Michael Lavorgna strikes back.......

[crenca]

9 minutes ago, plissken said:

 

"If someone came to my place of business and called me a liar, shill, delusional, a hack (I guess in my case a “quack”), and a coward they had better be prepared to deal with the consequences, especially the last, as they would soon realize that it wasn’t the case (and they wouldn’t be able to rely on anonymity)."

  

We aren't at your place of business. 

 

Hey, I missed that little gem.  Bill Brown must know a lot of karate, or watch a lot of westerns, or something...;)

[Bill Brown]

I believe "psychophant" was your spelling, I failed to place "(sic)" as I did with the misuse of "their."

 

I have inconsistent internet, hence wrote my note separately (can't stream music, obviously).  I also only post (anywhere) every few years, so not super-technically efficient in that regard.

 

Not sure what a sock puppet is or how I would become one.  I always register with my real name (well, it is actually William, but I go by Bill ever since I asked my family not to call me "Billy").

 

The "place of business" comment is interesting (and anticipated).  It isn't clear to me, but I suspect AS is ML's place of business, and this is CC's place of business.  And if they are on the internet....well, I don't know, isn't fully clear in my mind.

 

I never ascribed any nobility to ML, I referred to a different era; it seems that should be obvious.

 

I am from Texas, and enjoy some westerns, but I wouldn't describe myself as a fan.

 

I also don't know any karate, though, in my experience it hasn't really been necessary.

 

I had lunch with a psychiatrist colleague (I am not a psychiatrist) and discussed my rare foray out from lurker status.  She commented:

 

"Wonder if they will ‘Get it’?  (Self-involved, socially isolated, and developmentally stunted respondents). 

I continue to be amazed at the lack of self-knowledge and narcissism that is evident in internet posts and comments."

 

Maybe applies to a lot of us.  I know this morning when Audirvana shuffled to Coltrane's "Song Of The Underground Railroad" all of this seemed a bit insignificant.

 

Bill

 

[crenca]

5 minutes ago, Bill Brown said:

 

I had lunch with a psychiatrist colleague (I am not a psychiatrist) and discussed my rare foray out from lurker status.  She commented:

 

"Wonder if they will ‘Get it’?  (Self-involved, socially isolated, and developmentally stunted respondents). 

I continue to be amazed at the lack of self-knowledge and narcissism that is evident in internet posts and comments."

 

Maybe applies to a lot of us.  I know this morning when Audirvana shuffled to Coltrane's "Song Of The Underground Railroad" all of this seemed a bit insignificant.

 

Bill

 

 

 

Probably does apply to many of us as we are in an individualistic Cartesian age.  Most of my neighbors (whom I don't even know their first names) are this way not because of "the internet", but rather they sit in front of their TV's for their "stunted" development time.  Welcome to Western Civilization, or what's left of it.

 

Now, your friend is in fact a kind of high priestess as to what is "healthy" or not in this psychologized culture but even the "developmentally stunted" suspect that she does not have all the answers and those that she does, well they often come from the same "stunted" world she attributes to others.  

 

In any case, you should talk with audiophile neuroscience - he will explain to you that your just complaining about the human condition and that you just have to carry on if you want to learn anything about audio...

[beetlemania]

36 minutes ago, Bill Brown said:

 I know this morning when Audirvana shuffled to Coltrane's "Song Of The Underground Railroad" all of this seemed a bit insignificant.

 

Bill

 

 

I've found the "ignored users" feature of this forum to be a godsend. My enjoyment thereof is greatly enhanced by it. Highly recommended!

[plissken]

53 minutes ago, Bill Brown said:

(Self-involved, socially isolated

 

Huh, forums are a form of socialization. 

[rando]

Just imagine what you friend would have to say about people that lived before the internet or television or portable phones or even rapid transportation.  Textbook social isolation is sitting at home alone with absolutely no contact with the outside world and only the walls to talk to.  She should be accounting for a population overstimulated and expert firstmost in themselves. 

 

Maybe she was treating you, and not the greater subject of comments on the internet overwhelmingly falling short of reasoned logical and polite discourse befitting sensitive adults trading on their own good name.  Much less expressing empathy.

[Bill Brown]

"Maybe she was treating you"

 

Ha!  Good one.  Maybe so!

 

I have wondered, sometimes, whether I am in some kind of "Shutter Island" scenario.  Will have to ask if I am actually the patient (I am open to considering the possibilities).

 

BTW, she is treating the sickest of the sick, what would have been referred to in the olden days as the "criminally insane."  Not a whole lot of navel-gazing going on....

 

Bill

[Ralf11]

when I saw the shrink quote, I immediately wondered if there were different standards for engineers

[gmgraves]

21 hours ago, Allan F said:

 

 Much easier to simply use "we". I can't imagine anyone writing, "something that us can agree on".

 Touche! I hope Plissken wasn't offended by my correcting his grammar. If I made an error like that, I would certainly appreciate being told about it. Once years ago, I used the word irregardless in a sentence during a discussion. The person I was speaking with stopped me and told me that irregardless was an illiteracy because it's a double negative meaning without-without regard! I was embarrassed sure, but I never used the word again (well, not until just now, anyway ).

[Speed Racer]

You mean:

 

Once, years ago, I used the word "irregardless" in a sentence during a discussion.

 

If we are correcting grammar and whatnot, maybe we should correct punctuation as well.

[Speed Racer]

I don't get too excited about spelling, grammar, or punctuation unless I can't tell what the writer is trying to say.....

[gmgraves]

5 minutes ago, Speed Racer said:

You mean:

 

Once, years ago, I used the word "irregardless" in a sentence during a discussion.

 

If we are correcting grammar and whatnot, maybe we should correct punctuation as well.

 

Sure. We all make grammatical errors from time to time. After all, this is the Internet. Some are just more egregious than others.

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

10 hours ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

With due respect, and in the spirit of politeness, I think this is an example of the disingenuous nature that's being discussed.  From what I've read, you present your particular audio/social worldview as something like "normal", and those who fall outside of this myopic definition of "normal" as being unusual, antisocial,  or some other kind of pejorative outlier.   In other words, instead of believing it, you "are it".

 

Notice how you said "people" and not "some people" or "most people"?

 

The example of me opining that Bill has a very quick mind is not disingenuous at all.

 

I think you are overreaching about "people" vs "some people" not keeping up. I "normally" do add the qualification, just an oversight in this example. I agree though it should read some or most.

 

I reject the rest of your analysis about my concept of normalcy and submit it more precisely describes those who appoint themselves guardians of "objective reality"  and ridicule those they deem fall outside those parameters as among other things "delusional," characterizing a symptom of a mental disorder inconsistent with their peer group.

 

 

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

8 hours ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

In other words, not ML's fault?  Just like Flip Wilson's Geraldine, apparently the devil made him do it.

 

I wouldn't usually respond to this but just continuing on from before: I consider this , *to some degree* disingenuous. The poster has not said it "isn't" ML's fault, he said he was provoked.You didnt just leave it as a genuine question but added wanted to rub it in to suit your POV.

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

6 hours ago, Bill Brown said:

ML is of course responsible for what he writes and must suffer whatever consequences are deemed appropriate by the owner of the site.

I do think, though, that there is a misunderstanding (likely insurmountable, based on the personalities of his antagonists) of why he would become angry enough to message what he did (not what I would have chosen, btw- if someone insulted me that way I would be more likely to chuckle than react with righteous indignation or feel offended).

In the last few days I have read:

• Comparisons of audiophiles to flat earthers, antivaxxers, adherents to homeopathy, memory water advocates, etc.

• “I am not concerned about hurting their feelings”

• “There’s a benefit to being on the right side of the debate.  You have a higher ground that you get to speak from.”

• People labeled delusional- “If you are ML and you are delusional about Ethernet..”

• “One consequence of saying stupid shit is often, quite likely, ridicule.”

• “And you are 100% correct that their (sic) should be consequences for a professional audio reviewer that just blatantly lies”

• “You, too, would be frustrated if fake nostrums were shilled in your (more important) field”

• “welcome to generation wuss”

• “snowflakes roasting on an open fire”

• “I called him a hack and a coward a while ago but only because I truly believe those things and I can back it up.  Now I have additional proof of his cowardice.”

• “narcissists collect psychophants”

Certainly, many of these statements came after his message, but the attitudes behind them permeated all prior interactions with him.

There are both personal and professional issues, involved.  The latter is incompletely understood, I feel.  It is consistently seen, for example, when JA feels compelled to repeatedly respond to accusations of shilling, pay for play, pandering to advertisers, etc. (typically on AA).  People seem very willing to (anonymously, of course) impugn someone’s professional integrity without the expectation of consequences.

