NNTP-Posting-Date: =A0=A0 Fri, Aug 20, 2004, 12:24pm (EDT-1) From:
=A0=A0 Dave Hall Group: =A0=A0 rec.radio.cb
Subject: =A0=A0 Hey Twist!!!! Date: =A0=A0 Fri, Aug 20, 2004, 1:24pm
Organization: =A0=A0 home.ptd.net/~n3cvj X-Trace: =A0=A0
sv3-ZDZ/moIrmAAEi+xOEPkNQVGmpvkmu7UF+wCz8filpRT0rxrGbml8wr 8WXZq8TijDCNdVOB=
Dudrwlwnq!I9iQn+YEsbZkx4owgwo/IkTCiFZP6/GT2D3PBjsHcqSJGJWhi1QdS5sNcP3G5YEr=
jUKQRIhan0X1!IG7P5lLLufM=3D
X-Complaints-To: =A0=A0
X-DMCA-Complaints-To: =A0=A0
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: =A0=A0 Please be sure to forward a
copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: =A0=A0 Otherwise we will be
unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: =A0=A0 1.3.13
On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 17:18:11 -0400, (Twistedhed)
wrote:
Sorry Dave, had to run out for awhile. Let us carry on,,,,
I enjoy the civil tone. As long as it stays this
way, I'm cool.
_
K...back again.
Part III
From: N3CVJ
Why should this newsgroup be treated any
differently than an in-person venue?
I happen to agree with you on this item, but why should others be forced
or made to conform to our view? They shouldn't.
Why not?
Because they have the same rights as we do.
=A0=A0Personal freedom does not (or should not)
extend to the ruination of other people's
freedom or right of access.
And usenet does neither, nor does CB.
_
When legally operating people are shouted off
of CB radio by illegal stations "squashing mud
ducks", their right of access has been
infringed.
Please show me any document speaking of this a RIGHT to access you
claims exist.
On Usenet, no one can "squash" a "mud duck"
every one is allowed to voice their opinions.
But there are no restraints for those who can't
maintain a civil tone.
Nonetheless. civility is not a legal requirement, and once again, usenet
"can not extend to the ruin of another's freedom." In fact, the ONLY
thing that can lead to such a thing is a crime and/or incarceration
_
Your argument makes the point against the Patriot Act quite nicely,
though.
In what way?
Read the part you snipped, it illustrates it perfectly.
_
I would not want to make these activities
"illegal". If you want to act like a retard, by all
means, go for it! But we all have the right to
know who it is that is acting like the retard so
that they can properly face the repercussions
that that type of behavior brings.
No,,you don't have the right to know the identity of one just because
you feel he is acting like a retard.
There would be no question about whether or
not someone is acting like a retard. This is
beyond the subjective opinion of one user
over another.
If the behavior is continual and affects more
than just one person, then that changes
things.
Whatever. You STILL don't have the right
to know the indentity of one merely because you lend your personal
opinion that one is "acting like a retard".
_
Well now, the word "if" and the entrance of
injurous posts constitutes an entirely new concept and has no relation
to you claiming you have the right to know one's identity on usenet
merely because you feel he is "acting like a retard". Nice shuffle, but
it non-effective.
What did you think I meant when I used the
term "acting like a retard"?
Since you solidified how objective the term can be, it can actually mean
whatever you wish it to mean. Nevertheless, because *YOU* feel one is
acting in a certainmanner not in conformity with your beliefs gives you
no right to know anything concerning their identity.
_
A simple disagreement of opinion does not
qualify as "acting like a retard".
You are the one needing to qualify what he term *you* initiated as term
extremely "objective".
Someone who acts like a retard is someone
who contributes nothing positive and verbally
harasses the regular users to the point that
they take the fun out of participation.
That is ridiculous. "Retard" is a poitically incorrect offensive term
for one who suffers from diminished mental capacity confirmed by a
American licensed MD.
_
But,,keeping with this thought you
put forward, you just described exactly what happened to Dogie.
As it should be. Everyone who acts in that
manner should be removed from society
where they can no longer harm the activities
of others.
Wrong." Acting like a retard" is not illegal.
Neither is listening to loud rap music outside.
Non-sequitur. But to show how incorrect you have been, it most certainly
is illegal once it reaches levels that violate noise ordinances. The
charge: Disturbing the peace.
But do it at 1:00 Am and guaranteed the cops
will be there to "oppress" your right, for the
betterment of the rest of the community.
Non-sequitur once again. One has no right to disturb the peace and if
one chooses to do so, must be prepared for any consequence.
That's what I mean by accountability. If you
had to "face the music" for acting
inappropriately, you would eventually adopt an
incentive to NOT act that way. The quality of
the forums would increase considerably.
