Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 79

Thread: Fake EE Degree

  1. #51
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    240
    Quote Originally Posted by mtrycraft
    I do not have college degree. I am graduating this May with an Engineering Physics Degree (10 more credits). Engineering Physics is a combination of Electrical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, and Physics. Basicly someone to bridge the gap between Mechanical and Electrical Engineering. However, I have taken mostly EE classes and will graduate 20 credits away from an EE degree.


    That's great. Why not also do that 20 credits for a double degree? Talk the school and parents into it
    I would, but the parents arn't paying for it

  2. #52
    Forum Regular sofsoldier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    19
    I am an electrical engineer, hear me roar!

    Just kidding.

  3. #53
    Chris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    California
    Posts
    218
    Good Lord. Is this the only thing that will ever be discussed in this forum? Whether or not cables actually make a difference in sound.... and the qualifications of those who debate the issue... can we take this arguing and personal attacking elsewhere? This is not a forum for those who do not wish to discuss cables because they don't think they make a difference in sound quality. If you're only here to discount anyone who doesn't agree with that belief, you should click the Back button in your browser and find a more meaningful way to participate on this site.

    Flaming, personal attacks, and degrading posts should be taken elsewhere. We will become less tolerant of those who simply come to this Cable forum in order to play the role of a troll and tell people how dumb they are for thinking cables make a real difference.

  4. #54
    Forum Regular Rockwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    156
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris
    Good Lord. Is this the only thing that will ever be discussed in this forum? Whether or not cables actually make a difference in sound.... and the qualifications of those who debate the issue... can we take this arguing and personal attacking elsewhere? This is not a forum for those who do not wish to discuss cables because they don't think they make a difference in sound quality. If you're only here to discount anyone who doesn't agree with that belief, you should click the Back button in your browser and find a more meaningful way to participate on this site.

    Flaming, personal attacks, and degrading posts should be taken elsewhere. We will become less tolerant of those who simply come to this Cable forum in order to play the role of a troll and tell people how dumb they are for thinking cables make a real difference.
    Chris, who are you replying to? The threaded view show your post as a response to Beckmans rather benign post.
    "You two are a regular ol' Three Musketeers."

  5. #55
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    1,188
    "Good Lord. Is this the only thing that will ever be discussed in this forum? Whether or not cables actually make a difference in sound.... "

    No but is is a major issue. This is not a board where everybody is easily sold a bill of goods because there was good advertising copy and someone believed it and brought it here. There are enough regulars who ask for more evidence than just someones testimonial. This is a very controversial area and those on one side of the arguement want the right to make their points just as much as those on the other.


    "and the qualifications of those who debate the issue..."

    The thread about a fake EE degree was a very nasty posting which I assumed was aimed directly at me. I tried to answer it as straightforwardly and courteously as possible. Usually we let arguements here stand or fall on their own merits. Among regulars, opinions are not likely to change. But among newcomers, a range of opinions is the only way someone can keep an open mind. And they should know that the opinions coming from the skeptical side are not just from people who are too cheap to buy this class of product but from people who have good reason to come to an informed opinion.

    "can we take this arguing and personal attacking elsewhere?"

    This is the place where arguing is supposed to happen. But it is not a place for personal attacks. Usually when one person resorts to personal attacks, it is because he has run out of real arguements. If you can't kill the message, shoot the messenger.

    "This is not a forum for those who do not wish to discuss cables because they don't think they make a difference in sound quality."

    If by that you mean that this forum is only for those who believe cables make an audible difference and will not challenge that view and that those who do challenge it or at least demand more than testimonial evidence are unwelcome, then this forum is no better than cable asylum and if that is the case, I'm outta here. I said before that I would not post to a site which will censor one opinion or another.

    "If you're only here to discount anyone who doesn't agree with that belief, you should click the Back button in your browser and find a more meaningful way to participate on this site."

    NOBODY is discounted. But their opinions should be open to challenge and discussion, not merely be accepted as a way to preserve harmony. That's how tyrants keep law and order in dictatorships. Set out the partly line and shoot anyone who disagrees openly with it.

    "Flaming, personal attacks, and degrading posts should be taken elsewhere."

    Agreed.

    "We will become less tolerant of those who simply come to this Cable forum in order to play the role of a troll and tell people how dumb they are for thinking cables make a real difference"

    People who challenge the value of audio cables are not all trolls. And they don't tell people that they are dumb when they challenge their ideas or beliefs. Blanket Characterization of people who challenge an idea by classifying them as insulting trolls is totally unfair and out of order for someone in the role of site administrator.

  6. #56
    Forum Regular Bill L's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    78
    Chuck, this is the forum people go to when they want controversy. Take away the passion and the entertainment goes with it. I'm not sure why you picked my post to express yourself in the way you did. You seem persecuted. Good luck on your mission.

  7. #57
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    1,720
    Quote Originally Posted by Beckman
    I would, but the parents arn't paying for it
    A student loan? If you don't do it now, it will be that much more difficult later when you have obligations. And, you will have forgotten things
    mtrycrafts

  8. #58
    Forum Regular Chuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill L
    Chuck, this is the forum people go to when they want controversy. Take away the passion and the entertainment goes with it. I'm not sure why you picked my post to express yourself in the way you did. You seem persecuted. Good luck on your mission.
    Mission? We don't need no stinkin' missions.

    Chris wants this to be a forum where people can discuss wire and cables without the kind of behavior that is currently so prevalent. I'd like to see him succeed, so if I have to have a mission here I guess it would be to see Chris have the kind of forum he wants.

    Be careful about guys who come across as persecuted. They may just be holding back their darker side. The Hulk says it best. "Don't make me angry. You wouldn't like me when I'm angry."
    I guess if someone is going to get the wrong impression I'd prefer being seen as feeling persecuted to being seen as overly aggressive.

    What's your take on the post Chris left this morning? (see http://forums.audioreview.com/showth...1941#post11941)

  9. #59
    Forum Regular Chuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by skeptic
    People who challenge the value of audio cables are not all trolls.
    No, but according to you, anyone who posts positive comments about cables is a shill, and anyone who points out that your conclusion is unsupportable, you mock and belittle. It's pretty clear that you are one of the troublemakers Chris is addressing here, and it has nothing to do with your beliefs about cables or about your technical acumen. Just look at your posting history and you'll understand. You have a terrible record, probably the worst of anyone who has ever posted here. Chris is tired of the garbage, and even Mtrycraft has tired of it.

    [QUOTE]And they don't tell people that they are dumb when they challenge their ideas or beliefs.[/QUOTE}

    You have done so in this very thread, and now you are trying to deny it. That's as bad as someone claiming that they have an EE degree when they don’t. You discount others and then deny having done it, in the very topic where you committed the act. You must think most people are too dim to notice. Skeptic, you're wrong. People do notice. Most people, not just a few. That's why Chris wants it stopped. People don't like it.

    Blanket Characterization of people who challenge an idea by classifying them as insulting trolls is totally unfair and out of order for someone in the role of site administrator.
    Chris tried to be nice and not mention anyone’s name, but most anyone can read this topic and figure it out. It's easy to see who was calling people names, "shill" for example, and who was doing all they could to argue with anyone they could. Chris commented, at least in part, due to my complaints about your posts. That's a pity too, because you have the kind of training and background to be a valuable contributor here, and you and I actually agree on most things. However, it is your senseless attacks that called attention to this thread, so don't pretend that you don't know what Chris is talking about. You aren't dim so, don't pretend that you don't understand.

    Understand this. Telling someone they can't call people names the way you have been doing ("shill" is the most obvious example) is NOT censorship. You'd like to make it seem that way to hide the real reason Chris had to get involved, but your tactic isn't working. Chris saw fit to comment because you and a few others were behaving like barbarians. If you can't see that you were out of line, and take steps to prevent such behavior in the future, then I'm sure the forum won't miss the behavior when you're gone. Chris says it won't be tolerated, and I support his position 100%. You can talk about anything. but you can't do what you've been doing. I got the message long ago. How'd you manage to miss it?

