Andre Jute wrote:

WHY STEWART PINKERTON IS UNRELIABLE

2. THE STATISTICS OF MALICE
In the latter part of 2004, at the request of leading members, I
started a major project called KISS on rec.audio.tubes (RAT). Pinkerton
arrived and announced he would deconstruct the project. Between the
beginning of October 2004 and the middle of February 2006 he sent 4607
messages to RAT, a labour conservatively estimated to have taken him
767 hours, or more than a quarter of his working hours in the same
period, the major part of his free time. He told us that the purpose
was to expose my ignorance and prevent others following in my
footsteps. His 4607 posts were all abusive. Only one, considered below,
was electronically specific enough for me to consider comparing it to
what I had published. As the result of Pinkerton's 4607 posts, not a
single line of the booklength KISS materials was altered, not a single
fact was altered, not a single schematic was altered in the slightest.
As the result of Pinkerton's 4607 posts, no party interested in the
KISS project in the beginning dropped out, and no one who became
interested during its course was deterred in the slightest.
Pinkerton's 4607 vicious posts gave him great satisfaction, according
to him, but had no other result whatsoever (except to make
Pinkerton's name a byword for barbaric insensitivity and foul
manners). In all Pinkerton's 4607 posts counted here, he did not once
analyze the circuit of the amp he objected to while it stood for more
than a year on public view. By contrast to Pinkerton's vicious and
loud slackness, Patrick Turner analyzed the circuit and made
suggestions which were incorporated, and John Byrns made another
important suggestion which we shall shortly discuss and then
incorporate because I have already tested it. From Pinkerton all this
while, zero. In short, Pinkerton's claim of my ignorance is a sham,
an excuse for him to indulge his malicious urge to bring pain to
everyone else, 4607 times in 15 months on a single newsgroup.

Andre Jute

Part of a series of articles:
WHY STEWART PINKERTON IS UNRELIABLE
1. BACKGROUND
2. THE STATISTICS OF MALICE
3. PINKERTON'S IGNORANCE OF THE BASICS
4. PINKERTON LIES ON PROFESSIONAL MATTERS FOR PERSONAL REASONS
5. CONCLUSION

Stewart Pinkerton writes to offer his own message count:
Click on the above links, use advanced search on author, restrict groups to rec.audio.tubes and dates from 1 October 2004 to current date, and you get the following results:
Andre Jute - 662
Stewart Pinkerton - 602

I'm happy to accept Pinkerton's count. But we should note that Jute was
presenting the major KISS project, and yet Pinkerton sent 90 per cent
as many posts as Jute did. This alone is indicative of Pinkerton
maliciously trying to take over Jute's project.

That Pinkerton waged a pointless flame war for its own sake is
indicated by Jute's summary: "As the result of Pinkerton's 602 posts,
not a single line of the booklength KISS materials was altered, not a
single fact was altered, not a single schematic was altered in the
slightest."

After 111 posts and 100 hours on public view, the revised count was the
only argument offered in this analysis of Pinkerton's malice. The other
facts stand unchallenged.

Andre Jute

But we should note that Jute was presenting the major KISS project,

Mr. McCoy:

As noted and as is becoming more and more clear as even your "Timmies"
and your various and sundry other acolytes appear to be abandoning you:

You write only for yourself. Drop the "we" crap. Lest you think
otherwise, I write only for myself as well...

And your "major " project just does also appear to happen to be a
loose system of fantasies supported by anecdotes of doubtful veracity.

Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA

On 5 Mar 2006 17:45:32 -0800, " wrote:

But we should note that Jute was presenting the major KISS project,

Mr. McCoy:

As noted and as is becoming more and more clear as even your "Timmies"
and your various and sundry other acolytes appear to be abandoning you:

You write only for yourself. Drop the "we" crap. Lest you think
otherwise, I write only for myself as well...

And your "major " project just does also appear to happen to be a
loose system of fantasies supported by anecdotes of doubtful veracity.

Interesting how fast Jute dropped his claim of 4607 posts from me, and
accepted the true number of 602. Also interesting (and entirely
predictable) that he assumes that it's all about him - these were my
*total* posts to RAT over an 18 month period. An average of one post a
day, and included my own 'major KISASS project', which is every bit as
substantial as Jute's endless turgid prose surrounding a very simple
amplifier.

Shame that he can't apply the same KISS principle to the 'design'
articles, which could have been wrapped up in a couple of hundred
lines, rather than the endless thousands of lines of purple prose,
wild assertions and self-aggrandisement that he's taken to get halfway
through the exercise to date.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
...
On 5 Mar 2006 17:45:32 -0800, " wrote:

But we should note that Jute was presenting the major KISS project,

Mr. McCoy:

As noted and as is becoming more and more clear as even your "Timmies"
and your various and sundry other acolytes appear to be abandoning you:

You write only for yourself. Drop the "we" crap. Lest you think
otherwise, I write only for myself as well...

And your "major " project just does also appear to happen to be a
loose system of fantasies supported by anecdotes of doubtful veracity.

Interesting how fast Jute dropped his claim of 4607 posts from me, and
accepted the true number of 602. Also interesting (and entirely
predictable) that he assumes that it's all about him - these were my
*total* posts to RAT over an 18 month period. An average of one post a
day, and included my own 'major KISASS project', which is every bit as
substantial as Jute's endless turgid prose surrounding a very simple
amplifier.


I won another $500.00 for predicting that he would back off his first
number. I got word of winning the bet while I was giving shooting lessons
to the F.B.I. right after a session of tuning up my car to compete in the
Baja endurance classic. :-)


Shame that he can't apply the same KISS principle to the 'design'
articles, which could have been wrapped up in a couple of hundred
lines, rather than the endless thousands of lines of purple prose,
wild assertions and self-aggrandisement that he's taken to get halfway
through the exercise to date.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

In article , Stewart Pinkerton
wrote:

Interesting how fast Jute dropped his claim of 4607 posts from me, and
accepted the true number of 602. Also interesting (and entirely
predictable) that he assumes that it's all about him - these were my
*total* posts to RAT over an 18 month period. An average of one post a
day, and included my own 'major KISASS project', which is every bit as
substantial as Jute's endless turgid prose surrounding a very simple
amplifier.

"Turgid" prose aside, whatever that may be, how can you claim your
"project" is anywhere near as "substantial" as Andre's when Andre actually
built his project, while you built nothing?


Regards,

John Byrns


Surf my web pages at, http://users.rcn.com/jbyrns/

On Mon, 06 Mar 2006 10:56:16 -0600, (John Byrns) wrote:

In article , Stewart Pinkerton
wrote:

Interesting how fast Jute dropped his claim of 4607 posts from me, and
accepted the true number of 602. Also interesting (and entirely
predictable) that he assumes that it's all about him - these were my
*total* posts to RAT over an 18 month period. An average of one post a
day, and included my own 'major KISASS project', which is every bit as
substantial as Jute's endless turgid prose surrounding a very simple
amplifier.

"Turgid" prose aside, whatever that may be, how can you claim your
"project" is anywhere near as "substantial" as Andre's when Andre actually
built his project, while you built nothing?

Did he? I've yet to see any *proof* of that. Besides, I already stated
why *I* didn't build KISASS, but I'm happy to discuss its design - as
indeed I already have done. What has actually assembling the hardware
to do with the substantiveness of the design exercise?

After all, it's taken Jute several thousand lines to get to the output
of the driver stage so far, without any reference to actual hardware
or test results.

--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering