In Reply to: No Problem posted by thetubeguy1954 on February 1, 2007 at 08:58:27:
that helps clear up the apparent confusion given what you have said about the product in a previous post.The only thing I don't understand is the motivation for your (poorly constructed) post. Is it an understated jab at the Space Coast Audio Society (SCAS), or maybe posted so as to give the typically crude "objectivist" crowd an opportunity to heap scorn SCAS?
Forgive me for fearing such nefarious intent but after all the Acoustic System resonator product was one of the products that you specifically mentioned in the post that you concluded with the following rather melodramatic statement:
"OMG! It's the blind acceptance of 'audio' devices like this that keep the Objectivists from ever taking Subjectivists seriously. Are we revisting the Tice Clock all over again?"
Even if you don't wish to comment on the purpose of the post it seem only fair IME, based solely upon the sentiments expressed in you previous post, to suggest you see the SCAS as engaged in the something at least analogous to "... revisting the Tice Clock all over again".
No Guru, No Method, No Teacher
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Thanks, - bjh 09:47:25 02/01/07 (25)
- Re: Thanks, - thetubeguy1954 13:04:49 02/01/07 (24)
- Your point taken. - cheap-Jack 08:04:58 02/02/07 (0)
- Very well, only allow me to point out - bjh 14:40:05 02/01/07 (22)
- Perhaps You're Right - thetubeguy1954 12:17:48 02/02/07 (20)
- Re: Perhaps You're Right - AJinFLA 18:21:47 02/05/07 (8)
- Re: Perhaps You're Right - thetubeguy1954 06:16:24 02/06/07 (4)
- It is not me you must convince, it is you. - AJinFLA 16:45:55 02/06/07 (1)
- Another Moronic Reply From That Bird-Brain POLLYinFLA - thetubeguy1954 11:09:05 02/08/07 (0)
- Re: Perhaps You're Right - theaudiohobby 08:05:32 02/06/07 (1)
- Re: Perhaps You're Right - thetubeguy1954 10:36:43 02/06/07 (0)
- Re: Perhaps You're Right - andy19191 05:07:00 02/06/07 (2)
- Do you consider yourself to be an "objective audiophile" or a "non-audiophile"? - AJinFLA 16:54:06 02/06/07 (1)
- Re: Do you consider yourself to be an "objective audiophile" or a "non-audiophile"? - andy19191 01:32:12 02/07/07 (0)
- You're rare but not alone - kerr 13:35:21 02/03/07 (10)
- Re: You're alone but not rare - AJinFLA 18:31:56 02/05/07 (1)
- Wow! You made sense! - kerr 07:34:42 02/06/07 (0)
- You guys will do just about anything to avoid actually proving you can detect what you say you can. - Pat D 18:01:02 02/05/07 (7)
- I've already proven it! - kerr 07:29:03 02/06/07 (6)
- Hardly. The burden of proof is on those who make the claim. We point out they haven't met it. (nt) - Pat D 07:53:24 02/06/07 (5)
- No One Is Under ANY Burden To Provide Proof To Others! - thetubeguy1954 06:25:47 02/07/07 (3)
- You don't understand burden of proof. - Pat D 12:02:04 02/08/07 (1)
- Pat D YOU Don't Understand That No One Is Under Any Burden To Provide You With Proof. - thetubeguy1954 11:53:50 02/09/07 (0)
- Exactly - kerr 07:51:05 02/07/07 (0)
- But we HAVE met the burden of proof. The only disagreement is to whom we carry that burden (nt) - kerr 08:32:05 02/06/07 (0)
- Umm... - kerr 11:49:09 02/02/07 (0)