  10. #60
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    1,188
    Your sanctimonious dribble is not worthy of a serious reply.
    Get a life!

  11. #61
    Forum Regular Bill L's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    78
    If he succeeds then we may have an Audio Asylum clone here. How ironic since AA was conceived as an asylum from the behavior at this specific site. The root of the problem here is that no discussion of cable sonics can occur w/o interjection from the opposing camp. Each side thinks the other is giving bad advice and it then escalates. My opinion? This forum is a waste of space for the surfer looking for useful information. The 'bickering' here is a combination of trolls, egos and attitudes. It's fun if you enjoy pushing peoples buttons and many make use of it in that capacity. Visitors who don't see this are cannon fodder. I wish him (Chris) luck. My blunt $.02

  12. #62
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    365
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill L
    If he succeeds then we may have an Audio Asylum clone here. How ironic since AA was conceived as an asylum from the behavior at this specific site. The root of the problem here is that no discussion of cable sonics can occur w/o interjection from the opposing camp. Each side thinks the other is giving bad advice and it then escalates. My opinion? This forum is a waste of space for the surfer looking for useful information. The 'bickering' here is a combination of trolls, egos and attitudes. It's fun if you enjoy pushing peoples buttons and many make use of it in that capacity. Visitors who don't see this are cannon fodder. I wish him (Chris) luck. My blunt $.02
    There certainly is a problem here from my perspective in that subjectivists can't carry on threads where they share their non-scientific discussions without the mind-numbing challenges from mtrycrafts and others.

    On the other hand, I don't think the role this board plays in challenging unsupported technical claims and the advertising hype from cable companies should be eliminated or curtailed through censorship. It serves, in my opinion, a very important purpose.

    It's just too bad that certain people here won't practice a little courtesy and not butt into conversations where people don't want to talk about cables from an objective, scientific perspective. A little bit of judgment and perspective is required to differentiate between conversations between subjectivists where they are simply sharing their experiences with one another with no interest in getting into technical issues and those where unsupported, absolutist technical claims are being made that should be challenged.

    As it is, very few subjectivists come to this board because of the constant hounding they receive, so it becomes a fairly one-dimensional discussion.

    And, it seems to me that most of the regulars accept without any critical comment the results of old DBTs that could in no way qualify for publication in a true scientific journal, while castigating subjectivists for relying on their sighted tests. Both are anecdotal, but the regulars here refuse to discuss stuff like this. They will simply label anyone who questions any piece of “evidence” which they dogmatically accept as gospel as a troublemaker and a believer in alien abductions (one of their favorite slams), even through questioning and critical review is at the heart of the scientific method. Their tactics often resemble those applied on the other side by John Curl, Jon and other yeasayers.

    Despite my personal battle with Skeptic and disagreements with some of his speculations on peripheral issues, he seems to be one of the most objective and knowledgeable people on this board when it comes to discussing technical and scientific issues.

    Because most of the regulars here share similar views, it takes fine distinctions or personality conflicts (such as the current battle between Chuck and Skeptic) to generate any excitement. Occasionally someone like Jon will come along and stir things up, but unfortunately he prefers to talk about yeasayers and naysayers rather than actual technical issues. I tried siring things up for a while, but I don’t have a technical background and so my threads usually devolved quickly into mindless discussions about whether I was merely quacky or seriously demented.

