|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
37.130.229.149
In Reply to: RE: Mercman's Playback Designs review posted by Audio Bling on June 17, 2016 at 20:37:59
Geez dude.
You are really a sadist. You don't believe in a quick, painless murder. You like to really turn the knife...and protract the pain..lol.
Look, I think every "audio review" can be picked apart for one reason or another..this is a totally subjective hobby...
But the time you took makes it seem you care a little too much.
That is my review of your review of the review.
Follow Ups:
Re: "That is my review of your review of the review"
When I wrote my "review" I thought that someone would do and say this. Predictable, dull, tired.
The reason I took the "time" was to help Steve because I think he could improve. Whether he takes this on is his decision.
You also mention a few other things but I am not interested in your thoughts and opinions, sorry.
Here is a bombshell for your, I would bet the farm that Steve does not give a flying shit about your "thoughts and opinions" of his review either.
How about he drop by your job and tell you how you can "improve"?
If you were so concerned in helping him you could have contacted him privately. But, no, you had to blow your own horn. Apparently can't stomach your own medicine either. Your review has great merit but a review of your review is simply beneath you. Humility at its best.
Edits: 06/19/16
The reason I refrained from replying to Isaak is his combative style. It is clear to me he gets something out of bullying people around. (He has been warned about this by the mod.) However, I am happy to respond to you providing we can be respectful toward one another..
On your point of contacting Steve privately: as I said in my post, he doesn't accept unsolicited mail on AA. The alternative would be to go to A'Stream and email there. As I said, I don't like A'Stream org as it appears to me to be more interested in "clicks" rather than substance or quality. I agree this is my subjective opinion but that's how I feel and I do have reasons - some of which I mentioned. Another factor was that I also wanted to send a message to Michael L. and the whole A'Stream crew whoever they might be; anyway I chose what I thought was the best route. As for blowing my own horn that appears to me to be your subjective opinion of which you're entitled. I'll leave the subject of my stomach, humility and medication aside if you don't mind.. as for my post having some merit, thanks.
On another matter if I may.. Why has it become acceptable on AA to be rude to people who have other opinions? I mean there is a difference between being a "critic" or "reviewer" and being a "thug". Why the speculation about another's psychological state because they are not convinced by your point of view or they refuse to parley with you? I can readily accept that my point of view can be dismissed without feeling the need to take a personal swing at someone.. What do you think?
I agree with your last paragraph.
To me, the problem with AA over the few years has been the latent commercial interest behind some of the posts, and ego and bullying behind others. The kind of rotational posting when one inmate would answer for another to divert attention from a topic of discussion is a case in point.
I just looked, I can send him a private message.
You just have to be signed on, so unless he changed his settings it looks like you never tried to email him.
Hi Jeff, did you get a reply from "Merman" as to whether settings have been changed? As you can appreciate, I don't like being called a liar & think you should set the record straight together with apology..
Best regards,
As you can see no reply here. I did not send him a message, I had no reason to
I don't owe you an apology, I stated that I could send a message, so unless he changed his settings, you either weren't able to use the message system, or you didn't try to.
And to be honest if you wont go to AS to send a message, why would you go there to read the reviews. Your concern about giving them clicks, is kind of weak.
That is all my opinion, suplied in a civil manner.
Thanks Jeff,
Let's see if I have this right..
I am to be admonished for not sending Mercman a private message on AA (or AS)
BUT
It is OK for you to publically post on AA the implication that I was lying
Putting aside the obvious question of hypocrisy, I will agree with you about your entitlement to an opinion but with proviso. One needs to consider, for example, the now infamous fellow in Orlando had opinions too.. My point is that "civilised" societies are ones where entitlement is balanced against obligation. Your reasoning was speculative at best but this didn't stop you from pushing caution aside. Let's be clear: you were doing the accusing and I was the accused. And you are still doing it: calling my actions "weak"; I would say your account of my actions is weak in that it misses key points. But regardless, you don't seem to get that I don't have to convince you of anything to be accorded respect.
I finally contacted Merccman, he told me he has been receiving messages from inmates in the past.
Anyone who would compare my opinions to the guy in Orlando doesn't seem to grasp the difference between questioning whether you did try to post, and a radicalized terrorist committing mass murder. That you used it as an example tells me you are taking reviews way too seriously.
With a moniker like Audio Bling, I doubt that many take you seriously. I know I don't.
Jeff, again you seem to take what you wish and ditch the rest. I think it clear that the Orlando reference was in relation to the point being made which was about balancing entitlements and obligations not to you personally. I apologise to you if you misunderstood. Please understand I am not your enemy here. Why is it that you want to make me the bad guy; does it relieve you of your obligations? As for Mercman, his post is below; read it. Am I a liar or not? You have again formed your opinion without the evidence (and continue to publish it). Mercman's testimony seems to suggest he is not sure as he reset it. What is clear is that you interpret to suit yourself and, yes, I am serious about the truth.
P.S. Respect to all!
My email was not turned off to my knowledge, but it really doesn't matter-at least to me. Public or private is OK. I did check it and reset it to be sure it was activated,
Who shall review the reviewers?
Why Arthur Salvatore, of course.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: