W4ASX RESPONSE TIME, 11/18/2005 to K1MAN Essay ES051115

Open minded, I look for the wisdom, despite the nonsense that preceeded
it. In this case, Glenn, rambling masquerading as wisdom is what I
read. You'd do well to figure out what you're trying to say before you
say it. Readers want to see a topical sentence, not stream of
conscience writing. When the writing goes on and on without
materiality, then we conclude the writer is over impressed with
himself, writers who are generally poor listeners and readers. Such
people have difficulty perceiving reality.

I'm afraid, Glenn, that's where you fall in. Many of your
statements/conclusions are rife with fallacy, i.e. the fact that
someone fails to answer a CW call means he doesn't know the code. A
ham for 53 years, I do not answer code because I want to talk sideband.
So, by your logic, you question whether I ever knew the code on
account of ignoring a cw signal.

And this bit about law. God, Glenn, get a grip. Law is so deep and
intoxicating that even the most educated lawyer wouldn't make the
claims you do. Only someone who doesn't know what he doesn't know
would talk about law the way you do. Being honest, I know of one
exception: The jury trial you won against the law professor. Now, that
was a case you can be proud of, one you thought about and prepared for.
For the most part, however, you're way behind me in law, and I don't
fancy myself anything in law. I mean, consider what I don't know:
proof of facts, evidence, hearsay exceptions, theories of damages.
That's just within in the ambit of what comes immediately to mind;
imagine the big iceberg of law under the sea that isn't readily
visible.

At least when I write about you, I write on the basis of facts. For
example, when I alleged you were a narcissist, I drew directly from
your Wife, Bonny. Fact is, you don't know anything about Brian. I can
tell you that Brian is one hell of a genius in psychology, rendering my
psychological musings child's play.

You are certainly right when you say he sets up institutes and
pseudonyms, but don't many of us? My company is called Entertainment
Central, a registered dba of my person here in Florida. Don't you have
IARN and AARU? I've always thought that the way we Americans market
our material is through all kinds of names that are not necessarily our
own. In your mind, however, something is wrong when Brian employs
traditional Americana.

Glenn, again I reiterate at one point you were on the way up, but you
took a wrong turn. You are no great thinker, no great lawyer, a poor
writer, a poor communicator, a very, very poor ham, and a mentally
disordered individual, growing worse. Take stock of yourself, my
friend, and turn it around.

Bob Sherin,
W4ASX

P.S. If you send me material, please publish any response with the same
prominence as the original material. Thanks.
K1MAN Responds November 20, 2005
________________________________________
From:
To:
CC:

To: W4ASX

cc: K3VR

Date: 19 November 2005


You are right about two things, Bob: 1) I don't know anything about
Brian Crow, K3VR, and 2) Your iceberg analogy is a very goog one, but,
as an engineer, I do understand the scientific reasons why 9/10 of an
iceberg remains unseen under the water. I also understand the basic
principles that support the other 9/10 of the law, as you correctly
state that I do not know. I don't, of course.

Likewise, Bob, you don't know about 9/10 of my legal work or 9/10 of
my other work either. This, at best, will have to wait until all of
my books are finished and published at www.K1MAN.com as well as in
"Scientific American," etc.

My biggest legal case to date, by far, is currently pending in a Maine
Superior Court.

Thanks for reading my essay. It was great to hear from you after so
many years. God bless you! 73 and GL de K1MAN.


"Great causes are never tried on the merits; but the cause is reduced
to particulars to suit the size of the partisans, and the contention
is ever hottest on minor matters." - Ralph Waldo Emerson - From his
essay "Nature" 1844.



W4ASX Replies, November 21, 2005

What a lame response, Glenn. God, I could tell you that my biggest
case is right now, and it will go down in legal history. That it very
well. But this doesn't address the level of my legal knowledge nor
countless cases of others that are likely more important than mine and
better advocated.

What I get from you Glenn is this notion of entitlement, that only
other special people can understand you. I may not know 9/10ths of
your law any more than you know 9/10ths of mine. However, I do know
what I read as public record, and far from good lawyering, it is
pitiful, in my view. I see the way you comport yourself as highly
disordered.

Let me give you some examples. You take civil matters and put them in
the criminal arena. Where do you think you're going to get with all
your felony affidavit complaints and those green cards? By making
those matters criminal, do you think the U.S. Attorney is going to
pursue them? To the contrary, everyone with whom I communicate in
privity thinks you're nuts.

A good part of law is in the chosen remedy. Consider: If you have a
complaint against a ham interfering with your broadcast, pursue the
traditional civil route. Get an injunction. Given good cause, it's a
piece of cake and you could join the FCC as an indispensable party (to
interpleed).

Your remedy with Riley is the epitome of what not to do from
perspectives too numerous to enumerate. If you sincerely believe all
the things you allege in the public forum, why not frame it in a 42 USC
1983 federal action, which, designed for the purpose, has teeth? Of
course, you're not going to get anywhere unless you learn how to plead,
your weakest part (of which I was aware). For, if your pleading
doesn't pass muster, the case will go nowhere, like all of your cases,
except the Corson one.

Now, permit me to enlighten you about that 9/10ths iceberg of law
underneath. It is not governed by engineering formulas. In this case,
it is the sheer intoxication that no matter how far you go in law on
any given subject, the library is still replete with more. And every
subject can be attacked from so many different angles. Far from
governed by formulas, it is governed by education: Smart legal people
have a notion of what they don't know.

Your very manner of expression about law, Glenn, is arrogant and
pompous. What successful advocate would call an FCC NAL with prima
facia efficacy puny and anemic? If that is your idea of Soloman's law,
you need more than legal help.

Every would-be author wants to be published. The more respected the
publication, the better the author looks. So, apparently you have some
massive need to tell me to watch for you in Scientific American. Need
I tell you to watch for my best seller "Death of a River Pilot?" While
I have high hopes, I don't know for sure that it will be a best seller
-- or even published, for that matter. Only time will tell. But
you've got this need to hype yourself in the present for something that
may happen in the future. Has seasonal depression got you down? (I
know that Maine isn't the brightest spot at this time of year.)

In the 1950s, I elmered Aaron Fishman, K1BAF, and in recent years he
was in fact published in Scientific American regarding the history of
sun spot cycles. Not one to promote himself, Aaron just one day sent
me the article, whereupon I marvelled at his achievement. He wasn't
aware of what an honor it was. Now Aaron is a mensch, not a pompous
ass, as, quite honestly, you come off.

Like your stream of consciousness musings, your reply is stilted.
Memoirs. Anyone who has a life worth studying can write a memoir, but,
from what I know, yours isn't worth reading, and neither is mine.
You're far more likely to wind up a classic case study in DSM.

Please pardon me for expressing the thoughts stirring within.
Obviously, if you are enamored with marching to the beat of your own,
off-beat drummer, proceed! Be assured that I will evaluate any of your
prospective writings unprejudiced and with an open heart. To be
honest, I like communicating compliments but have the opposite animus
based upon the totality of your utterances in the public domain.

Bob Sherin, W4ASX