Egads! Marvick's Lost It (Re: Mailbag)

[cg-atla!dsmith@schizo.samsung.com (Dave Smith)]

In article <8912052113.AA29506@EDDIE.MIT.EDU> IED0DXM@OAC.UCLA.EDU writes:
>
> To: Love-Hounds
> From: Andrew Marvick (IED)
> Subject: Mailbag
>
>     Woj's "analysis" of the new record is too inept to merit
>reply. IED used to argue tirelessly with people foolish enough to
>embarrass themselves by criticizing Kate's work. Alas, he has not
>the stamina to do so any longer. He just wishes (naturally, without
>any real expectations) that Woj and Drukman and the other supercilious
>nay-sayers who plague this group would go do it someplace else. There
>are other music discussion groups where people as encloaked in ignorance
>as yourselves dither happily without cease. Can you find it in your
>heart to let go of your feelings _there_, rather than here?

This guy is hilarious!  It's a pity that Marvick is serious, otherwise
this stream of frustration that he's vented for us could be some
wonderful satire.

Andrew, Andrew, if objectivity bothers you so much in this arena of
discussion, you are more than likely to charter a brand spanking new
mailing list for yourself and any other "people foolish enough to
embarras themselves by" blindly following "Kate's work".

>     This is astoundingly stupid. .... [Marvick dumps on Druckman]
>  ...... IED frankly can't understand why this
>simple bit of factual information should irritate Drukman, unless
>its true cause is Drukman's pathetic frustration at his own lamentable
>inability to detect the obvious differences between these mixes.


>     Once again Drukman is late and wrong. ... [Marvick dumps on Druckman]


[Next:  Marvick dumps on someone not sharing his OPINION towards locating
"the laugh"]

>     This is false. [...you've all heard it all before ......]

>     Once again you have failed to read IED's words with any care.

>     IED did not present, nor did he claim to present, any argument
>at all in rebuttal to Drukman's ridiculous, ill-considered claims.

Come on Andrew, just say what you feel!  Don't hold back! :-)


> >Such thinking is for the truly insecure, for whom having opinions
> >of their own is just too intimidating.
>
>     IED does not, he assures you, feel intimidated. He is tired.  Just tired.

Are you SURE you're not intimidated?  I think perhaps your lack of
sleep is starting to impair your judgement.  :-)

> >I do not listen to
> >Kate's music searching for flaws, but if there are things I do not
> >like, I don't assume that it is my own ignorance or lack of taste.
>
>     And there is where you make your one fundamental, crucial and
>tragic error. For of course it _is_ your "own ignorance and lack
>of taste," as you put it, which leads you into such hopeless
>self-deception.
>
>-- Andrew Marvick

... and thus the final nail was placed into the coffin.

Andrew, there once was a time when you provided relevant, informative,
and (most importantly) pleasant entries to this group.  The most trouble
we got out of you was some petty bickering between Doug and yourself (by
the way, Doug, what are your OPINIONS on this issue?).
Unfortunately your postings have degenerated to being just elaborate name
calling directed towards those who don't agree with you.  Grow up Andrew,
and face the faKT that you are embarassing yourself and Kate in the process.

Sure, it's fun to see Jon Druckman provoke you to near hysterics, but your
lack of objectivity only proves "your own ignorance and lack of taste".

Yes, it appears that the crown has fallen.  Eh?

PS:  I agree with Druckman that "Reaching Out" is just bombastic caca.  You
     want reasons to support this?  I don't think you could even hear them.
     Come one everyone!  Let's get lead into hopeless self-deception!


-- 
==========================================================================
  David D. Smith ...!{ulowell,ginosko,decvax,ism780c,ima}!cg-atla!dsmith
     "...now I'm on everyone's mailing list,
                         for things I can't afford to buy"  BOB MOULD