Quote:
Buddha, dude, I'd much rather visit you and hang for half a day to talk about audio and related matters. At least you're a normal person.

But "Buddha" is a fake name! How do you know he'll be at home when you knock on the door? Geeez, Ethan! Is this your attempt to wienny out of this whole affair? Much safer to visit someone who can't hear any better than you, eh?

Ethan, you and the Lesser Buddha both wish to portray me as some "desperate" soul. Get over yourself, guys! You started this thread, Ethan, all you have to do is live up to what you said you were going to do without turning this into a steel cage match. Do you have to greet Frog as if he were along lost friend? No. But there is no reason you cannot treat him as someone you might like to get to know. It's very basic, Winer, just don't start the whole affair with a chip on your shoulder. Just don't act like an eight year old. Oh, yeah, yeah, that makes me sound so "desperate", doesn't it? I don't know, Winer, I'm seeing you as maybe 5'2". You and "LB" are, as we say in Texas, "All hat and no cattle".

All you have to do is live up to your word and not turn this into a grudge match and things will be "depserately" OK. All LB has to do is stop being a world class jerk just because he feels he can.

Hi Gents,

Read these strings and see the same attitude and minipulation being pulled off by Ethan. When you visit these strings you will gain a clearer picture of his method of operating.

http://forum.stereophile.com/forum/showf...e=1&fpart=4

http://forum.stereophile.com/forum/showf...e=0&fpart=1

http://forum.stereophile.com/forum/showf...e=0&fpart=4

This last string he attacks me with false information, out of the blue on page 3. I never even posted in this string or I believe in this forum before. I saw his post somewhat late and replied on page 4.

Quote:
When you visit these strings you will gain a clearer picture of his method of operating.

Thanks, but I don't want a better understanding of Ethan.

So, which one is the Amazing Randy and which one is Fremer?

I guess by his continual insistence that he's coming to "test me", I would be Fremer.

This sounds like it's dying on the vine.

No, it isn't a grape, it isn't "dying on the vine". Ethan's killing it. Deliberately. I think it's telling that you've spoken for him here more than he's spoken for himself.

In order to satisfy your Jones for argumentativeness you have to stoop to faux outrage that I or Ethan question the veracity of the name Michigan J Frog?

I don't care if you "question the veracity of my name". I question the veracity of your name, "Buddha". Probably because I don't know too many people who named their children "Buddha". But I could not care less what your name is, real or otherwise, because for one, it has absolutely no bearing on whether or not you'll show, if I were to drive to you for a blind test. Nor has it any bearing on whether or not I'll show. What neither you or Ethan has mentioned here, is what the hell does my name have to do with him doing this test, as we had planned, when I still had the same name? If you know so much about your friend's motivations, then maybe you can tell me why he jerked me around for so long, before making this a stop-the-presses issue? Because he's keeping strangely mum about that, like as though he's waiting to see what the responses will be, before he trots out his next joke of a lie, to cover up his backpedalling. The "faux outrage" is coming from Ethan, telling us that "no way is he going to drive to Canada to meet a "Michigan J. Frog"! Both of you have said that, and both of you have yet to address the fact that Ethan didn't say he was driving all the way up to Canada to meet me, but to meet his friend in Ottawa.

How freakin' desperate are you for controversy?
I like this gem:
From Jan: "Frog's name sounds no more implausible than "E. Winer"...

You really thinks so, eh, Jan?

Yes, I really think that he thinks so, because I think so too. Guess what we all have in common here? An opinion. I'm still waiting to hear what evidence you hold that makes your "opinion" that my name is cartoony and silly-sounding, more valid than the opinion that Whiner's name is cartoony and silly-sounding? Are you familiar with Doug and Wendy Whiner, from the old SNL skit? Sounds to me like they had a child. Yes, I really think so. But that's just an opinion. Unlike you and Ethan, I'm not presenting it as fact, much less baseless, unsupported "fact".

I like this one, too:

Jan wrote: "Unless you have specific proof that Frog is not being truthful it seems at best unkind, if not downright insulting, of you to assume Frog is not who he claims to be simply by taking Ethan's word on the issue and not Frog's."

Jan, you sound pretty nuts on this issue.

Wow. Powerful rhetorical debating device, that. I'll have to remember it for the future. "You sound pretty nuts on this issue". Am I saying it right? Ok, tell me if this works:

"Well the position I bring to this debate to counter my opponent's argument is..... he's nuts. Yes folks, no need to counter his arguments and burden you all with cumbersome evidence, proof, factuality.... all you need to know is, "he's nuts". Thank you. Thank you very much."

Frankly Buddha, after hundreds of audio-related debates, I don't know why I never thought of that before. Oh yes. "Credibility and rationality". That must be it.

If you think his name really is Michigan J Frog, then that explains a lot of other things you'll buy into as well.

On the contrary, if like Ethan, you believe whatever you "think" is true, basing your beliefs on your personal prejudice and conjecture, rather than what you may know is true based on a preponderence of factual evidence, then it explains a lot about a lot of other things you'll buy into as well. Some of which are your own quite unique personal beliefs that you nevertheless continue to espouse as incontestable fact. Rest assured, that you have the firm support of a hell of a lot of pseudo- and quasi-objectivists, in this regard. Ethan Whiner topping the list. So let me use your friend Ethan's "oh-so-clever" method of "proof" that my name isn't Michigan Frog, by doing a screen capture of a whitepages.com listing (which you agree is proof since you never argued with him against it), to prove that it is:

Please stop inventing more things - the transcriptionists were enough.

Well there you go again -- that's exactly what we're talking about, isn't it? Your own personal prejudices are now being passed as "fact" by you. This is what happens when you hang around Ethan long enough; you eventually forget what a "fact" is. As I recall, you were the only one who suggested, scratch that, *claimed* that Jan was lying about the people he said he tested his audio tweaks on. No evidence necessary on your part, for making such a libelous allegation. Not very Buddha-like, I must say. Maybe that's why Jan calls you "Lil' Buddha". Now how would you like it if you were treated with the same sort of regard, for no good reason? That is, everything you said was considered a lie, to dupe people. People wouldn't even trust that the wine you serve at your show didn't have poison in it, or that you were telling the truth when you denied that it does. There's nothing "reasonable" about not having a reason to distrust someone, and doing so just for the sake of it.

You are an aumisingly and amazingly belligerent person, assuming I believe your claim that you are a person.

You see, that there is an amusingly and amazingly belligerent thing to say.

I guess you also believe that Elk is some sort of antlered denizen of the northern forest?

Strawman, and a very weak strawman at that. Elk never claimed his screen name was his real name.

I would see Ethan's main concern being "invited" to Canada for a listening session with Michigan J Frog...and there being nobody home after Ethan travels all that way.

Yeah, right. Well follow in Ethan's footsteps and don't bother to try to explain why I'm going to all this trouble to set up a test I have no intention of showing up for, and let's magically forget how you said at the beginning that you trust both me and Ethan on this thing, with no mention of my name then. Why dont you just explain to me how the heck this concern relates to my name? I'm sure the logic behind this idea is going to blow my mind, and I'm especially curious to know, because if you read my latest to Ethan, this was exactly -my- concern about him. And he claims he has a real name.

Jan, Ethan is going to be travelling a significant distance. Is it asking to much to actually know who he's visiting?

And if you're going to try to sell me Ethan's croc, you'd do well to get your facts straight first. As I already mentioned a number of times, he wasn't planning to drive up to Canada for a listening session with me; he was driving to see his friend in Ottawa, and I offered a place nearby. It's a 7 1/2 hr drive from CT to Ottawa, a 6 1/2 hr drive from CT to me, and another hour and 20 minutes to get to Ottawa from me. So Ethan's big "inconvenience" that he's whining about, this faux concern about "risking driving all that way to see a guy who has a fake-sounding name I can't believe in", is nothing more than a lousy 20 minutes added to the lengthy drive he planned! Let me say this: you sure are easily fooled, when you can allow yourself to be fooled by Ethan Whiner. Tsk, tsk and tisk. Suffice to say, if someone as slow as Ethan can fool you, there's precious little left in the world that you can't be fooled by. Including yourself.

When Ethan goes to Canada and tries to get directions if he gets lost, does he ask 411 for the number of Michigan J Frog?

What a stupid, presumptious thing to say. At what point in this discussion did I say I wouldn't give him my phone number, if he requires it? BTW, have you or Ethan ever heard of "Google Maps"? Because I'm actually listed there, and you can trace a direct route from his house in CT to mine, without having to ask the operator if she knows where I live. Now as to whether Ethan knows how to read a map on his own, that I can't say.

If they meet in person, does Ethan address him as "Mr Frog, " or just "Michigan?"

Just when I thought a question couldn't get any stupider, you prove me wrong. If someone here meets you, should they address you as "Mr. Buddha" or "Buddha"? Do you care? Because I don't.

I wonder if Ethan will have to be blinfolded the whole time - or do you think he'd be allowed to see Michigan.

From the stupid to the ridiculous. You're giving a whole new meaning to the term "blind test". I suggest you find out what it is, because it doesn't involve actually blinding the test subject. I have to say that, in case your next "rumination" is that I planned to poke his eyes out. And no you silly donkey, I was not planning on putting a blindfold on Ethan so he couldn't see me. I was however planning on wearing a Nixon mask the entire time, so he couldn't see me. But I don't see anything odd about that. Doesn't everyone wear a Nixon mask?

So, I found it reasonable for Ethan to have an expectation of corresponding in an honest manner from person to person, not person to "avatar".

Oh please. I thought you prided yourself on not being simple-minded and naive? If you do, then you'd better think harder about what you just wrote. Ethan's been corresponding with me by forum and email. There is *no* special magic "force" that eliminates dishonesty, whether he uses his real name to correspond or not, or whether I do. If he wants, he can lie through his teeth, or his avatar, about anything and everything. That's why I said in this thread, there has to be a basic presumption of faith & trust in two people coming together on something like this, otherwise, forget it. Hint: if all of a sudden you're gonna get stupid and paranoid about the other guy's name with no relevant reason, you don't have that. If you think there is such a special magic force behind a special magic name, I'd love to see your argument for it. I can argue that every time I correspond with Ethan, I'm corresponding with his "avatar". Only I'm not deluded enough to think I'm actually corresponding with an "avatar". I have this crazy belief that there's an actual person who typed out the words I'm responding to, not a gif image. Call it faith. If you choose to inhabit Ethan's world, then your idea of what's "reasonable" is automatically invalidated.

After your face turns less red, go and look at the first posts about Michigan's name and find the insults.

Shouldn't be too hard. Ethan wrote: "The frog still has not told me his name."

A long time ago, during his previous round of obsessions with my name, I already told him that he knew my name, meaning its at the top of all my posts. I guess you shouldn't expect a 6w bulb to get that, and of course he responded with "Huh? Really?". So since he decided to come up with yet more endless obsessing about my name, I made it more clearer in this thread, telling him specifically where on the page to find my name. Hoping that with a compass and an 8 yr old boy scout to help him, he'd be able to find my name, and maybe shut up about it already so we could progress in the conversation and stick to what matters. So did he shut up about it? Obviously not. Nor would he debate me on the issue months ago, when I gave him an open opportunity. Like you, he simply believes whatever he "feels" to be true, to be true. Without even considering that before you make a personal accusation against someone on a discussion forum, stating that they are lying about themselves, you'd better have some very good evidence to back yourself up on that. But without ever even asking me if MJ Frog was my real name, Ethan "ASSumed" it wasn't, even going so far as to insist that it isn't my name. Like as if he would know! Walla, there's your insult. If I attack Ethan, I attack him on his -beliefs-. I never started arrogantly questioning his name, of all things! Stating that he's a "troll" hiding behind a fake name, which is another one of his unprovoked insults to me, when I can not know that.

I wonder if Ethan will have to be blinfolded the whole time - or do you think he'd be allowed to see Michigan.

Interesting you should say that (I don't mean to suggest you made a rational statement, but an indirectly relevant one). Indirectly, because I'll tell you now, I was planning on taking a photo of us while he was there. Not because he's so photogenic, but as evidence for in case he choked on the tests, and then to save face, lied about ever being there. I knew he was a dishonest person, and tried to do everything I could think of to avoid him lying about anything, but if he had no plans of even showing up, that's not something I could protect myself against. If he were to have claimed he did show up and I was never there, the absence of a photo would certainly not be any proof that he's lying! If I asked him to describe the house and I prove that he got it wrong by posting pics, he could simply say I gave him the wrong address. Again, that's precisely what made me say earlier that you can't do this, unless you have a basic mutual understanding of trust.

That's why I tried to keep things on a friendly level from the beginning. I knew no matter how I did on the tests, that he wasn't going to win (that I would do better than him). Although I initially assumed he was sincere about showing up, what I didn't know about Ethan, is if he was low and desparate enough to lie about not winning afterward. I also couldn't figure out a good way to prove decisively how the tests came out (to people in a remote location), in case he was planning to lie about that too. It would have basically been his word against mine, or the word of him and his friend against me and mine. I also didn't want to give him a reason to back out, and figured that if he tried to, he would use the issue of trust as his tool of manipulation. Even I didn't guess he was empty-headed enough to think of no better excuse than my name, as a reason to back out!

"Would you travel to Canada to visit a fellow board member, and all you'd be allowed to know in advance is his board name?"

Geez, where are you pulling this out, as if I need to ask? If that's all he were allowed to know in advance, then how the hell would he get to me in the first place?? Before reading all of these stupid baseless presumptions that you created out of whole cloth, I was under the impression that you were smarter than this. Guess that was a wrongful presumption on my part.

LOL, no shit. Jan and the frog have wasted thousands of words ranting about, well, I have no idea! Their main motive is to make trouble and toss insults. At this point I don't even read their posts anymore. I mean, they write 1,000 words at a time each to basically say "Ethan is an asshole."

So you're saying these responses are too long for you, you get confused, you can only keep up with really short messages. Well, at least that's somewhat plausible, judging by your responses. But are you sure it wasn't "millions and billions of words" we're talking about? Maybe you got tired and lost count after carefully going through 50,000 of them? Now after all this effort and millions and billions of words of apparently being called an "asshole" in a roundabout way, it never occurred to you that maybe this is all because you are an asshole? Then this means you're slower than anyone, even I, could have imagined. So if all that isn't enough, what exactly would it take for you to realize that you're an asshole? And once you do finally realize that, what would it take for you to actually stop being such an asshole, instead of just getting defensive and offensive, whenever you are rightfully criticized for your assholish behaviour? FACT: Through 6 pages and as many messages from you in this thread, which -you- started to discuss this test with me, you wrote not a single word to me. Nor did you try to discuss this test in email either. All you did in this thread was make dull jokes, or cowardly argue to others, while going well out of your way to avoid me. "Playing to an audience" as you always do. Thus ignoring my increasingly frustrating efforts to get you to respond to me and finalize the discussion of our test, before you have me commit the rest of my life to this thread, arguing about this test. So in case you're wondering why people call you an asshole, start there.

And if you're still wondering what an asshole is Ethan, here's another clue: All you've been doing since day one of this thing is lying to me about your true motivations, and jerking me around. Doing your damndest to tick me off, so that either you or I would then declare there's too much animosity to continue it. Well, that plan worked, because I'm certainly not going to invite a lying, willfully annoying asshole into my house for a "friendly" test challenge. So relax, wipe the sweat off your brow, because I'm officially declaring this thing dead now, since I see you don't even have the courage or honesty to do that much. Happy, that you got your desired outcome? (Knowing it was the best thing you could hope for, since you yourself knew there was no way on God's green earth that you would ever beat me in a listening test challenge). Now here's where the BS Express ends, because I've had my fill of your shenanigans....

I know very well that you had no intention of ever meeting this challenge, much as you tried to convince others that you did, because I had my suspicions about you from the beginning. With every step, you proved me right all along. Why do you think I insisted we discuss the details in email? Besides the fact that I knew if it was debated on the forum, you would at some point begin grandstanding your case for sympathizers and apologists (which is -exactly- what you did), I suspected your only reason for agreeing to my challenge was to pursue this hard on you had for my so-called "identity". You didn't want to challenge me to a "test", you just wanted to know "who I was", and saw this challenge as your opportunity to do so. Unlike anyone else here, you were so neurotically obsessive about my identity as soon as I stepped on board to these forums, you insisted that I prove my identity to you, pouting like a little child when I wouldn't, and going into a fit where you refused to say anything to me if I wouldn't "reveal" my identity to you (whatever that meant...). At the time, I offered to set you aside and debate you on your stupid, baseless presumptions about my identity, but you marvelously chickened out of that as well. (Hey, at least you're consistent. You'll only enter a debate or challenge you think you'll win, and you lose those too anyway). Then you violated your own silly "I'm not talking to frogs" policy and continued responding to me, despite the fact that I did not change my name or humour your identity obsession. And let me remind you btw, you never proved to me that you are who you say you are, after I very clearly asked you to.

Later, when you vociferously agreed to this test challenge (which was just you grandstanding again for the "audience"), what was the first thing you wanted to know, hmm? Was it the format or methodology of the test? Who or what would be involved? How to design it so that it was cheat-proof, despite the conductor being a friend of mine? No, and you certainly weren't interested in discussing that last aspect. You simply wanted to know where I live. Before you had even discussed with me what kind of a test I was talking about and whether you were okay with it, before we had even come close to agreeing that we were both okay with what was being proposed, your only concern was where in Canada do I live. Talk about putting the cart before the horse, I found that odd. Particuarly when in the beginning, you were pretty much okay with anything I proposed. Test if we could hear the fart of a male african bee? "Sure, no problem", says Ethan. "Naw, says The Frog. I think I'd like to test if we can hear the sound of a crepe suzette with field berries, sitting on fine bone china". "Sure, why not, says Ethan. I'm up to it". Ethan doesn't have a problem with any of my tests, and if I can hear it, he's just as sure that he can hear it, why not. Or perhaps it's that Ethan's too busy talking about the personal details of my identity, to worry too much about the details of the test, and whether he'll pass it or not. Guess this explains why you didn't write a single word to me in this thread!

It also explains this: At the beginning of this thread, Ethan wrote: "The biggest obstacle I see is collusion between The Frog and his friend's at whose home we'd meet." An obstacle I addressed, and which you ignored. And by the end of this thread, somehow, the name "The Frog" then became the "biggest obstacle" for Ethan. After I told you that I would hold the test at a friend's house, who's much closer to your friend whom you'd be driving to, and you having no objection to this in email or on the group, you (only later) complained about that, saying you would rather hold it at my place. Now that I found really odd, particularly since you never bothered to give me a reason why (I mean other than the stupid lying reason you gave, that my place "wasn't that much farther away" from Ottawa). Which even if it was 7 minutes farther, it made no sense to insist on it being held at my place as a condition of your involvement. But if your only intention with this challenge was to "discover my identity, oooh!", which you've been pathetically obsessing over for months, then it would make perfect sense. If you only showed up at my friend's place, then you wouldn't get my address, and you wouldn't be able to look it up later.

It also occured to me that if you're going to lie about my name being an insurmountable issue all of a sudden, what else are you going to lie about? Since the only considerable thing you wish to discuss in this thread revolves around the issue of my identity, once you get my address and all that, you probably had no intention of going any further with this. That is to say, it seems unlikely that you were ever planning to bother to make that detour, and show up. I'm sure you were just going to say that you did, but that I wasn't even there. Or worse, that someone else was at that address, and they knew nothing about any of this! And if I came back and said you never showed up, well it'd be your word against mine, wouldn't it? So those who believe or disbelieve me (or you), are inevitably going to be those who's audio beliefs are more aligned with either of us.

After carefully avoiding responding to my proposal to you, days later you give the excuse that you're too busy to continue the discussion and will do so later. But as I saw afterward, you continued to post regularly to the other forums, while ignoring this thread. Hoping it will die on its own if you pretend it never was. Then after 2 more weeks of continuing to completely ignore my test proposal in this thread, I see you only come back in this thread when Buddha starts reviving it, to ask you what's happening. So that means you were constantly checking it for signs of life, and you were hoping we'd all forget about you, I guess, right? Since you aren't honest enough to just say you were backing out of it and let it die like that, you had to find a way to save face, after seeing that Buddha was still interested in seeing an outcome. You were obviously hoping that this nightmare of agreeing to challenge me and putting your reputation of imaginary listening skills on the line might be over and done with. Don't hold it against him. I'm sure that if Buddha knew you better, that you really didn't want to go through with it, he would have refrained from posting. So now thanks to Buddha (everybody: "thanks, Bhudda!"), you gotta find a way to wriggle out of this thing.

That's when you pull out your "killer tactic" (gotta love that Ethanistic intellect). Which is: make an issue about my name, even though its still the same name it was at the start of this, and then stop even pretending to finish the so-called "discussion" of our test (you know, the one you hardly ever discussed with anyone, and wouldn't discuss with me). To get the sympathy vote, start feigning concern in a righteous tone, saying that you won't "travel all the way to Canada to see me", without "knowing my name".Even though you never even bothered to actually offer any incontrovertible evidence for your belief that my name isn't my name. Then hope for all you're worth, that like you, others also forget that you said you were coming to Canada to see your friend, and I would just be a stop on the way over. Don't even bother telling anyone what my name has to do with the price of tea in China all of a sudden, and how it somehow prevents you from continuing to finalize the discussion. Not important, so long as it creates the necessary face-saving distraction.

One problem with your sorry tactic, one among many, is that I (once again) offered to go ahead and debate both you and Buddha on the issue of my name, in a seperate thread. In fact, I believe my words to Buddha was that I would "hand your ass over to you on a silver platter", if you ever showed the courage to debate me on your unfounded claim regarding my name. Surprise, surprise, you never did. You pretended you never read that of course, because doing so, would mean you'd have to continue this thread, and maybe finalize this discussion one of these blue moons. Which is the last thing you wanted to do. Another problem is, for the months you've been Wining about it, you never once established or proved that "Michigan J. Frog" isn't my name (don't worry, I'm giving you every chance to make up for that oversight in my next message!). Or that your belief that it is, isn't simply yet another one of your seemingly endless ignorant delusions about reality and life in this world. Or that it isn't the excuse you're using to back out of a challenge that you made with your mouth, before your brain could catch up. Not any more than you established the silly sounding "Ethan Winer" is really your name. (Even if it says so on your birth certificate. Ever consider that in naming you, your parents knew that "Whiner" would be perfect? Maybe all this time, they pretended that was the family name, but it isn't, and they actually have a different last name, and its only the name they gave you!. If I were you, I'd ask to see their birth certificate). To my surprise, Buddha buys this lame ruse like its next year's fashion statement, and as you were hoping, debates the issue for you, while you purposefully maintain a low profile in this thread, and continue your usual prolific posting habits in the other threads (the less said, the better the chance of you not stuffing your foot in your mouth again, right? Good thinking!).

Let Buddha fight it out with Jan while continuing to pretend you never saw any of my posts in this thread. Brilliant!
Above all, don't volunteer any overt suggestions to me, that might end the false controversy you suddenly created over my name, such as making me show you I.D. when you come, as a condition of the test. Because the last thing you want to do, is resolve the controversy, and heaven forbid, actually have to take the test after that! Don't on your own bring up the fact that before this, you were perfectly okay going to a guy named "DUP's" house, without knowing or having proven who he was. Just as you would be, going to a demo show run by a guy named "Buddha", without asking that he send you his passport for inspection, before you even think of meeting him. Still, I was sincere when I told Buddha at the beginning of this that I had respect for you (for even attempting to pit your imaginary perceived expert skills against my listening skills, which unlike you, I acquired by doing actual listening. Not sitting around in a room inventing new ways of propping up my ego). Metaphorically speaking, it would be like Tyson going into the ring with a ficus plant (you're the ficus plant). I couldn't help but admire that kind of moxy, and scientific interest. (Although I now know for certain it wasn't sincere on your part). And obviously, I have absolutely no respect for you now, I won't even pretend to do so, and at this point after all the dumb and "assholish" things you've said and done (and yes, that includes your hypocrisy about insulting people), I don't see that changing in either of our lifetimes.

As for the test, guess what? I won by default. If you had a more honorable reason for backing out, like say, you were trying to use your ears as pencil sharpeners and now you can't hear so well, it might be different. Or even if you said "Look, I had another think about this after I sobered up and no, I think I'm just going to make myself look worse and less credible, were that possible, if I take you up on your challenge to test my listening skills against yours. So I'm sorry but I'm gonna have to decline". I would have respected that, and I would have declared the contest null and void, no winner, no loser. Heck, just saying you lost interest, would have been more acceptable and understandable, than the pathetic face-saving lie you tried to pull off about how you suddenly realized my name is an impediment to a blind listening test (even though I wasn't stopping you from bringing over a 4th party). But no, instead of being honest here with all of us, you tell me "I don't think your name is real, and even though I realize I have offered no proof of that other than my usual all-encompassing stupid blind unfounded prejudices that I am most known for around these parts, and even though you sound like you went to a lot of trouble to come up with a cheatproof test, I'm going to pretend that your name makes it impossible for me to go through with this. " Well guess what again? You're the loser. And the next time you talk about wanting proof for an audio phenomenon you understand and know nothing about, or your claim that if you can't hear an audio device it means it isn't doing anything, because you have "expert professional listening skills" supposedly better than most others, you weaselling out of our test challenge will continue to stand as proof enough of your hypocrisy and the emptiness of your words.

For Jan to imply I'm no more plausible that the cartoon frog shows just how desperate he is to disagree only to disagree.