  13. #63
    Forum Regular Chuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    79
    Skeptic, just so you know, you've been on my ignore list since you started your irrational outbursts in this topic/thread. That was the same point at which I contacted Chris. He's already warned you once that your behavior and irrational personal attacks will not be tolerated, but if you want to pretend or imagine that it's all drivel that's your prerogative. Chris has made it clear that he has no intent of letting it continue. I have no intention of reading inflammatory posts from people who only want to stir up trouble and then deny their activities when it's pointed out, so I block posts from the few who lack the social skills to carry on a civil conversation with others. The only reason I read your rebuttal to Chris is because his post was the result of my complaints about your posts, and I wanted to see what kind of excuses you'd come up with. I actually expected something a little more creative than a denial of the activities we've all observed, but I did expect you to continue with the personal attacks when you read my response. As a result, I haven't seen your response, and don't actually know whether or not you are continuing with the same bad behavior that you’ve been warned about. However, Chris says that your continued bashing of others will not be tolerated. If you think that's just drivel he'll probably have to prove you wrong. Do you really want to push until you force him to restrict your activities here? If so, be my guest, but while you finish up slamming Chris and his forum because he won't let you slam others the way you've been doing, don't expect me to be reading
    /b your
    drivel.

    May I humbly suggest that you might be happier if you follow my lead, and also put my name on your blocked poster list. You obviously have no interest in what Chris wants to do with his forum, nor in my interests in helping him achieve his goals, so we have nothing to discuss.

  14. #64
    Forum Regular Chuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill L
    My opinion? This forum is a waste of space for the surfer looking for useful information.
    Chris is trying to change that, and we can only hope that he will be more successful than they've been at AA. AA is hardly a peaceful place for newcomers; Chris wants to actually do what AA claims they've been trying to do, that being to create a place where people can discuss their *subjective experiences* with wire and interconnects, without fear of being attacked, called shills or worse, and so on. This doesn't have to preclude discussions of possible causes of audible differences, including listeners biases and/or misconceptions, but it does mean that the conversations will have to take place without the name-calling and personal attacks. That's going to leave some of the regulars here out in the cold, and will probably kill off a lot of the traffic here, but it should make this a better place for newcomers looking for information. Might not make the information any better, but the atmosphere will almost certainly improve.

    IMHO, those who come here only to argue rather than learn and/or share, would do better to take care of their personal problems using private messaging or e-mail. Chris apparently intends to see that they stop the activity on the general forums. Like you, I wish Chris luck. He's got a very hard row to hoe.

    See ya,

    Chuck

  15. #65
    Forum Regular Chuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by pctower
    (such as the current battle between Chuck and Skeptic)
    There is no "current battle between Chuck and Skeptic.” He's developed a habit of calling subjectivists shills and worse, and has tried to paint me in a negative light because I pointed out his behavior. The battle is actually between Chris (our moderator) and Skeptic, as I long ago blocked Skeptic and complained to Chris. I don't engage in battles on this forum, because it is not consistent with what our moderator has requested.

    Naturally, those who are guilty of habitually engaging in the sport of creating discontent and argument will see any attempt to curtail the foolishness as a battle, but it's really not. It's just Chris trying to make this a better place for all of us, and a few who are supporting his efforts. To see it as anything else is to spin the reality of the situation.

  16. #66
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    365

    Clarification

    Quote Originally Posted by Chuck
    There is no "current battle between Chuck and Skeptic.” He's developed a habit of calling subjectivists shills and worse, and has tried to paint me in a negative light because I pointed out his behavior. The battle is actually between Chris (our moderator) and Skeptic, as I long ago blocked Skeptic and complained to Chris. I don't engage in battles on this forum, because it is not consistent with what our moderator has requested.

    Naturally, those who are guilty of habitually engaging in the sport of creating discontent and argument will see any attempt to curtail the foolishness as a battle, but it's really not. It's just Chris trying to make this a better place for all of us, and a few who are supporting his efforts. To see it as anything else is to spin the reality of the situation.
    I should clarify. I used the word "battle" rather loosely in referring to the recent exchange between you and Skeptic. I didn't mean to use the term in a perjoritive manner toward you or Skeptic. That would be a colosal case of the pot calling the kettle black, given my track record. It was just an illustration of the kind of thing that does seem to generate excitement, for better or worse.

  17. #67
    Forum Regular Chuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by pctower
    I should clarify. I used the word "battle" rather loosely in referring to the recent exchange between you and Skeptic. I didn't mean to use the term in a perjoritive manner toward you or Skeptic. That would be a colosal case of the pot calling the kettle black, given my track record. It was just an illustration of the kind of thing that does seem to generate excitement, for better or worse.
    Hi Phil,

    This e-mail notification really keeps me on my toes. I only just left my last post a few minutes ago, and now "you've got mail" and there is a notification that someone has responded to one of the AR threads. That's pretty cool, as long as it doesn't become too much of an imposition. I really like the new forum format.

    You're clarification is both noted and appreciated. Both AR Cable and AA Cable thrive on the excitement created by the heated personal exchanges, but that's not what Chris wants to see on this forum. I've already told Chris that I think he will most certainly see a reduction in traffic, but it's his forum, and his call.

    The last time you and I had an exchange, we had a misunderstanding, and the wheels fell off. I don't care to see that happen again, so I'm a little reluctant to read your posts, and more reluctant to respond, but there is something in all this that I believe you and I agree on, and I want to discuss it with you. If I have managed to misunderstand your statements or position you must realize that I am only human and make mistakes just like everyone else. Don't make too much of simple misunderstandings (not that we will have any misunderstandings this time, but they were totally unexpected last time, so I'm just trying to head off trouble before it starts).
    I'll try to qualify my statements extensively to minimize the possibility of any misunderstanding.

    I have no intention of putting words in your mouth, but it is my impression from things you have said in the past that you think AA Cable has some problems. AA Cable is represented as a place where people can discuss their subjective experiences in peace, but because they also allow technical posts on their cable forum, there are often heated arguments that quickly turn into name-calling and worse. Unless I'm mistaken, always a possibility, you yourself have stated on several occasions that you felt that people posting their objective ideas on AA Cable were doing something contrary to the intent of the forum. Now perhaps you haven't actually said anything along those lines, but that's my understanding and interpretation based on what I've seen, so don't get upset and accuse me of putting words in your mouth. That is not the intent. I'm merely telling you and others what I have come to believe based on reading your posts. I could be mistaken, and you can correct me without calling me names or comparing me to obnoxious people. That is totally uncalled for and unjustifiable.

    The reason I'm re-stating what I believe to be your stated position is to make sure that I have understood properly, and to say that if I have understood your posts correctly then I am in total agreement with you. If I'm mistaken about any of this please try to tell me so without calling me names or comparing me to people you obviously don't like. That is the kind of stuff Chris wants to do away with, and we can all probably do a little better, so be nice.

    It is a simple fact of life that we often react negatively when our beliefs are challenged. When one warns others not to discuss religion or politics the warning stems from the fact that such discussions so often lead to heated arguments that rapidly deteriorate and become personal. If we set up a totally open forum to discuss politics or religion we will have endless arguments that degrade into personal attacks, and the excitement might produce a lot of traffic, but it would primarily be of interest only to those who wanted to argue with others. If, on the other hand, we restrict the participation in our political or religious forum to those who share common beliefs, the participants will be quite different. We will have an exchange of information between people who are in substantial agreement on the basic issues, and as a result there will be more information exchanged, and less "excitement."

    The question that begs to be answered is this; Do Republicans, Democrats, Christians, agnostics, atheists, and others, have a right to get together on Web forums and discuss their common beliefs? Further, do they have the right to do so without constant or even infrequent disruptions from those who disagree with them? If Chris wants to have a forum for Democrats, or agnostics, and wants them to be able to have their discussions without constant personal attacks like we see here, then he has to restrict the contributors in some way. That is not rightly called censorship. A Republican cannot go to a Democratic convention and express his views as if he were a proper member of the community. Chris wants to define this community in a particular way, and that is his decision to make. He is trying to make this forum more like what AA Cable claims to be trying to be, and unless I'm mistaken you also think that there should be a place where people can discuss cable sonics without being hassled, called shills, and attacked in other subtle and not-so-subtle ways.