-
What you feel constitutes "quality" is the opposite of what many others
feel. The loss of personal privacy in this world is never an improvement
in the quality of anything.
Why? What would you do differently if
suddenly we all knew who you were? It
certainly wouldn't change how I interact as I'm
already up-front about who I am.
Why? Why should it matter if people know
who you are? Are you THAT paranoid?
Why is none of your concern.
But is undoubtedly the whole reason why you
defend this notion so vehemently.
Don't give yourself so much credit. I have defended personal liberties
long before encountering you.
-
Why I choose to exercise my American
birthrights is none of your concern. Once again, you are owed no
explanation.
That you would flaunt you rights as an excuse
to allow people to victimize other people at the
expense of their rights is also telling.
Perhaps if that is what I have done, there may be some validity to that.
But since I have not done so, and only discussed such when continually
pressed by those not unlike yourself who have nose problems and an
admitted penchant for personal information in order to "spread it
around", I am quite satisfied with just what is and isn't "telling" in
this thread.
_
I remember making the claim that some I
knew personally was popped by local cops for
interference relating to his CB radio. You
challenged the validity of my claim,
AFTER you refused to cite a credible source, and only after did I
"challenge the validity" of your claim.
I don't have a credible source. I didn't "find"
the incident. I was personally involved with it.
Of course you don't and of course you were. There are those who insist
they were abducted by aliens who also have no credible source.
That doesn't mean that it didn't happen.
Well, yea, in the world of reality acceptance, it does.
first by trying to find some sort of difference
between "a suburb of" and "suburban",
suggesting that I was lying.
You are lying now. YOU were the one to invoke the word "suburb", not I,
and you invoked it when the heat got too hot and you realized, like
said, the court documents would confirm your story. I note you
originally claimed it happened IN Philthadelphia,
I never EVER claimed that it happened IN
philthy. Never. I said that it happened in
SUBURBAN (Meaning in the suburbs) of
Exactly. And then you invoked Norristown, which is NOT a suburb of
Philthy, NOT on any area maps of Philthy, and pays no bills or taxes to
Philthy, and has no mail go through Philthy. It meets NONE of the
criteria for a suburb of Philthy, ,,in fact, it's nowhere near Philthy..
It IS a suburb of philly, as it resides in an area
which surrounds the city area. In any case it
was your hangup of semantics that caused
you to look in the wrong place. The worst you
can accuse me of is incorrectly stating the
location. It doesn't change the particulars.
Your posts do not constitute particulars ofan incident that never
occurred merely because you say it did.
Oh, and thank you for admitting that I DID
provide the name of the exact town.
Oh, no problem, if that minor consolation worls for you, hail hail. The
fact of the matter is, the town meets no parameters for what consitutes
a suburb of a city. You feel merely because the closest big city is
Philly, it constitutes that Norristown is a suburb? By what do you base
this? Distance? What were you references? Again, you can cite nothing in
this world that illustrtaes Norristown as a suburb of Philly, because it
is not.
Philly. Why I chose that wording instead of just
saying that it happened in Norristown, should
be obvious.
=A0
It was.
=A0This is an international forum. Ask someone
from another geographical area if they're ever
heard of a relatively small town (such as
Norristown) and they will most likely not. But
mention a popular city as a geographical point
of reference, and it's another story.
This being an international forum doesn't stop you from invoking
domestic (American) law, so you can;t invoke it as a defense for your
beahvior now.
American law applies to me as I am a citizen
of America.
But you don't direct your posts about the law to yourself,,(well,
sometime you do), you post them with abandon and no thought to other
counties laws.
But as a referential courtesy to
those who don't line in "my neck of the woods"
I used general locational terms. I never
intended to be detail specific at the time I
posted it. That you took it as such is a failing
on your part.
You had months to reply. You were asked many, many times to provide
"specifics" (verbatim) of the case. That you responded with "Suburbian
Philly" and now try to say you weren't responding with "detail specific"
at the time you were asked, is *your* communication gaffe, because that
is exactly what you were asked for.."specifics". Not anyone else's fault
you can't answer correctly.
What more do you want?
Umm....perhaps this credibility you always speak of . You hold one who
doesn't respond to your demands for personal information as not credible
on usenet. The rest of the world holds one who makes claims with no
substantiation as not credible.
_
I told you all the
details. I never knew the defendant's last
name (part of that anonymity aspect of CB)
only that the name he went by was "Floyd"
(Which from other people, is his middle name,
his fist name is Anthony). It happened in
Norristown Pa (A suburb of philly) in the late
90's.
When you failed to find any information
AFTER you claimed it was in Philly,
I never claimed it was IN philly.
Sure you did,,,here it is again:
"This happened about 5 years ago IN
suburban Philadelphia.."
Suburban philadelphia is not the same thing
as being in the city of philadelphia.
Correct. But suburbs of Philadelphia are inexplicably tied to the city
it a suburb of, in one of many ways, a few of which you have now been
informed.
If I had intended to state that it was in the city
I would have said "in the city of Philadelphia".
=A0=A0You still won't admit your mistake.
That you feel that suburban philly means the
same thing as IN philly was your mistake.
_
Wrong. That you called it that with, once again, nothing to substantiate
it except your belief, does not consititute what makes a suburbia of a
city. Once again, some of those parameters are which defines a suburb of
a city are outlined above and Norristown meets none of them.
_
Not in the minds of the people who live here,
all of whom refer to themselves as living in the
suburbs of phila. Even as far out in the sticks
as I now live even the news media refers to
this area as the "philadelphia suburbs". But I
guess all these people are wrong and you are
right?
If they call Norristown a suburb of Philly, yes , they are wrong, and
once again, stop being so personal, for it is not I that define the
parameters of what constitutes a suburb of a city. For one, they must
have a civic connection in some form. Norristown does not. In addition
to you admitting how vile those Philthy folks are, you're telling the
world the majority of folks in your area are ignorant, as well.
If I was making the whole thing up, do you
think I would waste so much time on
semantics?
Oh yea. This group has been witness to watching you talk out both sides
of your mouth.
What difference does it make now?
Now that you admitted what I maintained after all this time, that you
are unable to produce anything to sustantiate this claim, not a thing.
_
You know
where exactly it happened now, so to continue
to argue the point now is counterproductive
and wasteful of bandwidth.
Correct. It should be reserved for your long rants illustrating your
fancy for what you refer as internet psychology.
If you want to go through the trouble to
request (at your cost) microfiche records,
No need. As far as a court of law would be concerned, I have presented
the burden of proof that your claims were false. I have been "pacified"
over this issue regardless or not of whether you feel that such is your
decision.
_
This is the internet remember, there is no
accountability. So anything that anyone says
is already suspect.
You are the one unable to provide for your claims. That you feel another
should feel foolish for your inability to do so is troubling.
Even when I told you the exact town,
You never said the exact town and if you did, you NEVER linked it with
the case you claim occurred or in the same thread. Since you claim
otherwise, force feed me some crow, Davie, and show the world where you
told me what town the cber got busted in and went to court. Just another
in that long line of unsubstantiated bull****,,,,
You asked for it, you got it: Enjoy your crow....
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=3D...oup:rec.radio=
cb+author
ave+author:Hall&hl=3Den&lr=3D&ie=3DUTF-8&c2coff=3D1&selm=3D3E49=
3556.2BA%40worldlynx.net&rnum=3D1
-
There it is again,,,,Norristown, a town that has nothing to do with
Philadelphia except in your mind. You will find nothing anywhere
denoting Norristown as even remotely associated as a suburb of Philthy.
Except by the people who live here.
Another claim of yours that is morose. I don't believe an entire
community is illiterate in civics.
I don't
purport to know what the people in the greater
Tampa area should refer to themselves as, so
I would expect that you not be so
presumptuous as to assume the same from
my area.
_
Ahhh,,but I am quite familiar with Philthy and the related
area...actually, I am pretty familiar with Penna, NY and a host of other
states. I have done quite a bit of traveling over the years and hung
around Philthy for some time.
_
_
You can't look for something and expect to f
ind much without key particulars,
like the defendant's name, which I can't give
you as I didn't know all of it.
YOU not being able to doesn't mean others are unable. And sure I can,
dave,,,I can do just that with the very simple process of elimination.
You start with the town and backtrack to the corresponding year or two
which you already gave us indirectly,,from there, one eliminates all
charges except for discorderly conduct. From there, it's a matter of
checking those charged with the offense in the corresponding time frame
and walla walla,,,,,,,,,,and that is but one way of many and by far the
easiest.
Not disorderly conduct, it was disturbing the
peace. Get it right.
Semantics.
And you still assume that this information is
on the internet.
Whatever has you stuck on the internet as being the single informational
tool in my work arsenal is incorrect, but seeing as you were told this
before and still can't grasp it, this will be the last time I correct
you on this matter.
As always, you have the right to insist on remaining clueless and
ignorant on such matters.
It may not be. The incident occurred in the
1996-1998 time frame
Not all information is available on the internet.
Exactly, so I have no clue why you continue to assume it is.
Then use your "magic" to produce the info.
I am of the opinion it did not occur. You made the claim, substantiate
it or just get past the fact that you finally admiitted you are unable.
Although once you find it, I suspect you will
not admit it. You don't strike me as someone
who takes being proven wrong all that well.
Well, that's ok, considering how many times you have been wrong lately.
Dave
N3CVJ
"Sandbagger"
http://home.ptd.net/~n3cvj