Yeah, keep talking about "plausibility" like it means something to you. Now, let's look at your "plausibility", Mr. Whiner. After weeks of wasting mine and everyone's time on this test challenge, pretending you were negotiating in good faith, you suddenly realize my name is similar to a cartoon character's (going to the trouble to find and post 3 links to prove it!!). And its enough reason for you to stop the discussion dead in its tracks, with the unsaid implication that you can't trust me on the basis of your completely unfounded assumption that my name isn't my own, without even stating what this has to do with our test or how it would affect it. Particularly when you never made an issue of my name before while you were pretending to be all for this test, and particularly when you ignored my proposal which shows that your silly name or mine would have no direct or indirect effect on the test. That shows how "desperate" you are to chicken out of this challenge. So don't take your coward's way out of attacking Jan here over the issue of my name, while you continue to show your complete lack of courage in responding directly to my challenge in this thread to debate you over my name. You want to take someone on, take me on. Because like all cowards, you will only come out to attack whomever you see as your weakest opponent, and hide behind whomever you see as your ally. You said both of our posts were "thousands of words" too long for you, so even that isn't another pathetic excuse you can cough up to ignore all of my responses, and remain disingenuous over your actions.

If I may be permitted to "do an Ethan" for a bit, and ignore my subject while I address other readers, I'd like to detail my own motivations for this. (For why, despite my initial concerns over his sincerity and the fact that he was only giving me less and less reasons to trust him, I still tried to get this to happen). I saw this opportunity to meet Ethan head-on in an audio duel (with a notion to test the type of audio products he has endlessly insulted), as a chance to actually do something to progress these endless ob v sub debates that rule these forums. Not just recycling the same polemics, but something more meaningful, that might shed some light on what it means to be an ob or sub, what is and isn't possible in audio. But no, once again, that doesn't look like its gonna happen. It's back to the same grind, the same groundless prejudices that govern audio dogmatists, the same pretense that we're all equally interested in good sound, that we all know what that is as it pertains to reproduced music, that we are all right in our beliefs, and unlikely to be wrong. While all of us remain divided among the usual party lines (ie. it appears that whether Ethan is "obviously lying, and with all the cunning finesse of a 2-year old who got his hand caught in the cookie jar, by insisting on stopping the discussions here because of my name, depends entirely on whether you believe in 'controversial tweaks' or are considered an audio "rationalist"). No one changing their mind in any significant way. For me, that's boring, and getting "boringer".

Well, that's all folks. The great subjectivist vs. narrow-minded hypocrite test challenge is officially dead, because Ethan welched on the challenge. He wants us all to believe his "real reason", is because he suddenly realized at the end of this thread, after several weeks of stalling the discussion and having it go nowhwere, that my name reminds him of a cartoon frog. So let's all pretend we're 7 yr old gradeschoolers and believe that, just so widdle E. can feel better about himself. Even though he provides no logical "adult" reason why this is any more relevant than jelly-filled cookies, the logic were now supposed to buy is "anyone knows you can't have an audio test with a cartoon frog"! Let's also all continue to ignore the fact that I submitted a test design proposal at the beginning of this thread, just as Ethan and everyone has already been doing. A brilliant one if I must say so myself, because my test proposal made it impossible to cheat. Which immediately made the issue of whether Ethan trusts me or I trust Ethan, along with which of us has the more "cartoony" name, quite irrelevant. Still, we don't want to talk about that, no, or about Ethan ignoring that propsal. Instead, we should do what Ethan wants us to do, divert the entire discussion to the subject of my name. Bravo, Ethan, you won!(the diversionary tactic).

It is my feeling from all the evidence presented, that he only went into this to get personal information from me, and likely had no intention of actually showing up. No doubt, knowing Mr. Whiner, he still thinks I'm a rival acoustic panel salesman, hiding my "true acoustic panel salesman identity" from him! So I guess Ethan took us all for a ride, and I'm sorry about that, because even as I was liking and trusting Ethan less and less (and it's not like I started off liking or trusting him that much to begin with), I really wanted this to happen. If he hadn't thought of making an issue of my name, believe me, it would have been something else. He already had 3 other equally silly and irrelevant issues lined up, before he decided the "name issue" was going to be the winner, the one he hoped would kill the deal. (One of which included my friend's house was no longer good enough for him, even though he accepted this in email. He decided he wanted to do it at mine). I'm afraid science wasn't served today, either.

- The Frog

"I'm sick and tired of hearing things
from uptight, short-sighted, narrow-minded hypocrites
all I want is the truth
just gimme some truth

I've had enough of reading things
by neurotic, psychotic, pig-headed statisticians
all I want is the truth
just gimme some truth

no short haired yellow-bellied son of Tricky Dicky's
gonna Mother Hubbard soft-soap me
with just a pocket full of soap...."

- "Gimme me some truth"
+ John Lennon

Quote:
I guess you also believe that Elk is some sort of antlered denizen of the northern forest?

Strawman, and a very weak strawman at that. Elk never claimed his screen name was his real name.

Only my initials.

But I like the image - as long as he also has good ears, an intelligent expression, and likes both Frogs and Buddhas just fine.

Ethan: So like this, you want to insult me about my name, and pretend my name is the reason you weaseled out of our challenge, but at the same time, both you and Buddha who took issue with my name being my name, have avoided my secondary challenge to debate me on the issue. That would be twice you avoided such a debate, in your case. Have you ever heard of the expression "having the courage of your convictions", Ethan? I'm guessing not. Because if you have, it would mean not making "hit and run" accusations against me as you've done, without having the courage to back up your own words. This is why everything you say here is meaningless, and not to be taken seriously.

Given your cemented reputation for avoiding difficult debates that you haven't the wherewithal to win, I'm not holding my breath. Given your subtle but transparent backpedalling out of our blind test challenge, quite the opposite loud braying you made going in, I can understand you wanting to spare yourself further embarassment. But since you've already killed any possibility to finalize that challenge, and since you insist on continuing to insult me over my name, this post will mark the official start of my debate with you on the issue. I warn you, that I'll be using some very scary elements to advance my point, such as logic, reason, and evidence. I know they must frighten you to death, since you avoid them at all cost in your "debates". Oh, and hang on to your ass.

Unlike the frog I'm a very public person. I have a web site that lists my address and phone number which is easily verified via WhoIs. Photos of my home, my wife, myself, and even my cat are all over both of my web sites.

Yah, so? Did you have a point, or do you insist that all your arguments be "debate by implication"? That you don't value your privacy is not at all surprising to me, since you're a dealer. It simply means you value your money more than your privacy. The fact that you're a dealer wouldn't normally be an issue, except you insist on advertising that fact here. I mean literally advertising that fact with every post you make, in the hopes of generating sales. (Most audio discussion forums have a policy against advertising in your posts, so I find it odd that this one doesn't). So if you advertise that you're a dealer, you're hardly going to get anywhere trying to conceal your name and address. If you think you have a point to make, next time, make it a meaningful one.

For Jan to imply I'm no more plausible that the cartoon frog shows just how desperate he is to disagree only to disagree.

Oh how brilliant. You regurgitated the very same argument Buddha made to Jan, thereby cleverly avoiding having to tax your faculties and think once again. Of course, that just means your argument is just as weak and meaningless as Buddha's. Whether a "Whiner" is more "plausible" than a "Frog" is a matter of opinion. Not fact. Who cares about your opinions, they're never based on anything rational anyway. What I care about is: where's your facts to support your contention that I'm a "cartoon frog"? I've been waiting for that ever since I came here, and you started whining and insulting me about my name. I certainly hope you're not deluded enough to think that making false accusations against someone and then running away from your opponent when he comes back at you, thus refusing to provide evidence to support your disparaging attacks, somehow makes you appear "plausible"?

Because you've been doing this all over Stereophile. Insulting people, twisting their words around, making false accusations, constantly avoiding refutations against you, and any meaningful response. Sasaudio gave 3 examples of such behaviour from you in this thread, and I've personally lost count of how many times I've seen you "hit and run" people like this. At 50. Maybe you're under the mistaken impression that if you avoid refutation of someone's argument, or hand in pathetic excuses as to why you're avoiding it (ie. "long posts hurt my brain"), it won't look like you've lost. Keep dreaming.

Best advice I can offer: I strongly suggest you bring Buddha wherever you go, to help try to put a good spin on your failing performance. As the Karl Rove to your Bush, he'll make sure you look good, or die trying....

How To Appear To Win An Argument
by
Ethan Whiner & Buddha

Buddha: "Sure this guy claims to know more than Ethan about proton fragments, but I'm not going to bother to follow his so-called "evidence" links. I mean really, how can anyone take him seriously, or believe anything he says, when his name is the very same as a well known serial killer?!

Opponent: Uh... Excuse me, what does his name have to do with....

Buddha: "Serial Killer!!"

Ethan: "How can I trust someone who insists his real name is that of a serial killer??"

Buddha: "Serial Killer!!"

How can I trust someone who insists his real name is that of a cartoon character?
Am I the only one here who smells a rat, er, frog?

Hahahahaha! Burp. You so fonny, Meestah Whinah!

Let me know when you're ready to come clean.

Yeah. And let me know when you're ready to crawl out from under the bed, hoping I would just disappear, and not notice you hiding from me. I guess if you pretend it never happened, you can also pretend that you haven't chickened out of our test challenge because you're afraid of how badly you would lose, and what it would mean for the reputation you think you have, but for an entirely "different" reason. You sure did a good job of pretending this never happened, though. I mean, in a thread that you started, to discuss our test, with my name at the top of it, you avoided writing a single word to me in 6 pages spanning several weeks! That must be a record in the "run and hide" tactic for you. Then you abandoned it for 2 weeks, while you took the time to think of a good reason to tell everyone why you abandoned it. Let me know when you're ready to come out.

Of course, the answer to your fake question of "how can you trust someone who's real name is that of a cartoon character", is written in the proposal I wrote in this thread. You know, the one you worked so hard to ignore, the one that made it impossible for either of us to cheat on the test. I could come back at you with "How can you trust someone who looks and acts like a cartoon character, and insults the intelligence of most of us, by claiming that he can no longer go ahead with the challenge he started out trumpeting, on the basis that the opponent's name is similar to that of a cartoon character?" The answer of course, is, you can't. And you're not smelling a "rat", or a "frog", you're smelling a weasel. A lying weasel, who feels he has to come up with pathetic excuses like the above, to save face for a challenge he had no sincere intention of going through with in the first place.

Yep, just as expected:

[snip Ethan's scan of Canada411 page]

I see. So with this, you're saying you have all this time to search for and post web links here on my cartoon namesake, to do listing analyses on my name, and set up screen captures and post the screen captures on your web site, but you don't have any time to respond to the test proposal I made in this thread weeks ago, that would make your issues of trust (assuming this is your point about my name) redundant? Well that says it all about your elemental dishonesty, doesn't it. Says a lot about how great a thinker you are, too. Just as Buddha's recent statements here about how I would need to throw a bag over your head, and how I'm not prepared to give you information you need to get to my place says a lot about how he doesn't think, and (mis)perceives reality. Both of you guys are two peas in the same pod here. Your gross misinterpretations of reality, because you choose to base your idea of so-called "truth" entirely on your prejudices, biases and baseless conjecture, explains everything about your relative approaches to audio. You don't have a separate mind for dealing with people as you do with audio. What you "think" you understand about audio tweaks isn't based on facts, merely your infinite ignorance, which ends up being whatever you invented that makes you feel you've understood it. Likewise, what you think and understand about people, is also whatever you've pulled out of your rear end. With the help of Canada411.

Allow me to demonstrate what I'm saying about your ignorance, prejudice, contempt for facts, extremely limited cognitive skills etc., with colorful pictures. This way you and Buddha would have a better chance to understand. Here is one question that a person of normal intelligence would ask, and the question you didn't ask yourself, before you searched Canada411 for my name: Where in these thousands of words did I say I permanently live in Canada? Answer? Nowhere. "I'm in Canada" could mean a lot of things. In my case, it means I'm here for the summer. Before you went off to do a background check on me, if you'd have asked me if I could be expected to be found in Canada411, I would have told you not to waste your time. Again, that would require a person of normal intelligence to ask the question. Not someone who's entire understanding of the world is based on whatever fantasies he happens to dream up at the moment. Since you like looking through listings, try this: Search for Canada's prime minister in Canda411. You won't find him. I guess that's proof that he doesn't exist. Also, following your line of thinking, it occurs to me that Ive never seen Stephen Harper. I guess that's further proof he doesn't exist. No point in going to meet him then.

Let me know when you're ready to come clean.

And let me know when you grow a brain, and stop making unfounded accusations and insulting people over their names. The following illustrates why you're a bad example to children, why you will never posess anything greater than your dumb prejudices, and why anyone who follows you (did someone say "Buddha"?) is a fool. Had you looked in whitepages.com, you'd have found this.

