally admit that you've been pulling our legs all
> > this time. Come on, it won't hurt, and you've milked it for all it's
> > worth anyway. What's the point of keeping a joke going long after
> > everyone's stopped laughing.
> I held the leg pull impression too. But the evidence convinced
> me. He has a new science on offer and *he actually believes it*.
I think he's just a maniac and can't control himself.
George M. Middius
Shovels whined:
> Robert already knew the answers
> to the questions he was asking about my motivations, identity, and
> beliefs, since I had told him in private long before now.
Isn't it time to let up with the silly pretenses? You can't possibly
believe those so-called "tweaks" you posted actually do anything, or that
any of the other voodoo crap on the Belts' site does anything. Nobody with
even a Mikey-sized brain could possibly believe any of it.
Robert Morein
<soundhas...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1143575361.2...@e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
>
> Robert Morein wrote:
>
>> <soundhas...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1143535898.4...@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
>> >
>> > Robert Morein wrote:
>> >
>> >> <soundhas...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:1143502758.1...@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
>> >
>> >
>> >> Dear Mr. Richard Graham:
>> >
>> >
>> > Dear Mr. Robert Nutbar:
>> >
>> > You wrote:
>> >
>> >> >> This is a fact finding thread. I presume nothing about you.
>> >
>> > In my last message, I printed out no less than FIFTEEN presumptions you
>> > made about me in your first post alone. You ignored responding to ALL
>> > of them.
>>
>> Dear Mr. Richard Graham:
>
>> No presumptions were made.
>
>
> I see.
Dear Mr. Richard Graham:
The purpose of this thread is to facilitate informed discussion by other
participants of r.a.o. with respect to you and your beliefs. It does not
serve that purpose for me to engage you in discussion.
Regards,
Robert Morein
soundhas...@yahoo.com
George M. Middius (the "M" is for "Moron") wrote:
> Ludo said:
>
> > > Come on, Mr. Sound. Finally admit that you've been pulling our legs all
> > > this time. Come on, it won't hurt, and you've milked it for all it's
> > > worth anyway. What's the point of keeping a joke going long after
> > > everyone's stopped laughing.
>
> > I held the leg pull impression too. But the evidence convinced
> > me. He has a new science on offer and *he actually believes it*.
>
> I think he's just a maniac and can't control himself.
Just to put things in perspective folks.... .the above comment was
written by a guy who spent the last 8 years of his life trolling this
newsgroup day in and day out, looking for people to attack. He's
accused one member of sleeping with his dead son, and regularly lies
about the content of emails that he receives. Just some of the
highlights of his illustrious trolling "career" on RAO.
When asked to control himself and his backbiting behaviour, Georgie's
response is to call you childish names, like "Shovels", make like a
mosquito and bite more deeply into your ankles.
George M. Middius
Shovels drops another pop-culture reference.
> Count Blah
If Eric Idle were doing a puppet show today, would his favorite theme be
drunkenness or licentiousness?
dave weil
>You're kidding me, right? You mean in trying to play "gotcha!" with
>me, you and your friend Garbage Bag Boy Weill, created all this
>brouhaha, all these long tirades, trying to tell me I'm a moron
>because I spelled "publically" incorrectly?
Did I say that?
Of course not.
I guess your day must be gray again...
dave weil
>> Tell us again how turntables don't have grounding straps
>
>
>Okay, Garbage Boy. Turntables don't have grounding straps. Have you
>ever SEEN a turntable, you imbecile? LOL! Too bad you have such a
>masochistic desire to see yourself humiliated like this all the time.
>
>
>You lose.
>
>
>Again.
>
>
>And by the way, making you my personal punching bag is getting a little
>
>played. I've shown countless times what a liar you are, and countless
>times what a stupid goof you are, who doesn't ever know what he's
>blabbing about. How many times do you want me to make a fool out of
>you? Take the advice from your manager: stay down for the count
>already, ya dumbass loser!
Looks like you're running ut of steam.
Cut 'n copy is great for filling bandwidth though...
dave weil
>p.s. Speaking of "truth", I'd like to take this moment to point out
>an observation of my own. With all the time that you and the rest of
>the group of fools are wasting here, trying to figure out what I'm
>about, you could have simply taken 30 seconds out to experiment with
>one of my tweaks and find out what its about, and if I'm the troll
>you say I am. But I certainly wouldn't want to abate your love of
>audio, your desire to improve your sound for free, or even just your
>scientific curiousity, by interrupting your little obsessive chat
>session about me. So do carry on...
Take your own advice and get some acoustic guitars in your listening
space, dick.
George M. Middius
Shovels whines some more.
