bb wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
bb wrote:
K4YZ wrote:

Because there was no "crappy little comment", Brian.

It was.

No, there wasn't.

Yes, there was.

No, there wasn't.

"Always at a deficit for information, aren't you, Brian?"

That's not "crappy", Brian...It's the truth. That YOU
don't
LIKE
it is one thing...

You don't like being called a liar. So stop lying.

I'm not lying, Brian.

Lie #10 this week?

You haven't presented #1,

Steve, do a search on "Robeson" and "liar." You've presented all of
your lies under your own signature.

Vaporware, Brian. Vaporware.

You claim there are lies. I've been asking you to substantiate
the claim. You have not. You furhter exacerbate your own situation by
making even MORE assertions without corroborating facts. Oh well.


Brian, so how could this be #10? You
and Todd need to see if you can carpool...Him for remedial English,
you
for remedial math.

There's nothing wrong with my math.

Sure there is. In that line you claim there's "10" lies. You've
yet to substantiate "1".

You can't raise a building without a foundation. And you can't
get to "10" without having started at "1".

If I cannot trust the information that the participant
provides,
then
what can I trust?

Yeah...I guess when RRAP is the ONLY place you get
your
"information" from, then you're pretty much at loggerheads
as
to
what
you "know"...

I know you're a liar.

You SAY I'm a liar, but I've PROVED that you are.

You've proven your self to be a liar this past week, and many
many
times previously.

Then why can't we get you to provide the cites? Where's the
proof
of your assertions, Brian?

You lie. That's enough for me.

You say I've lied.

I've repeatedly asked you to substantiate that claim.

You never have.

That would put the onus of liar upon you, Brian. (Not that it
ever LEFT you...)

Sorry.

Looks like there are some empty spots in the schedule.

Not from here.

Did you fill them in?

I can fill those scehdules with 6 people for 48 hours of 24h
coverage, Brian...Why couldn't you?

Whoa!

After you posted "Always at a deficit for information, aren't you,
Brian?" you linked us to a website that showed that this was a four
day
exercise. So why are you trying to make it into a two day exercise
again? More lies and misdirection?

Nope....I can still fill even a 96 hour assignment with six
operators for four days.

YOU keep saying only two. That's even better.

And without working any one or several individual(s) a double shift,
and maintaining the requirement of three person shifts of qualified
communicators...

No all communicators need to be at the mic for the whole 24hours.

Especially if they have 6 people to cover a 48
hour period that they are participating...

Correction. Two teams of 3 people each.

Two teams...Six people...Yeah...SIX is what I said, Brian.

So show me your 96 hour schedule.

Day one. Team one. Operator 1A comes on duty at 0600 until 1600.
Operator 1B comes on duty at 1000 until 2000.
Operator 1C comes on at 2000 and maintains
watch until 0600

Day Two, Team two. Operator 2A comes on duty at 0600 until 1600

Etc etc etc, with team one on again on day three, and team two on
again for day four. Six people of two teams covering 96 hours. Hours
least likely to have heavy traffic flows were covered with minimal
staffing. The bulk of the day had two operators at the mic with the
third available if needed.

100% coverage of the required hours. Two teams of three operators
each.

Done.

And you STILL have not shown me ONE instance where ARES
has
failed
to respond to ANY incident when asked to do so.

I've showed one instance where one volunteer is overextended.
Are
you
the only overextended volunteer in the ARS?

I'm not overextended.

And my managerial skills are such that no one working for me is
either.

You indicate otherwise. Do you work in a M-F, 8-5 Emergency Room?

And if I do? It still does not mean that you can't cover a 96
hour exercise with only six people.

My behaviour here has nothing to do with what happens
in
the
cockpit of an aircraft, Brian.

Then you admit to having multiple personalities?

Nice stretch, Brian.

Not a stretch. When ATC fumbles a phonetic or pressure atlitude,
do
you key the mic and keep repeating "LIAR, LIAR, LIAR?"

They don't fumble.