BTW, I expect an apology after this. But even so, I will never let a paranoid nutcase like you anywhere near my home. No matter what your real name is.

How can I trust someone who insists his real name is that of a cartoon character?

Ah yes, the old fallacy of distraction. That means your argument is based on a false premise, Whiner. I never said, much less "insisted", that my name is based on that of a cartoon character. You are the one who did. If you're referring to the Warner Bros. (tm) "Michigan J. Frog" (tm) character, well, our names are not the same. The character's name is "Michigan JAY Frog". My middle name is "Michigan Jackson Frog". Its not at all the same name. As anyone can see, only the first and last parts are similar.

The name "Yogi Berra" sounds a lot like a cartoon character too. Guess what? Millions of baseball fans trusted him to hit a home run, you freak. Here's some more people you wouldn't trust, but nevertheless, they are real people with real names. Well, more real than you or yours, anyway. They are all listed in the biggest phone directory in the country, whitepages.com, if anyone wishes to confirm....

First, let me introduce you to my friend, Mark "Woody" Woodpecker. He swears that the cartoon bird was named after him, and not the other way 'round, but I haven't confirmed:

My other friend, Wiley Coyote. He doesn't talk much, but he makes a mean ginseng floral tea:

You've probably heard of my good friend, Bugs. He's the one who got me the job at WB:

And there's his daffy friend, Daffy:

Every heard of The 3 Little Pigs? Well, they're real too. And while they don't live together any longer (too "gay" they said), they each live in a real strong house. Well, condos, actually, IIRC:

Ever heard of "The Flintstones"? Well, they're real too. Here's Fred's address:

And of course his wife (they're divorced now, you may be sorry to hear):

Let's not forget his friend Barney Rubble:

If you're familiar with The Flintstones, then you should be familiar with their futuristic counterparts, The Jetsons. Meet George Jetson:

And his wife Jane (lot of people don't know this, but there's a high incidence of divorce among cartoon characters. It's the stress of animation, as I understand it. It's not easy to stand and pose for 24 cells per second).

Familiar with Mr. Magoo? You should be. He's nearly as blind as you.:

I never liked these guys (being rivals and all), but anyway, maybe that rat you smelled was this mouse:

And here's where his ducky friend lives (no relation to Daffy):

Everyone knows Charlie Brown is a cartoon character. And yet whitepages.com says there are over 300 Charlie Brown's in the US alone. You must be really confused by now, Ethan. Go lie down.:

Everyone knows Bart Simpson is a cartoon character that lives in Springfield. And Springfield is in Illinois. Well here you go, Bart Simpson, who lives in Illinois. Oh, but not Springfield. I guess he's grown up now and moved out on his own:

Even Betty Boop is alive and well and living in Eureka Springs. I wonder how old she must be now?:

The final cartoon character of the lot. You'll probably recognize this name:

So. What have we learned today? Ethan makes a lot of stupid assumptions and disparaging accusations without offering or looking for a shred of evidence? Ethan never takes his foot out of his mouth? Ethan is made up of paranoia and prejudice, and is a namist. What's a "namist"? That's like a racist, except instead of being about race, the person is an ignorant bigot when it comes to people's names. It's the last "socially accepted" prejudice we have yet to deal with. I hope that the Ethans of the world start thinking about that today; that it is NOT acceptable to be hateful, intolerant, prejudiced or bigoted towards others because of their name, race, creed, religion, or political affiliation. "Toonies" (people who's names are similar to that of cartoon characters, as exemplified above), get this a lot, and we are not going to continue to tolerate this.

Re: Ethan: This whole thing stinks more and more every time I read one of your posts. [snip] Just what do you imagine will happen that has you backstepping all the way out the door? I wouldn't want you anywhere near my place if this is the attitude you are bringing with you. If you are so afraid Frog will take advantage of you, call this off now and stop your paranoid little game. Since you have turned this into a test of superiors, Frog, having broken your nerve, will win and you can shut up.

Just wish to confirm that your post, and this par. particularly, speaks quite well about how I feel about the whole thing. While completely ignoring the actual test design proposal I made, Ethan comes up with new-found "obstacles" 2 weeks later. One of where he decides to make an issue of my name, providing no basis for which to do so. As though this claim were anything new or relevant. Buddha picks up the argument for Ethan and promotes it, so Ethan runs with it, and makes further insinuations about my name. But nowhere does he specify how or even if my name would somehow directly affect the test. Hey, who needs "logic" when you're Ethan Whiner? So he leaves us to imagine what he is implying by this "whine". What was supposed to be an informal, friendly 'scientificist' endeavour, he turned into a test of superiors with his big-mouthed yapping about how the loser should "shut up forever", or some chest-beating nonsense like that. I predicted it would turn into this, which is the main reason why I wanted to take our discussion to email and keep it there, and just get the damn thing over with quickly as possible, without egos getting involved. I even said as much at the time. But he insisted otherwise, and I didn't want to be too difficult at the very onset, and give him a reason to kill the deal. And you're absolutely right. I had had enough of his BS tactics at some point, to realize that I wouldn't want him near my place with that insulting attitude of his. Assuming he ever had any intention of showing up.

Re: Buddha: You have become a cartoon character in that regard. Fortunately for you that will keep Ethan from your door.

LOL! (I really did laugh out loud here!)

I can see where you're going with this, you've turned the leaf into a very, very tiny but highly effective Hemholtz resonator just to screw with Winer. Good job!

No, I think you're thinking of Ethan's head. If you blow against his ears at the correct angle, you've already got the beginnings of a good jug band. Leaves, like most objects, have a polarity, and our senses are sensitive to it. Little known fact. Sorry, *extremely* little known fact. Although I was compelled to accept the concerns, I have to say that on a personal level, I was insulted by the very idea of Ethan deciding to bring in a 4th party and all these other concerns that were expressed, relating to me cheating. Because I know that I don't need to tricks or deceit to screw with Winer. While I don't claim to be superhuman, I have enough confidence in my abilities to go up against any audiophile on a listening test. That would certainly include someone who's still not sure whether he can hear cables or not, 35 years after they were discovered to have a "sound".

If anything, I was worried that Ethan would have a disadvantage against me, because he'd be listening to products he never heard (and doesn't believe in), on a system he's not familiar with. I don't think it would be an issue for me, but I figured it could be for him. That's why I made sure to mention that he could listen to either for as long as he wanted, before the test. Oddly, he said nothing about that, so wasn't at all concerned about it. Even more odd that he didn't complain about the fact that I said our test would basically be run on an overgrown transistor radio (I wasn't serious, though! I had planned to let him know when he came, that it was going to be run on a high end system). In fact, if you look at all that he wrote, he had precious little to say about the test in general, no matter what I proposed. If he ever had anything to say about the test itself, it certainly wasn't to me, or in response to anything I had proposed. So looking back at what I proposed and the absence of a response from him to it (implying that he accepts my proposal), it seems this was either someone with an overabundance of confidence in his abilities, or someone who did not have a sincere intention in his body, in regard to this challenge. Well, people can decide for themselves what Ethan's true intentions were, as I already have.

I'm bummed, I was hoping this would happen.

Ethan, aren't you intrigued by Frog's experiences?

If I was close, I'd be dying to go.

(Side note: That listing showing Michigan Frog is a United States listing.)

Michigan, before Jan and I started sharing our love, I was simply agreeing that it would be fair of Ethan to be hesitant to undertake all this without sufficient contact information.

As you mention, these internet 'names' are avatars. If you were coming to see me, I'd freely hand out my real name, address, and phone; not simply continue to insist that my name was buddha.

Ethan's portrayal of the events made it sound like he was put off by a perceived lack of information - which makes sense to me, and seemed an easily solved dilemma.

As to Jan being nuts, I'll leave it to the readers of the thread to weigh his assertion that the odds of your actual name being Michigan J Frog are the same as Ethan Winer being Ethan's actual name.

Michigan and Ethan, if you are going to be within an acceptable distance, please do go for this. It's a great chance for some cross pollination!

Mr. Frog, if you ever venture near Northen California or Las Vegas, I'd be more than happy to try this experiment.

Quote:

Quote:
LOL, yet again almost seven thousand words that say nothing more than "Ethan is an asshole." I love this quote from BillB

I mean the ones that really get their knickers in a twist and spew negativity - usually in conjunction with overly long posts. The long posts are helpful in one way though - it gives me fair warning to just skip over their stuff.

ADD is an attention span that's terrible to loose. And I'm still bowled over that you counted the words, Winer, just to find out what we all already knew.

Quote:
As to Jan being nuts, I'll leave it to the readers of the thread to weigh his assertion that the odds of your actual name being Michigan J Frog are the same as Ethan Winer being Ethan's actual name.

As to Lil'Buddha being friggin' bipolar, there's no doubt. How much were you willing to bet on Frog's name being real?

Quote:
Michigan and Ethan, if you are going to be within an acceptable distance, please do go for this. It's a great chance for some cross pollination!

I'd like to second this. Initially, it seemed that this was something you guys wanted to do. If so, please go for it. You might have fun.

As it is now, the thread is going nowhere. If you have finally changed your minds about doing the listening tests, then let's just move on to other things.

Thanks.

LOL, yet again almost seven thousand words that say nothing more than "Ethan is an asshole."

If the shoe fits, wear it. The sooner you accept the fact, the sooner you can do something about it. For people coming in late, let's recap why in brief:

a) Throughout your participation in this entire thread, you completely ignored the test proposal I carefully worked out, to both ensure neither of us could cheat if we wanted to, and that you or your supporters couldn't start accusing me after the test of rigging it. That's the first and last sign of a true asshole, who strung me and many people along in agreeing to a test he had absolutely no intention of ever showing up for, let alone negotiating in good faith.

b) After 7 pages, you still haven't written a single direct word to me in this thread, and it looks like you never will. This is the thread which you insisted on starting, to finalize the details of the test we were discussing in email. In it, all you did was "pander to an audience", and that's still all you're trying to do, instead of communicating with me. For this reason, I wouldn't recommend anyone enter into a test challenge with you, lest they experience the sort of frustration I did, having to deal with you. You're too neurotic, nevermind dishonest, to bother with. It's too bad the inflated size of your ego doesn't come anywhere near to matching your abilities, because I'm not the only one who was curious to see how far apart your ego and your ability really are.

c) After ignoring my test proposal for weeks, and stalling the discussion for 2 of those weeks (while you posted to other threads on this forum), you responded only when Buddha posted to say "What's happening with this?". You agreed that it should be finalized, but then you said (about the challenge) that "it's not out of the question". Not at all explaining how you went from "OH GOD, PLEASE!! PUHLEE-EEE-EEZE!! I AM DYING TO PIT MY EXPERT LISTENING SKILLS AGAINST YOURS, MR. FROG!" to "Eh. It's not entirely out of the question. BUT first....". Then you brought out a whole new set of "obstacles" (also "problems") as you called them, to prevent the test from ever happening. They included weird, cryptic demands to test "low level artifacts", of which you have yet to specify what any of them are. A demand to test at my house, instead of my friend's. You have yet to specify why. Other than your urgent desire that I get fed up with your manipulative BS and tell you to go to hell, so you can breath a sigh of relief that this test won't happen, and be able to maintain what's left of your daily-battered reputation.

d) The most controversial of your numerous new "obstacles", the one you used to finally ensure this challenge die, included a strangely incongruous demand that you won't drive all the way up to Canada to see me, unless you get a better name from me than "Michigan J Frog". Asserting that you weren't going to get involved in a test with a "cartoon frog", as you called me. "Strange" because for one thing, this was the name I had weeks ago at the beginning of this thing, and you never said diddly squat about it then. "Strange" because it was an entirely unfounded assertion on your part, that this isn't my name, and to be even more arrogant and insulting, couldn't be my name (I proved you wrong about that a few minutes ago). "Strange" because it actually had nothing to do with our test, and couldn't affect our test as I had designed it, and though I was waiting for you to prove otherwise, you made no move to prove that it could. Or to prove your insulting allegation that it isn't my name. And finally, "strange" because you lied about driving all the way up to Canada to see me. You initially said you were driving up to Canada to see your friend in Ottawa. So you lied about one of those things. And I'm only a 20 minute extension to your 7 1/2 hr. drive.

e) You said nothing against the fact that I wanted us to test the sound of a blue liquid in a small bottle, nothing about me considering the sound of a safety pin, nothing against us testing on a Wal-mart mini-component system you've never heard before (even though you started out saying we should test at your place, because your rig is better than mine). No, your primary concern was whether my name was Michigan J. Frog or not. Which, along with a similar pattern I detailed at greater length in my previous message, showed that throughout all of this, you weren't actually interested in conducting a blind audio test challenge with me, so much as you were interested in finding out the details of my personal identity. I suggest that it wasn't a "rat" or a "mouse" that you were smelling. It was your own B.S. Check in back of you.

Remember: your "I'm not doing this because his name is Michigan J Frog" excuse to kill this test challenge only works on idiots. It won't work on me. If you went along with this entire thing just so you could sniff out whether I'm an acoustic panel competitor of yours, as all the evidence suggests, then I advise you to take the issue up with your psychiatrist.

Ethan, aren't you intrigued by Frog's experiences?

No, I think he's more intrigued by my identity. Far more than I am by his, I might add.

(Side note: That listing showing Michigan Frog is a United States listing.)

Side note 2: I already mentioned in my response to Whiner that I don't permanently live in Canada.

Michigan, before Jan and I started sharing our love, I was simply agreeing that it would be fair of Ethan to be hesitant to undertake all this without sufficient contact information.

No, there was nothing "fair" or "reasonable" about his complaints, it was a diversionary tactic, to get him off the hook for the challenge. As I already told you, I wasn't going to arrange to have Ethan come and undergo a series of tests with me, without giving him the address of the location. So this idea that he would have to undertake this without "sufficient contact information" is an invention on his part and yours. You have no basis to even make such a suggestion, when we simply had not got to the part where he got the necessary contact information for him to get to the test site. That happens at the -end- of a discussion like this. The reason we had not got to that part, is because he kept throwing in obstacle after obstacle, to keep the discussion going ad nauseum, or until he annoyed me enough to tell him to take a flying leap. That included his both irrelevant and unfounded allegation that my name is false, and his insistence that he won't agree to the test, unless I give him my "real name".

As you mention, these internet 'names' are avatars. If you were coming to see me, I'd freely hand out my real name, address, and phone; not simply continue to insist that my name was buddha.

I know you would, but as I also mentioned, I could personally not care less what your so-called "real" name is. And you could be lying about what your real name is, so I have even less reason to care. If I know you here as "Buddha", I'm perfectly happy calling you "Buddha" in Vegas. What difference does it make? I would probably feel weird not calling you Buddha, because it would remove the association I would have made with your name, and what I know of you from your communication. Think of how your "real friends" would feel, if they know you for years under the name "Buddha", and you suddenly told them you now wanted to be called "Sananda Maitreya". They would probably just look at you crossways and say "Shut up, I'm calling you Buddha. And if you don't like that, I'm calling you Freakus Dufus. Take your pick.". Besides, why would you "continue to insist your name is Buddha", when you never said it was? So if you're trying to make a comparison here, it's not a fair one either. The only thing I would insist on is your address, because my powers of ESP are not what they once were. As for your phone, I guess I would only need it if you didn't show up, and I wanted to find out why.

Ethan's portrayal of the events made it sound like he was put off by a perceived lack of information - which makes sense to me, and seemed an easily solved dilemma.

Lack of "what" information? A name that he could believe in? Well no, that isn't an "easily solved dilemna" if he's expecting me to give him a name that isn't mine! It was also neither here nor there at that point, because never mind how to contact me, we hadn't even agreed on what the hell we were supposed to be testing! Out of the blue, he decides he didn't want to be testing Belt devices, which he insulted by calling them "inaudible", and started talking about wanting to test mysterious "low level artifacts", remember??! I don't know what the hell that is, do YOU? Obviously, he doesn't want us to know, and is probably laughing his head off at everything he wrote, and the reaction its been getting. So how is getting every possible detail of my contact information, before he has even bothered to respond to my test design proposal, and before we've even come close to agreeing on a proposal, more important than finalizing the discussion on the test itself? And tell me, are you gonna start handing out all of your personal information to any jagoff that calls you up, that you've never met, before knowing if you're ever going to be doing business with him? If so, then you're not me.

If you can't even believe the guy you're going to see to participate in a blind test with is giving you his real name, then what the hell is the point? Then he's going to look at the address and say I haven't given him my real address, then he's going to say my friend was giving me "secret signals", or that we had pre-arranged a cheating system in advance, and it never ends. I said I didn't want no James Randi in my place. If someone is going to insist on being difficult and adversarial with you every step of the way, and if it becomes obvious they aren't even sincere about participating in the challenge to begin with, and only interested in finding out if you're an acoustic panel competitor, then why bother with them? I don't have anything to prove to anyone else per se, I just wanted to advance our discussion on tweaks. I'm sorry you don't want to see that Ethan strung you along too, in his game to get my contact info. He was never sincere about any of this, from the get go. If he was, well don't you think he would have something to say about my test design proposal??!? Don't tell me it's because he was "put off by a perceived lack of information", since that lame excuse only came weeks after I submitted the propsal. As of me writing this, he hasn't written a single word to me yet, in this entire thread.

As to Jan being nuts, I'll leave it to the readers of the thread to weigh his assertion that the odds of your actual name being Michigan J Frog are the same as Ethan Winer being Ethan's actual name.

I don't see much of a difference myself. I have a web site. He has a web site. I have a funny cartoony name. He has a funny cartoony name. I'm in the white pages. He's in the white pages. As to Ethan being nuts, I'll leave it to the readers of the thread to decide that. (Hint: he's nuts).

Michigan and Ethan, if you are going to be within an acceptable distance, please do go for this. It's a great chance for some cross pollination!

We are going to be within an acceptable distance, if what he said about visiting his friend in Aug. is true. But I think that boat has sailed. If you read even 3 words of the several thousand I've recently written on the subject, you'll see that Whiner has proven to me to be a dishonest, disingenuous person, with ulterior motives here that have nothing to do with audio (other than his audio business). Although we were hardly known before as good buddies, I thought we could set aside our differences in the (true) interest of audio, and try to prove something one way or another, as it relates to us in that space and time. I had every intention of running this test in a fair and honest manner, and I proved it with my proposal. The one he never even looked at. But he doesn't even trust me to get beyond my name, so this test, like Ethan himself, is beyond redemption.

Mr. Frog, if you ever venture near Northen California or Las Vegas, I'd be more than happy to try this experiment.

Good answer! If I ever do, you're on! (No egos involved, just an experiment toward scientific truth).

Quote:
I'd like to second this. Initially, it seemed that this was something you guys wanted to do. If so, please go for it. You might have fun.

As it is now, the thread is going nowhere. If you have finally changed your minds about doing the listening tests, then let's just move on to other things.

Thanks.

I agree, the thread is going nowhere. I no longer trust Ethan or his motivations, and wouldn't let him into my house, so yes, you could say I've changed my mind on this project. I'm ready to move on to other things, so no objections here if you'd like to close the thread.

Winer, I made the challenge to lil'Buddha and in his typical fashion he blew it off with an insult. Now it's your turn. Produce solid proof Frog is not who he says he is.

Or shut up.

Short enough ferya?

More appropriate would be for Mr. Frog to simply give Ethan a call (Ethan's contact info is readily available) and provide his name, address, phone numbers, directions to his lily pad and dates of availability.

It's than Ethan's job to graciously accept the invitation.

Then both of them need to put their friendliness caps on and do some serious listening.

Finally, report in.

As a side note, I hope his real name is Michigan J. Frog as it is a fun name.

Finally, as we are all out of elementary school - evidence to the contrary - insults based on ridiculing another's avatar should never again appear.

We once again disagree. Ethan and li'Buddha have made the accusation Frog is a liar. So far only Frog has made an attempt to provide proof he is a truth teller. As he has stated there are plenty of people who exist without a telephone directory listing. Frog has, as far as can be told, done his part.

Those people making false accusations must produce proof to back up their libelous posts. The burden is not on Frog. If neither Winer nor lil'Buddha can produce proof, they have nothing more to say and should just shut up. This entire affair of a cartoon name is a red herring in the first place. Let's see these two guys have to prove something they say just once.

Quote:
Finally, as we are all out of elementary school - evidence to the contrary - insults based on ridiculing another's avatar should never again appear.

Thank you, Elk. Can we all try this, please?

Quote:
This entire affair of a cartoon name is a red herring in the first place.

You are right; and it has been carefully and expertly laid by Mr. Frog to avoid having his representations regarding his listening abilities tested. His posts exude fantastic confidence in his ability to deconstruct any counter argument and (in his view) win every online debate. His website is similarly constructed: Here are all the arguments my oponents will use so by listing them I have invalidated them. Simple but very effective.

If he wanted the test to go ahead he could make it so but that is not going to happen. It requires entering an area that he does not control - the real world.

Quote:
The burden is not on Frog.

The "burden" is on both to move forward.

However, if Mr. Frog really wants this meeting to take place he needs to make the first affirmative step.

Ethan can't walk to the local pond and request that a croak brigade be set up to contact an unlisted M.J. Frog.

OTOH, Ethan is ridiculously easy to contact. He'll even return a call.

So let's get this meeting set.

Quote:
However, if Mr. Frog really wants this meeting to take place he needs to make the first affirmative step.

Ethan can't walk to the local pond and request that a croak brigade be set up to contact an unlisted M.J. Frog.

Let's see ... Ethan has not replied to Frog's email posts. They had been in communication up to the time Ethan started this thread. Yep, that makes Frog incredibly difficult to contact and just unwilling to go forward.

Ethan, produce proof that supports your claim Frog is not Frog. Very simple. No need for any other discussion. You have libeled Frog and you need to support your claims.

And "the croak brigade"? That stuff's getting tiresome.

I make no claim Mr. Frog is unwilling to move forward. I simply suggest that since Ethan's phone number is handy that The Frog be the hero and pick up the phone.

As to burden of proof, the burden is on Mr. Frog. By posting under this avatar he is making an affirmative statement. If he affirmatively asserts that this is additionally his real name, it is his responsibility to demonstrate this if challenged.

I won't detail the logical constraints that require this as you wouldn't like it anyway.

Regardless, I find His Frogginess' posts squirrely enough to muddy the waters (to mix anthropomorphic metaphors) and render unclear if he truly asserts that his name really is or is not MJF.

I personally don't care. I just hope for posting detente and a meeting between the two.

Quote:

As to burden of proof, the burden is on Mr. Frog. By posting under this avatar he is making an affirmative statement. If he affirmatively asserts that this is additionally his real name, it is his responsibility to demonstrate this if challenged.

B...S...!

Quote:
B...S...!

One of your more articulate replies. And one of the few without a personal attack. Good job!

It also confirms that you would not be interested in the logical proof, a well-settled issue of logic. For the layman, one quick easy way to begin to understand is to contemplate diving a real number by zero.

Regardless, more important is to get these two together for a listening festival.

Perhaps Mr. Frog and Ethan can work out their differences and set up a meeting. A phone call would be a great place to start - I suspect there would be much less posturing this way.

Quote:
I make no claim Mr. Frog is unwilling to move forward. I simply suggest that since Ethan's phone number is handy that The Frog be the hero and pick up the phone.

As to burden of proof, the burden is on Mr. Frog. By posting under this avatar he is making an affirmative statement. If he affirmatively asserts that this is additionally his real name, it is his responsibility to demonstrate this if challenged....

Regardless, I find His Frogginess' posts squirrely enough to muddy the waters (to mix anthropomorphic metaphors) and render unclear if he truly asserts that his name really is or is not MJF....

Ah, not to but into your quarrel, just to mention I think Michigan demonstrated his name is real at

http://forum.stereophile.com/forum/showf...part=6&vc=1

Maybe just missed the post? Of course he would not want to give out his address.

Just a friendly reminder.

Quote:
Ah, not to but into your quarrel, just to mention I think Michigan demonstrated his name is real at

http://forum.stereophile.com/forum/showf...part=6&vc=1

I took this post simply as a counter to Ethan's post similarly displaying a search site. Ethan states that since it comes up empty this is not Mr. Frog's real name. Mr. Frog posts a picture showing a hit to state that he has contrary proof that it could be.

Maybe Mr. Frog is indeed stating that it is his real name. However, the entry comes up as "M. Frog". In any event, it isn't "proof" in the sense that Jan demands - we all can pick an avatar of our choosing, whether it is our name or not.

It turns out there are dozens of Frog listings throughout the country, including Kermit of course.

And hundreds of Elks!

But so what? I just would like these two to get hold of one another, and to meet and listen to some tunes. Share experiences, try out some tweaks that seem ridiculous on their face and see how they work, all that good stuff.

And then let us know what they experienced.

/S/ Batman

Quote:
One of your more articulate replies. And one of the few without a personal attack. Good job!

B...S...!

And I notice you included a personal attack. What a forum!

(No need to explain why it wasn't a "personal attack", thank you. Your definitions and clarifications have become quite the bore.)

Quote:

Quote:
Ah, not to but into your quarrel, just to mention I think Michigan demonstrated his name is real at

http://forum.stereophile.com/forum/showf...part=6&vc=1

I took this post simply as a counter to Ethan's post similarly displaying a search site. Ethan states that since it comes up empty this is not Mr. Frog's real name. Mr. Frog posts a picture showing a hit to state that he has contrary proof that it could be.

Maybe Mr. Frog is indeed stating that it is his real name. However, the entry comes up as "M. Frog". In any event, it isn't "proof" in the sense that Jan demands - we all can pick an avatar of our choosing, whether it is our name or not.

It turns out there are dozens of Frog listings throughout the country, including Kermit of course.

And hundreds of Elks!

But so what? I just would like these two to get hold of one another, and to meet and listen to some tunes. Share experiences, try out some tweaks that seem ridiculous on their face and see how they work, all that good stuff.

And then let us know what they experienced.

/S/ Batman

No harm meant Elk. Just thought you might have missed it. Have a good weekend.

Ease off guys. Let's get on to more important things.

Like my toast.

It's [X] and Banana..with cinnamon sprinkled on top.

X=Nutella, or X=Peanut Butter (reduced fat kind, of course).

Now, which is it?

Quote:
The frog is a liar and he proved it himself. A few weeks ago he said he is unable to come to the US because he is not welcome here and can't get past Customs. Then yesterday he apparently forgot he told that lie when he said he lives here in the US and Canada is only a part-time residence.

A Columbo you ain't! Frog showed a hit for his name in a US directory. How does having problems with Customs keep someone from maintaining a residence within the US? My neighbor's house is still listed under his father's name and his father died forty years ago. If you looked in the directory, you wouldn't find Jere but you would find a dead man. I never suggested the telephone directory was proof of anyone's existence or nonexistence - you did that. I only said check the directory if you want to find more information. At this point we seem to know Frog is listed in a US directory but not in a Canadian directory. That proves ... ?

What is it about Frog that has you so frightened, Winer? What do you suspect are his motives? Why haven't you continued to correspond via emails?

Will Mr. Frog Call Ethan? Will Ethan accept the invitation gracefully?

Where are you even coming from with this? How does me calling him magically eliminate all of the lying and insults he's been attacking me with for the last few days, or compensate for his lack of an apology for making false allegations against me? He started this thread to discuss the test and didn't communicate a word about anything to me, and has only spoken against me in this thread. How does a phone call help, if he can't or won't communicate with me in email or on the forum?? You speak about "logic" as though you own the concept, but yet you don't seem to have even an essential grasp of it here. He didn't accept my invitation to test him, "gracefully". He's been whining about one thing and another, that would make it impossible for him to take up the test challenge, and changing his mind on things we agreed on. How does a phone call change that? I wish people would stop speaking for the Whiner, and let him speak for himself. For one example, he never said he wanted me to call him!

Moreover, you haven't even proposed a reason for why I should call him?? Why?!? To beg him to read my test design proposal, the first post I made to this thread, since he missed both the proposal and the 67 times I mentioned that he had ignored it? When neither you nor anyone else who says they want to see this happen, reminded the weasel of that important fact? He hasn't stopped insulting me about my name, and even deliberately insulted me over my gender, yesterday. When have I ever attacked his gender, tell me? Yet I don't see you saying anything to him about that, but you think I should pretend he never made all these unprovoked attacks on my character, as you're doing, and be gracious enough to call him, and if he accepts my call, it would be a "graceful" move on his part? Right.

The "burden" is on both to move forward.

You obviously haven't been following this thread, to make such comments. Whiner's the one who started backing out of the challenge, who never responded to me in this entire thread. So don't talk about "both of us" moving forward. If you've been following this thread at all, then you would have noticed that my first post in it, several weeks ago, was a test design proposal to address the concerns he and others were having about the possibility of me or him cheating. Guess what. Your "Mr. Whiner" never responded to it. No one did. Not you, not Buddha, not Jesus, not Mohammed. No one did. No one even responded to the 657 times in this thread that I mentioned no one responded to it. Despite the fact that it already put to bed this faux controvery of trust that Ethan created, over my name. And that you and others took up his "righteous cause" for. So that's how much Ethan and Co. have been "moving forward" since the beginning of this thread. Is the picture getting any clearer for you Mr. Elk?

However, if Mr. Frog really wants this meeting to take place he needs to make the first affirmative step.

Oh, you are SO wrong about that. You could not be more wrong if you tried. And after all I've already exemplified about how Ethan never wanted this to take place, and all the ways that he showed it (and all the ways I fought his resistance in vain, in order to try to get this to take place), to respond with that thoughtless remark is just insulting. Ethan himself pointed out that I wrote "thousands of words" to him in this thread. And I have pointed out that he has yet to write a single one to me. So I'm not going to respond to such a thoughtless remark, except to say: Why don't you try asking The Whiner if he "really wants this meeting to take place"? More than ever, I'll bet he's more scared of this challenge than he is of his business competitors. And as a paranoid as he is, I'd say he has good reason to be scared in both cases.

If you're going to insist on not reading anything I wrote about Ethan and his deliberate sabotage of our test challenge before responding, then why don't you at least try taking a look at what he's been writing about me last? Start with him stating that he's "known all along" (this means he's issuing a factual statement, Mr. Logic) that I'm "delusional" if I "think" the presence of a "small bottle filled with magic potion" has any audible effect. No evidence to support his alleged factual statement, that is insulting to both me and the manufacturer of the product. Being purposefully abrasive and antagonistic, he ignores once again statements I made in this thread about having passed blind tests on this product, and provides zero evidence to prove I did not conduct or pass these tests that I said I did, and he in fact even ignored me saying he ignored those statements. Yet you haven't told ethan it was "his responsibility to demonstrate this if challenged", since he has the "burden of proof" to do so, have you? This shows the extent of your bias against me and for Mr. Whiner. In fact, no one who has demanded evidence from me, has demanded evidence from Whiner. For anything. This is why he must be laughing at all of this, and why he's never taken this challenge seriously. Your biased attitude also supports what I was saying in my earlier post about how everyone is divided among party lines, and has no real interest in truth or fairness, outside of their audio-related beliefs.

In addition to the above, he had the gall to demand an apology from me for failing a test he's too chicken to ever meet me on, and that he started doing and saying everything in his power to undermine, while he has yet to apologize for the things he actually did do, rather than the things he's allegedly going to do! Following the coward's false bravado here, he then goes on to say I'm calling him names and insulting him (making no mention of the names or insults he started attacking me with), and that I had no reason to be ticked off at him and if I am, it must mean that I'm "delusional", "obviously unbalanced", and without offering any supporting evidence, he even threw in "have a hidden motive/agenda". This after I uncovered the fact that he did. As I've seen so many times over, ethan doesn't even have the intelligence to come up with his own ideas when he launches personal attacks against forum members. Instead, he steals ideas equally from his opponents as he does from his allies, regardless of whether they maintain any relevance after being transferred like this, and whether he can provide any factual basis for his character assinations. It "defies all logic and reason" says The Whiner. What he doesn't say, is that the "logic and reason" behind the "thousands of words" defining my complete and utter disrespect of this man, has everything to do with his actions in this discussion. Which include making false accusations against me, unprovoked attacks on my character, attacking my family's name, negotiating in bad faith to deliberately sabotage the project, bringing in unnecessary controversies and objections to derail the proceedings. Now after all of his insults and attacks on my character, explain to me why I should now invite someone like this into my home or that of my friend's?

Ethan can't walk to the local pond and request that a croak brigade be set up to contact an unlisted M.J. Frog.
OTOH, Ethan is ridiculously easy to contact. He'll even return a call.

Look, I've had enough of this nonsense about my name. I've also written enough about it, and many times at that, so you should read what I wrote before you start speaking on behalf of Ethan's agenda again. THIS ISN'T ABOUT MY NAME! The demand for contact information in the middle of our discussion was made by Whiner, because this was his plan all along. To get my contact information. When he saw this wasn't going anywhere (because of him, ironically), he got desparate and started making an issue of my name, so he could hope to get whatever he thought was my real contact info, so he could look me up and find out if I'm a competitor of his. So stop assuming that I was not going to give him the information necessary to meet me!. That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. If I wasn't planning to give him the address of the test site, how the hell do you figure he was going to show up, by divine intervention?

Furthermore, by saying I'm unlisted, you're making a presumption that I should be listed; and a false one at that. Read what I wrote, I already told Buddha recently that I had every intention of giving him necessary information to meet me. This was to be done when everything was finalized. If Ethan doesn't trust that I would let him know where the test location is at the end of our discussion, then you are defending someone who's unreasonable to the point of being insane. In which case he needs a psychiatric test, not an aural one. I'm sorry that you too haven't been able to see that Ethan strung you along as well, and didn't bother to mention to you that this was all a ploy of his to find out if I was a competitor, and that he never had any intention of going through with it. So that's what he thinks of you, btw. Why do you think after accepting to do the test at a friend's house, he changed his mind all of a sudden and insisted it be done at my place, which after complaining about how far he'd have to go out of his way to meet me, was even further out of his way? Because he was too stupid to think at the time I proposed that, that in agreeing to hold it elsewhere, he wouldn't get my real address. In context with all the other evidence supporting this, its the only logical reason he would insist on that. Since you pretend to be everyone's logical superior and you've been authorized to speak for Ethan apparently, then give me a better, more logical one. I'd like to hear it, because I certainly haven't heard anything from the whiner on that.

I just would like these two to get hold of one another, and to meet and listen to some tunes.

Really. Have you even read any of Ethan's posts of late? He's continuing to take a hostile, deceitful, and adversarial position against me. Note, I said, "against" me. He's continuing to act like an arrogant a**, and continuing to insult me; calling me names like "delusional", a "loon", bringing my gender into question (the typical true sign of an internet lowlife), and still making false allegations about me, stating (without evidence again) that I have a "hidden agenda or motive" (when in fact, I have given more than enough evidence to show he's the one with the hidden agenda/motive). In his latest buffoonery, he even called me a "liar", based on yet another stupid assumption of his.

Now why would I invite a lying, hostile, jackass who insults me like this into my home? Would you?? The same jackass that has been making false allegations about me throughout this thread, and as we speak is continuing to attack my character 50 different ways, and you want me to invite him in my home for a friendly listening session? Is this what you call "serious"? More importantly, did you miss the thousands of words I wrote, proving that he never had any intention of coming by? What makes you think he's at all interested in this now, when he was only feigning interest in the first place, in order to get my personal identity info, and racking his brains to find things to come up with that would ensure we would never get off the ground? I find it strange to see that people are putting the burden on me to continue this, and not on The Whiner. When he's the one who started coming in 2 weeks later with all these bizarre "obstacles" that I would have to get past, before he would consider whether it was "in or out of the question" to continue this. He completely stopped participating in the discussion in the middle of it, pretending he was busy with work, while he continued to post in other threads.

If he affirmatively asserts that this is additionally his real name, it is his responsibility to demonstrate this if challenged.

You've got it ass-backwards, my friend. Whiner is the one who made an issue of it, the one who accused me, without providing a shred of evidence mind you, of having a fake name, that wasn't listed. I proved him wrong. So NO, you need to be telling -him- that its -his- responsibility to demonstrate that it isn't. You're doing the very opposite, because you're clearly biased. But that aside, why do you think this thread was started, and what do you think it is about? A challenge about my name or a challenge about which of us has the better listening skills? Whiner is again pretending to be sincere and saying its about "audio", yet him, you and others are making it all about my name! And at the same time you're telling me I should stay focused on audio discussion so we can do this thing? WTF?!

So since when did this challenge become about names, and not audio? That's a rhetorical question, btw. The answer is: since Ethan wanted it to be. Because he's neither "intrigued" nor interested in advanced audio. As he's proven, he's only interested in finding out if I'm a business competitor of his. And BTW#2, I did graciously offer Whiner the opportunity to debate me on my name. On two separate occasions. The coward wormed out of that challenge too. On two separate occasions. So don't give me that crap about how its "my responsibility to demonstrate that my name is real if challenged", when I already did.

Ever since he came back to this thread and showed no sincere interest whatsoever in finally ending this endless "discussion" (that he never participated in with me), I don't know what I've been hit worse by; all the deceit or all the hypocrisy. Whatever, it's too much for me. If you were at all sincere about seeing this happen, this really was a poor effort on your part. You should simply have directed your efforts and criticisms at Ethan, since he's the one that was backing out of it, and the one that proved to not have a sincere interest in seeing this through to start with.

That too. Obviously the frog has a reason for not wanting me to know who he is. Which makes the whole thing even more strange.

Right. Thanks for admitting to all that your participation in this entire thing was simply to find out "who I am". Nice try at playing dodgeball with the truth again, senior weasel. This has never been about "audio". You just proved that again, because "who I am", whatever that means, has absolutely nothing to do with audio or the blind test proposal. It has everything to do with you wanting to know whether I'm a competitor of yours, which is why you've ignored every request to prove it does. No, this is about you lying about me in the middle of this thing, in order to derail the project when your efforts to find out more about me (as opposed to finding out more about the test) weren't getting very far.

Further proof that this thread and my beef with you isn't about audio, lies in the fact that you started this thread so we could discuss the terms of the test. But you haven't written a single thing to me about our test. Or anything. You've even ignored every time I mentioned the fact that you haven't written a single thing to me, discussing the actual test proposal. Instead, you've spent all of your time here ignoring my input, changing what we had already agreed on, dragging the discussion on so that it gets nowhere, then leaving for 2 weeks to post elsewhere while you let the thread die, throwing "obstacles" that were sure to get my dander up, and create roadblocks to stall and hopefully kill the project. This is about you insulting the products I wanted to test (calling them "inaudible", as well as "magic potions", without a shred of evidence, and even ignoring the evidence I gave that proved otherwise), using my name as a vehicle to launch defamatory attacks and accusations against me, insulting both me and family. Which you've been doing since day 1, and which you've even chickened out of debating with me. This has been about you pretending to have an interest in having your mythological listening abilities tested, just so you could weasel some personal details from me to find out if I'm a competitor of yours.

You've managed to fool a few people on this point, bravo. You haven't fooled me. I had your number right from the start. Soon as you wanted to know where I live, before you wanted to know what I was proposing to test, or how. The fact that you've been pretending to be sincere about this when you've been shown to be desparate to think of anything that would prevent it from happening, says a lot about how much you can be trusted, how honest you are with your fellow forum mates, and how much you don't believe in your own abilities, to risk of even putting what little you think is left of your reputation on the line. The fact that you would pretend that my indignation towards you is about "audio", when you know full well that has nothing to do with why I'm ticked off at you, also says a lot about how disingenuous you are. So much for that mindless theory of yours about how you are a "trustworthy guy" because your address and phone no. are on your website.

You've never supported your lying accusations with evidence. I guess because they were lying accusations. I've proved as much, and I'm waiting for your apology. You're definitely not getting into my house without a sincere apology for your unprovoked lying accusations about me in this thread.

The frog is a liar and he proved it himself. A few weeks ago he said he is unable to come to the US because he is not welcome here and can't get past Customs.

Oh great, it just gets better and better with this clown... Look Bozo, I most certainly did not say I was "not welcome in the US" and "can't get past customs", liar! I said that "some of my documents were stolen" -- which I'm waiting on!!

All you ever do around here is put your foot in your mouth, like a damn fool. And then you stupidly sit there, scratch your ears and wonder why people get so irritated at you, and use many big words to tell you that you're an asshole. You don't just up and call someone a "liar" like that, unless you're sure you have 100% verifiable proof of your contentious charges. I mean, not unless you're simply an asshole. So that explains why you find people think you're an asshole. And by proof, I don't mean your "idiot-standard" proof, but the standard that normal intelligent people go by. Especially when you have already lied about them (ie. you lied about my name), basing your false charges on your usual stupid assumptions. BTW, these are the very same "stupid assumptions" you are constantly making about audio, and tweaks, and the same foot you stick in the same big mouth, while you are never able to back up a single stupid thing that you ever say around here. Like Jan said, you're "all hat and no cattle".

No more running away from me and beating around the bush. Take responsibility for your words and deeds. Act like a man for a change, and stop being a coward and leaving others to try to defend you to me, or leaving your own weak, empty words and accusations to fend for themselves. I demand a retraction and an apology from you for the above false accusation, calling me a liar, and the false accusations regarding my name, which were also refuted. Let me remind you again that you also lied to everyone here when you said you were driving up to Canada to see me, whereas before your story was that you were driving to Canada to see your friend.

One more thing:

"Participants may not use the Forums to post or transmit advertisements or commercial solicitations of any kind."

This means get your damn commercial website advertisement out of your posts.

I said I was ready to move on, but it seems no one else was, so.... I don't know why this thread wasn't shut down, especially after I agreed that it should be. And I think this is the only time when I thought a thread should be closed before its time. Especially since Ethan has created enough controversy around him and animosity towad him among his 'known enemies', and thus appears quite satisfied with himself over his work here. As I've shown from pieceing together the evidence, Ethan never intended to see any of this through. Yes folks, he is petty, deceitful and neurotic enough to do this, regardless of how you see yourself aligned with his audio beliefs. Most of the things that have been said on his behalf have been said by others. While he sat back and wallowed in the fun of allowing others to defend him. To be numbered among the endless amount of things Ethan refused to address:

* He brought up the issue of my name, but when asked, refused to prove that it would affect the test. I'll go further and more meaningful than what Elk wrote, and say that any attack from a member over another member's screen name should never again appear. Whatever a person chooses to use as a screen name on such a forum, is their personal right. Whether they choose their given name or a moniker does not violate the rules of this forum. So as such, they should not have their screen name attacked or have to tolerate false and unsupported allegations made over whether its their given name or not, or their personal character or what they say attacked, on account of their name. "Namism", which is a form of prejudice and intolerance based on someone's name, should not be tolerated on a civil discussion forum. (On my own audio discussion forum, I encouraged participants to use screen names and avatars, so everyone would be level in this regard, and no one bigot could claim to be superior to another on account of their name, or attack another member on name or gender. Both of which the bigoted "Ethan Winer" has done with me).

* He still hasn't responded to my test design proposal, the first post I made to this thread. Which made this issue of my name irrelevant weeks ago. Nor has he responded to the many times I stated he never responded to my proposal.

* He accepted the test location, then changed his mind and wanted it done at my place. Again, refusing to answer why.

* He accepted the test devices, then changed his mind and wanted us to test other devices, all of which he refused to identify by name. Kind of hard to settle the discussion of a test if you don't know what the hell the opponent wants to test, and you're supposed to guess. But then, as I have stated too many times now, what people are refusing to see here is, settling the test to then confirm a date was never his intention. If I ever managed to get him to give me a date when he would come (which I had been trying for weeks to do), I'm convinced he would never have shown up, and would have simply told another lie about how I gave him the wrong address, or didn't show up at the address I specified.

* He refused to accept taking part in the test, all of a sudden and after weeks of discussion, citing that my name didn't give him enough information to take part in the test. Except it was the same name we started all this with, and he had no objections then (before the 2 week vacation he made this thread take). Furthermore, he used this phony excuse as a basis to lie about about refusing to drive up to Canada for the test. He initially said that he was coming to see his friend in Ottawa, not me. I was just a stop on the way (about 20 minutes out of his way, as I calculated). He lied in order to provide reason to insist that I provide him with my real name. Which itself was a lie, bringing us to....

* He started out screaming about how gung-ho he was to take this challenge that I offered, then after abandoning the discussion for 2 weeks while pursuing other threads at Stereophile, and without giving any reason for this, changed his tone to "eh... it's not out of the question". Am I really the only one who got the impression from this that Ethan was not very interested in seeing this through, before that he ever started using my "name" as an excuse for bailing out?

* He lied about me not providing my real name, and continued to refuse to offer evidence of his assertion that I hadn't, after I countered his attempt at proving his false allegation.

Which brings us to the present state of affairs. Obviously, if Ethan doesn't support his allegations about my name, and won't acknowledge the evidence I gave that counters his false presumptions, he can continue using this as a reason to stall the test indefinitely. Then he can say "Sorry guys, too late, I already went up to Canada to meet my friend". Or some other excuse to wriggle out of the challenge.

If you did not want to have your skills tested in public and take further major hits to your credibility, but the problem is, you were a deceitful little worm who was only in it to try to find out who your opponent is and whether he has a competing business to yours, and you didn't have the honesty nor the courage to just say you didn't have the nerve to go through with it and needed to come up with an excuse to save face... how would you do it? Ignoring your opponent throughout the entire thread would be one way, wouldn't it? You could never finalize a test discussion if you choose to never respond to the person who proposed the idea in the first place, could you? This way you would never have to take it.

Making false accusations about your opponent's name, and demanding that he give you his "real name", before you have even bothered to finalize discussion of the test parameters, when you haven't even bothered to prove that he hasn't given you his real name, would be another way. You could merely insinuate this had something to do with him being honest on the test, without explaining how if it were even true, it would have any effect on the test as proposed. Stalling the test by stopping your participation in the discussion and hoping everyone loses interest is also a way to worm out of your commitment. These are all things that Ethan did. All things he needs to answer for, and he has said so little on his own behalf, he has a lot to answer for.

I was negotiating in good faith, he was negotiating in bad faith. He's the one who started questioning my honesty, when I never questioned his. But instead of discussing the proposal I had entered into this, which effectively dealt with the issue of honesty, he started making false accusations against my character over my name, none of which he has ever proven. But instead of being made to answer for his derailing this test project, he's being defended on every point by those who know him and support at least some of his audio beliefs.

I took exception to all of his unprovoked and unwarranted attacks on my character in the middle of this discussion, none of which were necessary for someone who was at least pretending to get together with me on a "friendly listening test", all of which offended me, to say the least. Because it was obvious this person was not at all interested in seeing this test through, and had been stringing me all this time to get background info on me. Because I had not reacted with humble gratitude after he lied about me and attacked my character (what a shocker!), that gave Ethan the excuse to then say he didn't want to visit someone who would insult him. Which is exactly what he wanted from the beginning. Am I the only one who noticed that? Seems so, since no one has asked Ethan whether he even wanted to see this through. Don't bother, I already know the answer. It's: "Do chickens fly?". No one has asked me either, but they've told me they wanted me to invite him in my house, without them acknowledging a single trangression that he has made against me and this test, in this thread.

On a related note: If anyone is going to be in the Ottawa area this summer and wants to take Ethan's place, anyone who is sane, rational, sincere, not neurotic, not deceitful, does not have a hidden agenda/motive and is not a backstabber; anyone who simply has an honest desire to participate in a series of mutal blind tests on advanced tweaks, with yours truly, let me know. Read the test design proposal I submitted to this thread first, (which Ethan didn't), so you know what is being proposed.

Quote:
I was negotiating in good faith, he was negotiating in bad faith. He's the one who started questioning my honesty, when I never questioned his. But instead of discussing the proposal I had entered into this, which effectively dealt with the issue of honesty, he started making false accusations against my character over my name, none of which he has ever proven.

That's pretty much what this boils down to. Winer has made the accusations and never once supplied convincing proof for any of his conceits. Winer was the first to impugn the integrity of someone with whom he had entered into an agreement. All of you just hopped on Winer's wagon for the ride. Winer started this thread and never came close to actually completing the terms that would have made the thread relevant. This all came out of Winer's backside.

If you don't want this to go on forever, someone needs to provide proof Frog is not Frog rather than dancing around the Maypole tugging on Winer's skirt. You've all ridiculed Frog and made fun of his name like a bunch of little children. You've all tried your high and mighty act and your "I possess superior logic" schtick. Yet not one of you have made any attempt to prove Frog is not Frog. Why? Because you can't?

Someone here needs to do so or you all need to shut up about it. Or apologize the Frog for the treatment you've given him. This "test" isn't going to happen so drop that line of BS. At this point I wouldn't invite a single one of you other than Frog into my house. You all piss and shit on someone and then expect them to be forgiving. What a forum!

A clarification:

Not believing that Michigan's name is "real" is not disparaging to him or "making fun of his 'name'." It has nothing to do with the fantastic quality of his idea for the listening sessions, and does not invalidate his other insights.

It's just not his real name.

I have proof...

Go to his own website...http://www.theadvancedaudiophile.110mb.com/a-page/index.html
Link

You'll see "Michigan" posted a picture of himself, next to his dog. He specifically claims the picture is of him.

Michigan's real name is, therefore, Wallace, not Michigan!

That's straight from Michigan's own website, straight from his keyboard.

No disputing it, it's there in his own words.

Are we done now?

If you like, you could check "Who Is" for the website, and see if one Michigan J Frog is the owner.

Otherwise, you'd end up with three (and more if you know Michigan from other forums) possible names and two countries of origin.

If Ethan had checked all this, and he had a real concern about possibly getting pranked, then Michigan's name may matter to Ethan. (I don't believe Michigan would do this, I'm just wondering about Ethan's thinking.)

However, if Ethan used this issue as a ruse to ditch a great opportunity, I disapprove.

If Michigan thought Ethan was going to dodge the fun and was just using the avatar issue as a smoke screen, really just wanting to fish out Michigan's name for sport - I can see why Michigan would be hesitant to give out personal data.

So, we end up with a Mexican stand off between one person in Canada and one here in America.

If that basic form of trust can't be established, not much else is gonna happen.

I can see both sides - Ethan's insistence, and Michigan's hesitance.

Too bad, too. Ethan would have been the PERFECT person for this listening event. Maybe we can send DUP?

Any other solid "objectivists" we could recommend to Michigan?

Hey, Michigan, how about RBNG, RLW, or other similar characters?

I'm dying to know one thing...which is the greater sin, shopping a dealer and buying from the internet, or not believing Michigan is Michigan's real name?

You are bipolar, aren't you?

Ah, Jan, apology accepted.

I know it's hard for you to accept when you are wrong, so it's fine for you to do it this way.

I have proof...