If someone came to my place of business and called me a liar, shill, delusional, a hack (I guess in my case a “quack”), and a coward they had better be prepared to deal with the consequences, especially the last, as they would soon realize that it wasn’t the case (and they wouldn’t be able to rely on anonymity).

There was a time when we were men (sorry Teresa).  And I agree with the “wuss generation” designation, though I think it was misapplied in this case, and prefer Eastwood’s name in print of “pussy generation” (sorry again, Teresa).

In older (perhaps more noble days), the above would have been dual-worthy.  These days we (that frequent these sites, anyway) are perhaps more enlightened and don’t shoot at each other, but the underlying instincts haven’t fully left us.

I should note that I agree with much of what “Neuroscience” has been writing, especially my complete lack of desire to go to medical fora and ridicule those who disagree with me (what’s the point?!).

I considered not frequenting CA anymore (not because of ML's situation), or perhaps just following the more practical threads, but admit it is hard to look away from a car accident.  I will have to figure out how to be more disciplined in this regard.

I will go back to my typical lurking.

Bill

 

Well said, the only thing wrong about this post is that your list of nominated insults is incomplete, you should be banned for this

 

Yes,like you, I still keep returning to the analogy of doctors not joining medical fora and ridiculing members. It does raise interesting questions about motivations.

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

 

 

5 hours ago, crenca said:

Hey, I just found this thread!  I was going to goad Audiophile Neuromancer with a popcorn reference, but Chris's speech had me thinking perhaps I am a better person that that...

 

NAH!  Hey Neuro, where are you?

Chris's speech had me thinking perhaps I am a better person that that...

 

perhaps you just misunderstood him

[plissken]

2 hours ago, gmgraves said:

 Touche! I hope Plissken wasn't offended by my correcting his grammar. If I made an error like that, I would certainly appreciate being told about it. Once years ago, I used the word irregardless in a sentence during a discussion. The person I was speaking with stopped me and told me that irregardless was an illiteracy because it's a double negative meaning without-without regard! I was embarrassed sure, but I never used the word again (well, not until just now, anyway ).

 

It's so rare that I'm incorrect that when something like that comes along I just shrug it off.

[mansr]

7 minutes ago, plissken said:

It's so rare that I'm incorrect

I made a mistake once. I thought I'd made mistake, but it turned out that I hadn't.

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

4 hours ago, crenca said:

In any case, you should talk with audiophile neuroscience - he will explain to you that your just complaining about the human condition and that you just have to carry on if you want to learn anything about audio...

 

I think Jabbr (?) pointed out to you, your strong suit is not analytical thinking or reasoning ( I think he said)

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

 

3 hours ago, Ralf11 said:

when I saw the shrink quote, I immediately wondered if there were different standards for engineers

 

nuts and bolts?

[plissken]

2 hours ago, gmgraves said:

 

Sure. We all make grammatical errors from time to time. After all, this is the Internet. Some are just more egregious than others.

 

One time I looked at someone and said "I like your shoes" but it came out as "go fuck your mother". Who knew?

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

Just now, plissken said:

 

One time I looked at someone and said "I like your shoes" but it came out as "go fuck your mother". Who knew?

 

Possibly a delusion on your part....it came out "you can take my test"

 

[rando]

3 hours ago, Bill Brown said:

"Maybe she was treating you"

 

Ha!  Good one.  Maybe so!

 

I have wondered, sometimes, whether I am in some kind of "Shutter Island" scenario.  Will have to ask if I am actually the patient (I am open to considering the possibilities).

 

BTW, she is treating the sickest of the sick, what would have been referred to in the olden days as the "criminally insane."  Not a whole lot of navel-gazing going on....

 

Bill

I'm glad to see you took that as conversational.  Much attention is being given to creating an intellectually open environment here.  As opposed to fractured and combative barren ground.   Suggesting that your friend and colleague might be doting on you shouldn't be upsetting or derogatory in any way.  Yet a part of me wondered if you might find something prickly in my manner or wording that decided you against this place for good given your stated reservations. 

 

Unrestricted internet commenting  is a hellhole she sounds very qualified to proffer an opinion of.    

[Speed Racer]

No self-respecting Psychiatrist or Psychologist should diagnose without having direct interaction with the subject.....

[The Computer Audiophile]

Just now, Speed Racer said:

No self-respecting Psychiatrist or Psychologist should diagnose without having direct interaction with the subject.....

The Goldwater rule - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldwater_rule