"D. Stussy" wrote in message
. org...
On Sun, 16 Nov 2003, charlesb wrote:
"D. Stussy" wrote in message
. org...
A more important question: Why do you think WE care?
Another mental case who thinks that his screwed-up opinion
represents
everybody else's thinking.
They call that - meglomania.
Sorry to be the one to have break it to you, "D.", but there are
thousands
of packet radio operators in the U.S. who DO care about the hobby.
I don't dispute that. However, there are plenty of packet operators
who
also
know that TAPR has been a non-functional group long before a decade
ago.
What
you posted isn't news to anyone (nor does it really belong on the
"policy"
group - there are packet specific groups).
There you go again, assuming that your screwed-up opinion represents
everybody else's thinking.
They call that - meglomania. Maybe you should mention this to your
physician.
If you bothered to do any research, you would know that it's not just my
opinion, but the opinion of almost every packeteer in my region. It's
common
knowledge that we ALL know, and have known for years (in excess of a
decade).
There you go again... Yep, after three in a row I'd say it's definately a
case of meglomania. I think they make a new drug for that, maybe you should
ask your physician.
The nastygram opinions of disruptive, anti-ham jerkoffs such as
yourself
have no significance whatsoever.
Charles Brabham, N5PVL
And you do? By starting this thread, you have proved only that you
are
and
shall always remain a legend in your own mind.
Hey, I'm just reporting a bit of news that not everyone may have been
aware
of. You'd be amazed how many hams think of TAPR as a packet radio
organization, even in the ARRL. That's the extent of the significance of
my
post.
But it's not news. It's been known for years.
Not really. The events I described in the post were reported in the last
TAPR PSR, concerning actions of the TAPR BoD last month, not ten years ago.
Everybody else figured out that TAPR was adrift ten years ago as you say,
but the TAPR BoD only figured it out recently. They're a little slow, but
they finally figured it out.
That was the story. I don't see how you could have failed to be amused by
their antics, actually appointing somebody to uncover the mystery of what
TAPR is good for. The BoD put their heads together and tried, but they
couldn't figure it out for themselves.
Now that's entertainment! Don't tell me that you didn't get a giggle out of
all that!
If this is new to you, then you
need to get out from under your rock more often and look around. However,
I'm
certain that others will agree with me; we'd just assume that you don't
come out
at all because you (along with a few others) never seem to have anything
worthwhile to say (and/or nothing that anyone wants to listen to).
Blah blah blah; Ya Ya Yah. Whatever. Twenty-three skidoo, back on you. Nya
nyah!
Code/No-Code has no place in a "policy" newsgroup either, but guess
what?
Actually, as it relates to the rules and testing, it does belong in the
policy
group. Policy is often reflected in the rules.
Yes, and TAPR has mistakenly been viewed as the "National Packet
Organization" by the ARRL and most average hams for quite some time,
adversely affecting policy regarding digital modes and packet radio.
Unfortunately, your meglomanaical view that everybody in the world agrees
with whatever you happen to be thinking is not supported by the evidence. In
fact, opinions among hams tend to vary quite a bit, on any number of
subjects.
Crawl out from under your rock, OM; Take a look around! :-p
For those of you who are unfamiliar with D. Stussy, he is a bit of a
curiosity... A hardcore "LandLine Lid" who doesn't like TAPR... That is
most unusual, because the whole idea of being a LandLine Lid was more or
less invented at TAPR, and most LandLine Lids (digital) identify strongly
with the organization. After all, the Internet is the latest advance in the
art of radio, right?
LandLine Lid: Hams who communicate over the Internet and pretend that it is
amateur radio.
Charles Brabham, N5PVL
|