    I think (and feel free to correct me, nicely, if I'm wrong) that we (you and I) agree that there needs to be a place for people to discuss cable sonics without being hassled. We have AH and ecoustics for subjective viewpoints, and AA (like Saturday night) is alright for fighting, so as it is everyone EXCEPT the subjectivists has a place where they can post in peace and be with those of like mind, even if the like mind is the mind of argument (as is the case on AA Cable, and for the time being also here at AR Cable). I think Chris is trying to create a resource that is missing from the Web, and whether we agree with him or not, he's certainly got the right to do what he wants with his forum.

    Calling it censorship is just plain wrong. It is not censorship to ask the atheist to refrain from disrupting Church services. That would be a matter of maintaining the peace. Sometimes we have to hold our tongue until the appropriate time and place, right?

    Anyone who thinks Chris is acting as a censor is simply looking at the situation from a skewed perspective (and perhaps all perspectives are skewed). Those who think it is censorship need to rethink. Try to take their ideas about audio and convince the AES that their freedom of speech gives them the right to present their ideas at the annual AES convention. Unless the ideas are something very special the AES isn't interested in hearing from the man on the street. No private organization has to accept membership or input from anyone. The word "private" precludes this. It is true that we cannot discriminate based on certain factors in our business dealings, but a private club or organization, Church, etc., is an entirely different matter. A Web forum is in fact a privately owned and operated organization. The participants are the principles of the organization, and the organization, being privately owned, can reject or accept content and contributions from whomever it chooses. The forum owner is the only one with any rights regarding these matters. Chris has a privately owned Web site and has total control over the content thereof. It is exactly as if this were a print publication. Does anyone think they can write an objective argument against cable sonics and then accuse Stereophile and TAS of being "censored" if they refuse to publish the article? Does anyone think they can write an article about evolution and then accuse the Christian Science Monitor of censorship when they refuse to publish it? Does anyone really believe that they can call others names on a forum where the moderator and forum owner don’t want such behavior, and then accuse the forum moderator and owner of censorship? Enforcing rules is not censorship. Most technical discussions require controls; People can’t just spew out anything they like, at will, without respect for the task at hand. Rules enforcement is simply not censorship. Thinking that it is reveals a misunderstanding of the meaning of the word "censorship." Don't you agree? If not, where is my thinking flawed?

    Thanks,

    Chuck

  18. #68
    Forum Regular Rockwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    156
    Quote Originally Posted by Chuck
    Chris is trying to change that, and we can only hope that he will be more successful than they've been at AA. AA is hardly a peaceful place for newcomers; Chris wants to actually do what AA claims they've been trying to do, that being to create a place where people can discuss their *subjective experiences* with wire and interconnects, without fear of being attacked, called shills or worse, and so on. ...
    The original poster of this topic did not come here to dicuss anything subjective about wires. The comment was a personal attack on one or more members, questioning their integrity. He may not be a shill, but is certainly a troll.
    "You two are a regular ol' Three Musketeers."

  19. #69
    Forum Regular Chuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by Rockwell
    The original poster of this topic did not come here to dicuss anything subjective about wires. The comment was a personal attack on one or more members, questioning their integrity. He may not be a shill, but is certainly a troll.
    Hi Rockwell,

    I don't doubt that the post was a troll. That isn't what created the problems that made Chris feel that he needed to get involved. The problems started when it was pointed out that calling Bo a shill was unsupportable (he may or man not be a shill). For that I have been attacked by one person repeatedly, and Chris doesn't want that kind of behavior on his forum. He doesn't want people being called shills without some justification and he doesn't want people attacked and called names without justification either. In this instance, the bashing was started by one person, and will probably continue until Chris puts an end to it, and I for one applaud his efforts.

    See ya,

    Chuck
    Last edited by Chuck; 01-28-2004 at 03:27 PM.

  20. #70
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by skeptic
    I find it strange that on your second post on this site you are already challenging people who have posted here far longer and made far more contributions to other peoples' real knowledge than you probably ever will..
    Yes, but then you make the assumption that, only on my second post, that I am some no-nothing newbie who wouldn't know the difference between a speaker an a tin-can.

    My post was not about me. I was simply commenting on the people who have posted within this forum as supposed "authorities" because of their claims that they possess degrees that they do not have. Maybe perhaps you can drag the personal attacks out of what was a genuine question. However, your lengthy reply and the content within makes me come to the conclusion that my posting hit far too close to home for you to deal with. But thanks for the reply nonetheless.

  21. #71
    Mutant from table 9
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,205
    Dude, isn't your come back like three years too late?
    ______________________
    Joyce Summers: "You've got really great albums!"
    Rupert "Ripper" Giles: "Yeah... they're okay..."


    "Tha H-Dog listens easy, always has, always will." - Herbert Kornfeld (R.I.P.)

    "I lick the mothra moniters because they pump up the base!!" - Dusty Beiber

  22. #72
    Crackhead Extraordinaire Dusty Chalk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    below the noise floor
    Posts
    3,636
    Whoa! Time travel is real!
    Eschew fascism.
    Truth Will Out.
    Quote Originally Posted by stevef22
    you guys are crackheads.
    I remain,
    Peter aka Dusty Chalk

  23. #73
    Loving This kexodusc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Department of Heuristics and Research on Material Applications
    Posts
    9,025
    Glad you recovered from that coma. Let's bring you up to speed - it's 2007 - Bush got re-elected, the Red Sox won a world series, the Dems control the House and Senate, Tom Cruise went totally insane, there's a new Rocky movie, New England is still a really good football team and turns out there weren't any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Who knew?

  24. #74
    Forum Regular Woochifer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    6,883
    Quote Originally Posted by kexodusc
    Glad you recovered from that coma. Let's bring you up to speed - it's 2007 - Bush got re-elected, the Red Sox won a world series, the Dems control the House and Senate, Tom Cruise went totally insane, there's a new Rocky movie, New England is still a really good football team and turns out there weren't any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Who knew?
    Yup, and Chuck, mtrycrafts, PC Tower, Bill L, Rockwell, and Skeptic long ago picked up their toys and left for other playgrounds.

    Happy New Year Everyone! And all the best for 2005 ... errr ... 2007!
    Wooch's Home Theater 2.0 (Pics)
    Panasonic VIERA TH-C50FD18 50" 1080p
    Paradigm Reference Studio 40, CC, and 20 v.2
    Adire Audio Rava (EQ: Behringer Feedback Destroyer DSP1124)
    Yamaha RX-A1030
    Dual CS5000 (Ortofon OM30 Super)
    Sony UBP-X800
    Sony Playstation 3 (MediaLink OS X Server)
    Sony ES SCD-C2000ES
    JVC HR-S3912U
    Directv HR44 and WVB
    Logitech Harmony 700
    iPhone 5s/iPad 3
    Linksys WES610



    The Neverending DVD/BD Collection

    Subwoofer Setup and Parametric EQ Results *Dead Link*

  25. #75
    Class of the clown GMichael's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Anywhere but here...
    Posts
    13,243
    Quote Originally Posted by bo130
    Yes, but then you make the assumption that, only on my second post, that I am some no-nothing newbie who wouldn't know the difference between a speaker an a tin-can.

    My post was not about me. I was simply commenting on the people who have posted within this forum as supposed "authorities" because of their claims that they possess degrees that they do not have. Maybe perhaps you can drag the personal attacks out of what was a genuine question. However, your lengthy reply and the content within makes me come to the conclusion that my posting hit far too close to home for you to deal with. But thanks for the reply nonetheless.
    Wow, you've been here for 3 years longer than I have. I must have been doing some drinking because I just don't recall you at all.
    Well? Aren't you going to welcome me to AR?
    WARNING! - The Surgeon General has determined that, time spent listening to music is not deducted from one's lifespan.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •