At 1/5/13 02:27 PM, Travis wrote:
At 1/5/13 02:15 PM, JayMyers wrote:
Yep, if you don't realize it, then we'll move on.
At 1/5/13 02:14 PM, Travis wrote:
You realize it was Saqwert who made that comment right?
At 1/5/13 02:21 PM, Urban-Champion wrote:
why do you feel the need to try and prove to me that the thread isn't a fucking mess of people begging for attentionSorry, facts are facts. Are you still angry that you were wrong
"You take things too seriously"
so i see that we've admitted that "mad" and "angry" are two different things? lmfao
One would be dimwitted to think that you would have any clarification in what is right and wrong. heck, i don't even feel the need to try immensely to justify my argument. The fact that i know the correct definition of "audiophile" and what defines a person as an "audiophile" will always solidify the belief in my mind that you are really no smarter than the average BBS'er. Hell, even other people were able to recognize that to generalize every person who has listened to a vinyl recording as an "audiophile" is un-remarkably wrong in every sense of the word. Clearly, there will exist people who listen to vinyl recording/will have a vinyl collection yet aren't inclined toward faithful hi-fi audio re-production. Hell, any google search of the word "audiophile" at any link, will say NOTHING about people who listen to vinyl are classified as "audiophiles". It might say something about audiophiles using the vinyl format as a preferred re-production format. And to deny any of these facts, otherwise, is clearly just an attempt to try and fuck with me. And if it weren't, then, travis old chum, you'd be arguing against facts.
So i guess i could be taking this a little seriously. ah well. Certainly doesn't mean I'm angry.
Sorry, facts are facts.