"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...

Keith G wrote:

"Andre Jute" wrote in message
ups.com...
uk.rec.audio, rec.audio.opinion and rec.audio.tubes are newsgroups
populated by self-declared audiophiles. One would expect those who
boast about their interest in music, one of the arts which express
emotion, to be sensitive. One could excuse those among them who are
"engineers" and hangers-on of engineers for being crudely insensitive
as it is well known that these types lack the finer sensibilities that
distinguish (or are supposed to distinguish) music lovers from the hoi
polloi.

Yet on these three conferences we find a thread "WHY ANDREW JUTE MCCOY
IS A LIAR" with 128 message from 29 distinct contributors (1). The
thread is about liquor, CD players, and much else. There is a
contributor called Andre Jute well known to regulars on all three these
conferences. No effort was made anywhere in this thread to prove that
he is a liar. Of these 29 contributors, *28* never had the sensitivity
in all of the *10 days* and *128 messages* of this thread to ask if it
isn't poor manners to mangle someone's name, if it isn't poor manners
to discuss many other matters under a headline condemning someone
without proof, if a new thread wouldn't be a courtesy.

So much for the manners of the trailer park trash one finds on
newsgroups.

Only one of these 29 contributors, Iain Churches, remarked that it was
weird to discuss Calvados under such a heading. Another contributor,
Don Pearce, a self-declared "engineer" then insisted the thread was
about proving Andre Jute a liar. In other words, in Don Pearce's mind
this libellous calumny was conducted deliberately. Apparently he spoke
for the rest, as their continued posting to this maliciously named
thread on a wide range of subjects confirms. Thus the excuse of inborn
insensitivity and crudeness in "engineers" falls away: this was a
deliberate crime initiated by Stewart Pinkerton and knowingly supported
by the the "engineers" and their hangers-on, who all thereby become
Pinkerton's accomplices.

Let's see who apologizes and who adds abuse to the nauseating
insensitivity and appallingly poor manners they have already displayed
for 10 days and 128 messages.

Andre Jute

(1) Count conducted at 17.28 GMT on 14 Mar 2006.



Too much crossposting - *Binned and removed*...

Gee, Keith, after 128 messages calling me a liar in the headline,
crossposted to UKRA, RAT and RAT, I make a humble complaint -- and you
start screeching in no fewer than nine messages about crossposting.
Looks to me like you're adhering to a double standard.

I'll count you for nine votes against good manners, decency, fairness,
justice and honesty.

Audiophiles 1, Zero-Manners Yobs 10

Furthermore, I see in your posts, dear Keith (everyone has some use),
that some clowns whose posts I don't read have gone into a feeding
frenzy, and we know they didn't vote for decency, so we can count on
side of darkness and vomit and yellow puss and nastiness 2 for Witless,
2 for Plod, 3 for NYOB123, so the intermediate score is:

Audiophiles 1, Insensitive Clowns 17

The audiophiles are routed. About what we expected.

Andre Jute

Your math is a reflection of your honesty.

Does that add to my score?