They do. Unless your experience is so limited that you've yet to see
it.

My experience is from 1974 when I was first licensed as an
aviator. I've flown everywhere in the United States except North
Central, Alaska and Hawaii. I have never once had an ATC error.

An ATC controller in Memphis in particular saved my bacon from an
uncontrolled, pop-up target, on January 21st, 1975. Split second,
no-BS, "do this now" instructions saved me and two other Marines from a
guy in a Skymaster who had just taken off from an uncontrolled field
and could not see me since he was climbing into the sun and coming up
from behind me.

I have NO complaints with the ATC system!

That's the Steve Robeson in RRAP. Introduce us to the Steve
Robeson,
CAP Ace sometime.

What's a "CAP Ace", Brian? The Civil Air Patrol doesn't have
"aces", and I never flew "combat air patrols" in the Armed Forces.

You never flew combat air patrols for anyone, but you've got flight
suits and medals...

Yes I do. The flight suit is PPE...Personal Protective Equipment
as defined by OSHA.

None of any medals I have ever been awarded by either the United
States Marine Corps or the CAP are on that flight suit.

So you STILL have yet to answer the question, Brian....WHAT, in
your opinion, is a "CAP Ace".

Is this yet ANOTHER assertion that will take us a year to get you
to finally admit was an unsubstantiated opinion?

What lie? And yes it IS what YOU said, Brian. Word for
word.
Not a period or comma was dropped.

Lie #11?

Where's #1?

10 back. Last week.

And you said that I had a math problem. Hi!

You do.

You also have a "fact" problem.

And a reading comprehension problem.

Not to mention the already existing honesty and character issues.

This continuing "dodge" to cite the alleged "lie" is yet more
proof of MY assertion that you are without facts or honesty. You are
being intentionally deceitful. Same as lying.

And you have made the assumption that they are working
12
hour
shifts. Your re-arrangement still does not substantiate
your
other
claims.

Re-arrangement??? The 12 hour shift scenario is a Best Case
Scenario.
If the shifts were 8 hours, the volunteer deficits would be
even
greater.

"Best case" for whom?

For covering all of the shifts.

Uh huh.

Remember the customer? The customer that is never, ever, ever
denied?

YOU made the assertion that there is a failure of ARES to respond.

YOU have YET to provide even ONE example where ARES or RACES has
failed to respond for any of the criteria you have suggested...or for
ANY criteria for that matter.

I have been with ARES teams for wildfires in Southern California,
missing children searches in Georgia, public service support in
Pennsylvania and cross country bike races in Tennessee.

You gotta cover all the shifts with the right number of qualified
ops.

I did.

Anyone who has really done any of these knows that's NOT the
facts, Brian...Like you...

Three qualified operators per team. Them's the facts.

Yep. Three. See above. You may not like it, but I've "been
there, done that", and it works. Sorry if you don't agree.

By the way, from what PRACTICAL EXPERIENCE in emergency services
are YOU coming, Brian? Just what have YOU done for Amateur Radio?
MARS? CAP? The VFW Ladies Auxiliary?

One more example of "Not A Clue Burke" hanging his bacon out to
dry!

Explain. And you've yet to show where the customer is not shorted in
this 96hr scenario.

See above.

OK, 8 hour shifts:

Let's put Phil on Team A, and Phil is pulling two shifts.

Day 1, Team A: Day
Team B: Swing
Team C: Mid (deficit of 3)

Day 2, Team A: Day
Team B: Swing
Team nothing: Mid (deficit of 3)

Day 3, Team A: Day (no Phil, deficit of 1)
Team B: Swing
Team C: Mid (deficit of 3)

Day 4, Team A: Day (no Phil, deficit of 1)
Team B: Swing
Team C: Mid (deficit of 3)

Steve, have it your way. It makes the situation worse.

No, it doesn't. You can still cover all operating periods
with
staff. I doubt you were ever a supervisor in the USAF, Brain,
from
your "all hands on duty now" contention.

Hi! Hi, hi, hi!!!

Were you a reservist?

Nope. Active Duty.

You think like a day weanie.

You don't think. At all. You're not capable of "fluid
management". Your planning and execution have to be at someone else's
direction, Brian. Ever hear of "TQM", Brian? It's USAF Core Value.

And I've asked you to define your "day weanie" comment. I say
it's just a Lenniesque diminutive without substantiation.

As usual.

Sorry, Brian...Your contentions are still grasping for
straws.

Nice try, though.

Idiot. Would you like me to show you what 6 or 4 hour shifts
look
like???

Brian, six people for a 48 hour period is thin, but
adequate.

Inadequate for the 96 hour period that you specified, and the
"team
of
3" requirement that Phil specified.

Them's the facts.

No, they're not.

Then state all of the conditions. Then show how the customer is not
shorted.

Done.

Sorry you don't agree, but then it appears you don't have the
supervisory skills to make it work.

Steve, K4YZ

The supervisor fills in when there are a lack of personnel. But
you
didn't see much of that in the USMC, didja, ya Day-Weanie Marine.

"Day-Weanie Marine"...?!?! Really getting P/O'ed that you
keep
getting your nose rubbed in your own inadequacies, aren't you?

You're the only inedaquate equation in this. You have yet to show
how
to cover the 96 hour exercise, with the available personnel, while
maintaining the required number of qualified operators per team.

Done. I thought if I kept nudging you to think a bit you'd pull
it out, but I was wrong. My bad.

Look, it's a new week and I'm in a good mood. Just got back from
a
great scout camping trip. Wx was perfect, invigorating hike,
gourmet
chicken in a foil pack dinner last night, must not have snored
too
much
last night because my throat isn't sore.

Glad to hear you had a nice day.

The best.

Not QUITE the best. You've still got serious honesty and
character issues to overcome.

But we'll take you one day at a time.

Just admit to your lies, say you're sorry, and begin this week
with
a
fresh start. The truth will set you free.

Take your own advice, Brian.

I do. Every day. I start off by not lying.

Then by denying that you have a problem with honesty is yet
ANOTHER of YOUR lies, Burke.

The kids are going to see this some day.

Why not make them proud by having the intestinal fortitude to
gut-up and admit your problem and move forward...???

Start off by TRYING to cite my alleged 11 lies. Then you can
provide us with some evidence to support your "ARES won't respond"
assertion.

You need to requote that.

I don't need to requote anything, Brian.

YOU need to quit stalling and get your act together.

Then move on to your "unlicensed devices" issue.

You need to requote that.

More stalling, Brian.

We're
still waiting for documentation of the legality of your Somalia
operation

Why? You are not in my Somalia log and you will not receive a QSL
card. You are not the Somalia minister of communications. You are
not
the US Air Foce on site commander. You are not the United Nations.
You are not the ARRL.

Nope. I am none of those.

But I HAVE been the "recipient" of your blatant dishonesty in THIS
forum vis-a-vis your Somalia operations, and I KNOW that you acts were
not legal unless you can pony-up some facts that show that you DID have
valid authority to operate an Amateur Radio transmitter while in
Somalia.

As it stands, you were simply pirating. Toddie would be proud.

and some evidence of your claims of having worked the
equilvilent of DXCC from two or three other DX locations.

You're a chronic liar, Brian. It really is THAT simple.

Steve, K4YZ

You make claims, Steve. You do it often and loudly. But your claims
aren't worth spit because they are lies.

No, they are not.

You continue to make unsubstantiated claims. You make those
claims in such manner, tone and repetitiveness as to state them as
fact. To do so over and over when no where there is no substance to
support it (and evidence to the contrary is prevelant) is a lie.
Period.

Now show me your Top-Off 96 hour duty schedule where all shifts are
covered with the proper number of qualified radio operators, and
without abusing the volunteers. You claim you could, so do it.

Did it.

Best of Luck.

No luck needed.

Steve, K4YZ