> When asked to control himself and his backbiting behaviour, Georgie's
> response is to call you childish names, like "Shovels"
<snicker>
dizzy
dizzy
paul packer
George M. Middius wrote:
> Shovels whined:
>
> > Robert already knew the answers
> > to the questions he was asking about my motivations, identity, and
> > beliefs, since I had told him in private long before now.
>
> Isn't it time to let up with the silly pretenses? You can't possibly
> believe those so-called "tweaks" you posted actually do anything, or that
> any of the other voodoo crap on the Belts' site does anything. Nobody with
> even a Mikey-sized brain could possibly believe any of it.
Some of your posts are obscure. George, but you come clear when you
need to. Rather than debate Mr. Sound any further (if "debate" be the
word), and further feed that black hole of an ego, I'd rather just
endorse your concise paragraph. How indeed can anyone believe such
piffle? I suggested it was a joke more in hope than anything, as I
didn't want to believe anyone so intelligent and lucid could embrace
such whackiness and then repeatedly tear into anyone who questioned it.
Now the awful truth has struck home---it's possible to be extremely
bright and profoundly stupid at the same time!! I don't know how I'm
going to live with this realization, but I'll try. I will offer one
olive branch to Mr. Sound though, in that I'm still willing to listen
to further evidence of the efficacy of his tweaks. And I look forward
to this revelation he promises, which apparently will show us all what
asses we've been. Come on, Mr. Sound, don't drag it out too long or
we'll get bored.
soundhas...@yahoo.com
George M. Middius (the "M" stands for "Mosquito) ranted:
> Shovels whined:
>
> > Robert already knew the answers
> > to the questions he was asking about my motivations, identity, and
> > beliefs, since I had told him in private long before now.
>
> Isn't it time to let up with the silly pretenses? You can't possibly
> believe those so-called "tweaks" you posted actually do anything, or that
> any of the other voodoo crap on the Belts' site does anything. Nobody with
> even a Mikey-sized brain could possibly believe any of it.
....Which begs the question: why were YOU the only one here who tried
my tweaks?
LOL!
I think that says all we need to know about you, Mr. Middius.
George M. Middius
Poor Shovels. Another house of cards is about to come crashing down on
him.
> > Isn't it time to let up with the silly pretenses? You can't possibly
> > believe those so-called "tweaks" you posted actually do anything, or that
> > any of the other voodoo crap on the Belts' site does anything. Nobody with
> > even a Mikey-sized brain could possibly believe any of it.
> ....Which begs the question: why were YOU the only one here who tried
> my tweaks?
To tell the truth, Shovie, I didn't actually try it. I was mistakenly
trying to help you lure the 'borgs into what I thought was an elaborate
rhetorical quicksand hole. I now see that you are so twisted that you
can't distinguish mockery from blind faith. (That's the only similarity
I've seen between you and the Krooborg, if that's any consolation.)
soundhas...@yahoo.com
paul packer wrote:
> George "Mosquito" Middius whined:
> > Isn't it time to let up with the silly pretenses? You can't possibly
> > believe those so-called "tweaks" you posted actually do anything, or that
> > any of the other voodoo crap on the Belts' site does anything. Nobody with
> > even a Mikey-sized brain could possibly believe any of it.
>
>
> Some of your posts are obscure. George, but you come clear when you
> need to. Rather than debate Mr. Sound any further (if "debate" be the
> word), and further feed that black hole of an ego, I'd rather just
> endorse your concise paragraph. How indeed can anyone believe such
> piffle?
I'll show you how. You believe the "piffle" that perception of sound
ends with Newtonian laws.
BTW, little Georgie up there, that you thought you just agreed with,
was simply using deceitful personal attack tactics in his posturing
about how I can't possibly believe my own tweaks. I say that, because
he believes in the "piffle" as you call it. Enough to have been the
first and only member here to try my tweaks. If you go back to my first
post and look real hard, you'll see that. Now don't you feel the
fool, for having responded as you did to George?
> I suggested it was a joke more in hope than anything, as I
> didn't want to believe anyone so intelligent and lucid could embrace
> such whackiness and then repeatedly tear into anyone who questioned it.
> Now the awful truth has struck home---it's possible to be extremely
> bright and profoundly stupid at the same time!!
Being that I'm way ahead of you, I've known this for a long time in
my life. Here on RAO, I've observed this many times from the people
on this group. Take the author of this thread, for example. I've gone
on record as saying he's extremely bright; more so than anyone else
I've encountered here (including you, if you were curious). I've
also called him a "moron". Paradoxical, isn't it?
Morein, out of anyone here, has the greatest capability of
understanding the concepts behind the tweaks; due to his educational
background in QM and other scientific disciplines. But he knows nothing
about the theories involved here, and even he won't have a more
complete grasp of the principles, unless he takes the time it takes to
study them. (Note I said "more complete", because I'm not sure anyone
has a complete grasp, IMO). But he's not interested in taking 30
seconds to perform the tweak experiment. Jabbering away in endless
speculation sessions about me however, that he seems to have plenty of
time for.
I don't think you're an idiot either. You come across as reasonably
intelligent, rational thinking human being. But what you said about
"How can anyone believe such piffle", and basically everything that
followed, was profoundly stupid. Paradoxical, isn't it?
> I don't know how I'm
> going to live with this realization, but I'll try.
I'll tell you what I was engaged with just before sitting down to
respond here. I was working on improving the sound of my MP3 player. I
used a special little device to do so (but it's a very simple one).
It consists basically of a crocodile clip, with a small piece of wire
attached, and a hexagonal nut at the end of it, and there are some
tweezers involved. All the pieces involved in this seemingly primitive
device are specially treated or made. I won't tell you how they're
treated, but I will tell you how it works. I simply clip the jaws on to
any and every part of my player, including the headphones, then squeeze
the tweezers against the nut. The end result produced a dramatic
improvement in the sound of the MP3 player. Point being, if I can live
with the realization that temporarily clipping pieces of plastic and
wire for a few seconds can greatly improve the sound I'm hearing from
my MP3 player, I think you can manage a teeny tiny paradox.
I will offer one
> olive branch to Mr. Sound though, in that I'm still willing to listen
> to further evidence of the efficacy of his tweaks.
Got some sad news for you Paul: I don't care how willing you are to
listen to theories, because I'm not willing to talk to you about it.
I've always said that if people want to prove that anything in audio
is valid, such as my tweaks or those of any other, you have to LISTEN
to the tweak. Unfortunately, especially at this point, it seems
unlikely to me that you or anyone else here will hear any changes
produced by any of my tweaks even if you did try them, since you have
so considerably convinced yourself that they're jokes, and I'm the
punchline. So it's not gonna take much for a bigot like you to
convince yourself you didn't hear a change, when you did. You're
too scared to try any of them anyway, so this is a moot point.
The problem with theory is, you're a sheep. Remember? All that does
is play into your bigotry and prejudice. We went through all of this
with the green pens, remember? A perfectly valid tweak, made
(popularly) invalid by sheep like you, who couldn't find a theory to
fit it, and so concluded the pen didn't work. It was measured every
which way but loose by the sheep, but rarely ever was it actually
listened to, to determine if there was something there or not. The
green pen is not a joke. It does work. (Other colours work too). The
joke is how essentially stupid people, who figured they were smart
people, went about dismissing and eventually destroying a perfectly
valid audio device. It's not a "happy joke" however, it's actually
a sad joke. Because now that you can't find the CD stoplight any
longer, audiophiles have one less means of cheaply improving the sound
of their CDs, records and tapes. (Yes, I realize I said records and
tapes).
You don't have to understand something, for it to be valid. You
don't understand how the universe works, how it all started. And yet,
you're here and so is it, aren't you? Don't be so frightened all
your life. You're letting fear and prejudice rule your understanding
of the world. This is why I can't really consider you to be an
intelligent man, because you have a self-limiting mind.
> And I look forward
> to this revelation he promises, which apparently will show us all what
> asses we've been. Come on, Mr. Sound, don't drag it out too long or
> we'll get bored.
Well, you can always mock and deride me if you get too bored. That's
what everyone else here does, to amuse themselves.
soundhas...@yahoo.com
Garbage Boy remains confused as ever, searches for mommy:
> On 28 Mar 2006 11:46:27 -0800, soundhas...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> >You're kidding me, right? You mean in trying to play "gotcha!" with
> >me, you and your friend Garbage Bag Boy Weill, created all this
> >brouhaha, all these long tirades, trying to tell me I'm a moron
> >because I spelled "publically" incorrectly?
>
> Did I say that?
>
> Of course not.
Yes, you implied as much. Just as you implied you had a "classical
education", and that my posts had something to do with "morphic
resonance" (which you never explained because you don't KNOW what
"morphic resonance" means), and you repeatedly said that "turntables
have grounding straps". Which proves that
a) You don't have a "classical education"
b) You don't know the first damned thing about turntable grounding
c) You haven't a clue as to what morphic resonance is.
d) You have even less of a clue as to who James Parrington is
e) Your entire life's work now revolves around stalking and trolling
me on usenet.
You will be proving me right again about you by responding to this
post.
You lose, garbag bag boy.
Again.
soundhas...@yahoo.com
Garbage Boy smokes another J, comes up with a brilliant idea:
I will on the very day that you become smart enough to debunk one of my
tweaks. Or in other words, keep hoping and dreaming, dickweed.