Hi Buddha,

Slow day at the office? Me, I'm installing Wista, in a Raid-O configuration. So yeah, I've got some more time to play "the name game". Which isn't just Ethan's favourite pastime I see, but seems to have become everyone's. If we're to continue this at all, I think someone should change the name of this thread, as it has not had anything to do with an audio test challenge for quite some time. Maybe "The Michigan, Ethan Et Al. Debate Michigan J. Frog's Name Thread", or something more appropriate.

Not believing that Michigan's name is "real" is not disparaging to him or "making fun of his 'name'." It has nothing to do with the fantastic quality of his idea for the listening sessions, and does not invalidate his other insights.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Thank you, molto grazie! I'm glad to see at least someone here read the damn proposal! I was starting to wonder if I just dreamed the whole thing. I wrote it hoping it would end the inevitable arguments over trust and honesty. Instead, Ethan by-passed it completely and just went straight to the inevitable!

It's just not his real name.
Go to his own website...http://www.theadvancedaudiophile.com/a-page/index.html
You'll see "Michigan" posted a picture of himself, next to his dog. He specifically claims the picture is of him.
Michigan's real name is, therefore, Wallace, not Michigan!
That's straight from Michigan's own website, straight from his keyboard.
No disputing it, it's there in his own words.
Are we done now?

You would think, wouldn't you? After several weeks of doing nothing but arguing about my name, instead of the test we were "supposed" to be discussing (before the decidedly unbalanced Whiner decided he would prefer to know more about my name than the test itself), you would think people would get tired of that, with everyone demanding that he shut up about my name already, and state whether he's willing to comply with the proposal that was put on the table weeks ago, or not. Or that they'd at least remember this is an audio forum, and the hope was that we were supposed to eventually some time this year finish agreeing on the details of the test by Aug. But no such luck. In fact, there are 250 more words in the remainder of your post alone, about my name. So o.k., here's the deal. I lied about my name. But! I'm not saying which one I lied about.

If you like, you could check "Who Is" for the website, and see if one Michigan J Frog is the owner.

Uh-oh, TSFMS (tm). (TSFMS=Too Smart For Me, Sherlock). Oh boy, now I'm really getting nervous.... (for the dudes in the back row who can't see so well, please imagine buckets of beads of sweat pouring out from every pore, as the Buddha pours the bbq sauce over The Frog). Ya know Buddha, I guess if I had the foresight to realize that two years later, some clever sleuthing jr. net detective on an audio forum would find a discrepancy with my stated name, my written name, and my registered name, and that this would somehow cause a conflict with a blind listening test I was trying to organize with someone who had aboslutely no intention of ever showing up for it but just wanted to know which name he needed to look up in his yellow pages, I wouldn't have allowed my site co-assistant to use his name as the registrar. I am SO easily persuaded, it's not funny.

Otherwise, you'd end up with three (and more if you know Michigan from other forums) possible names and two countries of origin.

Make that 57 possible names, and 32 countries of origin. Not including Argentina. (Don't kry for me, Argenteena... the trooth eez I never luffed you....).

If Ethan had checked all this, and he had a real concern about possibly getting pranked, then Michigan's name may matter to Ethan. (I don't believe Michigan would do this, I'm just wondering about Ethan's thinking.)

Pranked? I don't remember Ethan saying he was nervous about being "pranked". Actually, I don't remember what the hell he actually said was the reason for insisting we all talk about my name and forget that we came here to discuss an audio test. But don't worry, I'm sure he'll pick up on that as his new-found reason, now that he's read it from someone. (Ethan: "That's it, he was trying to prank me! Yeah, that was always my concern! That, and whether he sells acoustic panels. No wait, just the first thing!).

Ok, I don't want to be a prisoner of logic here or anything but..... why the hell do I need to lie about my name to "prank" Ethan? If I wanted to do something stupid like that, I could do it under any name. And no it doesn't matter whether he has my real address or not. I could just say "Dude, you look lost. You must have the wrong address. No frogs 'round here mister. Got some squirrels, though. Black ones. They're good eatin'.". But the "prank" theory is really something I would expect from Ethan. He's the only person here I know dumb and paranoid enough to believe that, or deceitful enough to not believe it, but put it forward as his belief, as an insidious form of character attack. On the contrary, he could "prank" me, by saying he showed up when he never even came close to the test site, jumping to his laptop to write that I was simply not in. Before I could say "wha'appened?" As I've pointed out in previous scribblings, there's far more real evidence that this was his actual intention, than suggests it was mine. I've never seen someone do such a poor job of pretending to be interested in something, and still have people around him believe that he's interested! You actually read my test proposal, which is more than I can say for Ethan, who was supposed to be discussing it with me throughout this thread! All he wanted to discuss was where I live, my name, my address, etc. He didn't seem to care if I was testing him on a pair of chicken shish-kebabs, while submerging him in Gator-ade. That's what I call a "prank", my friend.

However, if Ethan used this issue as a ruse to ditch a great opportunity, I disapprove.

Believe it or not, so do I. In the beginning, when I was dealing with "Ethan v.1.0", who sound pretty easy going and was surprisingly cool with me proposing things like testing a safety pin on a plasticrap Wal-mart special mini-comp system, and looked like he wasn't going to get all wack-o on me and start making impossible demands, I saw a very real and good opportunity to truly "advance the discussion", as they say. I don't know exactly when he morphed into his present "Whiner v2.0" character, some time before his "2 week vacation" I'd say. This is where he said he was too busy to continue the discussion, came back 2 weeks later, suddenly started saying the test was "eh, not quite out of the realm of possibility at this moment", then demanded everything from the letter "E" be stricken from the English language to having me prove his lying allegation that I bear false name (and let me tell you, it only gets this bizarre when you insist on inviting Ethan Whiner to the party).

If Michigan thought Ethan was going to dodge the fun and was just using the avatar issue as a smoke screen, really just wanting to fish out Michigan's name for sport - I can see why Michigan would be hesitant to give out personal data.

Well, I'm not suggesting it was just for "sport", sport. One of the first things Ethan said to me when I joined the Stereophile forums, was to declare that I was using a fake name (apparently as I learned, you can say anything about anyone or anything, and you don't need to suport any of your lying allegations around here against another forum member. Unless Ethan demands it). He then went on to say that I was an acoustic panel competitor who specifically came here to insult him and harm his business, but that I was hiding my business affiliation to get away with it. Now I've dealt with a lot of fools which I do not suffer gladly, I'm sorry to say. But I knew right then I was dealing with a real, unadulterated, genuine purebred fool of the first order. A particularly paranoid one at that, who fishes blind assumptions out of the depths of his delusions (and other dark places...), and then slaps it on the table in front of you and presents it as "fact". Daring you not to laugh. I had a hard time figuring out which was more absurd; Ethan's delusions about me or his delusions about audio.

So, we end up with a Mexican stand off between one person in Canada and one here in America.
If that basic form of trust can't be established, not much else is gonna happen.

Ethan's a Mexican? Why didn't someone tell me? Oh no, I can't work with that. I don't trust no Mexicans. (That btw was my impression of Mr. Whiner, for the day. Thank you). Well obviously I agree with that sentiment, since I said the very same thing some time back; many times I'm since, I'm sure. You start questioning the guy's integrity on being able to conduct a fair test, based on whatever prejudices you may have about his name, then you add that you think he's going to prank you, then you say you don't believe he's giving you the right address and that you're afraid he's going to make a fool of you by making you drive out of your way for nothing, then you say you don't know whether he's a guy or a girl and you're not sure he even exists and could be a computer-generated character, then you say you don't trust his friend, because he looks like a Hell's Angel member, etc. etc. etc. And all this before the damn test has even started! I only thought this was possible because I foolishly thought he could put all his differences, and biases and prejudices aside for once, and meet me halfway on this thing so we could finally see which of us was more full of BS on the forums.

I can only sit here and imagine how far Ethan would go to come up with excuses to explain why he did so piss poorly on the test compared to me; had we taken it and this be the result. This is definitely someone who would lie and make excuse after excuse if he lost the challenge. This arguing would have never ended. Do you really think he would have "apologized" for every bloody thing he'd ever said about audio, as he required that I do if I do worse than him? Ethan's ego is so big, they have to charge him extra for cargo space, whenever he boards a plane.

Too bad, too. Ethan would have been the PERFECT person for this listening event.

Ethan 1.0 maybe. As for version 2.0 of his bad self, I would rather test a hickory tree.

Maybe we can send DUP?

Oh, you found someone even crazier than Ethan. Great. Even better, why we don't we just cull the local asylum, and see if there's anyone we can lure out with a piece of cheese? We could tell them we're testing for rabbits.

Hey, Michigan, how about RBNG, RLW, or other similar characters?

No, rlw is someone I don't trust with this; he's actually been caught and admitted to sabotaging one tweak manufacturer's business. RBNG I don't know enough about him to know whether he's trustworthy, but I know enough to know I don't like him (personal reasons). But anyway, I doubt we could make it happen if we both wanted to, as he's about 600 miles away. Even further than whats-his-name.

I'm dying to know one thing...which is the greater sin, shopping a dealer and buying from the internet, or not believing Michigan is Michigan's real name?

The original original sin. Closing your mind to what you don't know of the world.

Quote:
Too bad, too. Ethan would have been the PERFECT person for this listening event.

Yes.

I really hoped for a meeting between an extreme objectivist and and extreme subjectivist. What fun!

It's sad how this has devolved to a fight over who has been more insulted. Unreal.

Panties everywhere. Tightly knotted.

~sheesh~

Ya know, Michigan, I was thinking about you at the Hi Fi shop today, when a speaker audition reminded me of how there are likely "different" types of "sonic"/ listening experiences; and that we tend to lump everything into the category of "listening." The idea is still protoplasmic and not yet fully formed. I'll get my act together with a new thread that has nothing to do with names. Maybe there's more common ground than some people think.

Not to navel gaze with vocabulary, but I bet many disagreements in the hobby occur when one person describes what he is "hearing," and another person talks about what he/she is "experiencing."

I'm still fomenting how to approach the discussion.

The same audition reminded me that there is ALOT going on when we "listen," and that there are probably different phenomena that exist with the same gear auditioned in a leisurely vs. an instantaneous DBT test.

OK, onward and upward.

Quote:
The same audition reminded me that there is ALOT going on when we "listen," ...

Absolutely.

And very difficult to describe.

Quote:
Not to navel gaze with vocabulary, but I bet many disagreements in the hobby occur when one person describes what he is "hearing," and another person talks about what he/she is "experiencing."

No need to answer the last question. You're bipolar alright!

Ya know, Michigan, I was thinking about you at the Hi Fi shop today, when a speaker audition reminded me of how there are likely "different" types of "sonic"/ listening experiences; and that we tend to lump everything into the category of "listening." The idea is still protoplasmic and not yet fully formed. I'll get my act together with a new thread that has nothing to do with names. Maybe there's more common ground than some people think.

Not to navel gaze with vocabulary, but I bet many disagreements in the hobby occur when one person describes what he is "hearing," and another person talks about what he/she is "experiencing."

I'm still fomenting how to approach the discussion.

Sounds interesting, but I'll have to wait until its fully formed to consider any comments about it, because I don't want to guess at what you're saying. I've discovered "different types of sonic listening experiences" in my own experience, very specific things, but not sure if its at all related to what you experienced. Think about it, and throw it out there in a new thread. I'm sure you'll get plenty of opinions.

The same audition reminded me that there is ALOT going on when we "listen," and that there are probably different phenomena that exist with the same gear auditioned in a leisurely vs. an instantaneous DBT test.

Of course. I'll join Elk and sing "Absolutely"; there is a lot going on when we listen; a lot we may or may not be conscious of. And absolutely there are different phenomena going on in a casual vs. instantaneous DBT. This is why I say each requires a different set of skills. I had this very thing in mind when I first proposed this test challenge to EW. Because my experience in casual listening far outweighs my experience in SBT or DBT, much less instantaneous switching DBT methodologies like ABx, I had my own set of doubts as to how I'd perform, and I knew there was no guarantee that I would perform well in a blind test. Particularly under "challenge" conditions. I weighed the fact that if Ethan, a dyed-in-the-wool pseudo-objectivist had more experience with more formal tests, he might have some advantage given what was being proposed. However, I guessed that he hadn't that much experience doing listening comparisons under any regard, and my experience with informal tests no doubt overwhelms his (if his take on cables is anything to go by), and would probably give me an edge over him when using a formal (blind) test approach.

Note that blind tests are the great "equalizer". That is to say, both obs and subs alike do poorly on them. One difference that really defines the two camps is the reason given for why most blind tests reveal nothing. The objectivsts, being shallow thinkers all and famously unconcerned with details, say "It's obvious. There are no differences worth noting! It doesn't get better than what you have now!". While the subs, whom I like to think have evolved a little more than the objectivists, who consider both the technical aspects of audio and the beyond technical aspects, say "I'm not sure if I hear differences, but then, I don't listen to music under blind conditions, so I don't care what happens under such conditions". The best engineers are a bit of both, the worst are ideologues.