Schlecks' Schlock!
 

To Whom It May Concern:

Just so you have a complete picture of Paul W. Schleck, I took the
following from one of his posts in news.groups.proposals:

"Mark Morgan, KB9RQZ, is correct that all of our proposed moderators and
consultants hold the highest class of Amateur Radio Service license in
their countries (Amateur Extra for the U.S. team members, Class A or
similar in the case of Jack Cook, who holds both UK and Australian
licenses). However, that doesn't mean that we would be judgemental or
unfair to other classes of license. We would certainly be open to
adding moderators to our team that hold other classes of license. We
will certainly decline articles that are disrespectful to or prejudicial
against other participants for any reason, including license class. We
would prefer to judge ideas, and take posts at face value, rather than
prejudge individuals and credentials in a vacuum."

Now that just speaks volumes about this man, his caliber, his "ethical
standards", etc. Now, doesn't it?

Gawd! I feel sick ...

Warmest regards,
JS

Schlecks' Schlock!
 

John Smith I wrote:
To Whom It May Concern:

Just so you have a complete picture of Paul W. Schleck, I took the
following from one of his posts in news.groups.proposals:
...
Now that just speaks volumes about this man, his caliber, his "ethical
standards", etc. Now, doesn't it?

Gawd! I feel sick ...

Warmest regards,
JS

Unbelievable, is there ANYONE here who believes Mr. Schlock... err, Mr.
Schleck would be "fair" and just to ALL? That he would consider
ANYTHING other than his own petty gripes and bitches? If so, step right
up here to defend the man, I am waiting ...

My gawd, the man is so crooked he makes my dogs hind legs look straight!

Regards,
JS

Schlecks' Schlock!
 

"John Smith I" wrote in message
...
John Smith I wrote:
To Whom It May Concern:

Just so you have a complete picture of Paul W. Schleck, I took the
following from one of his posts in news.groups.proposals:
...
Now that just speaks volumes about this man, his caliber, his "ethical
standards", etc. Now, doesn't it?

Gawd! I feel sick ...

Warmest regards,
JS

Unbelievable, is there ANYONE here who believes Mr. Schlock... err, Mr.
Schleck would be "fair" and just to ALL? That he would consider
ANYTHING other than his own petty gripes and bitches? If so, step right
up here to defend the man, I am waiting ...

My gawd, the man is so crooked he makes my dogs hind legs look straight!

Regards,
JS

Schleck is all about self-aggrandizement. His posts are all about himself.
Read his posts, the few that he sends. Paul is convinced that he, and only
he, has true insight into Ham matters and that he, Paul Schleck, knows
better than us, the Great Unwashed.
Does the term, "Stuffed Shirt" come to mind?

Schlecks' Schlock!
 

Wodger wrote:

...
Schleck is all about self-aggrandizement. His posts are all about himself.
Read his posts, the few that he sends. Paul is convinced that he, and only
he, has true insight into Ham matters and that he, Paul Schleck, knows
better than us, the Great Unwashed.
Does the term, "Stuffed Shirt" come to mind?





Wodger:

ABSOLUTELY! And, he is much, much more. That bit of his just took the
GREATEST LIAR I have ever known and made that liar look like nothing ...

Schleck is good alright, the man has brass b*lls the size of
basketballs, and his little trolling bunch of henchmen are
sickening--strange they ALL seem to have extra licenses, isn't it?

Course, he just "swore" to the committee that they would not be "unfair"
or "judgmental", what a GREAT FARCE!

Warmest regards,
JS

Schlecks' Schlock!
 

Here is what my response to Mr. Schleck would be on his proposed
moderated newsgroup:

Mr. Paul W. Schleck:

I would question your ability to be a fair and just moderator. I have
participated in the rec.radio.amateur.??? newsgroups, I have witnessed
your abilities and goals.

There, I have seen you and your extra class henchmen attempt to
constantly steer the course of its' flow, intimidation and threats have
often been your tools. I have watched you and others look down upon
other amateurs who will now be allowed to take a "No Code Amateur Exam."
In no way have I ever seen you be even close to being "fair" or "just"
in your opinions, judgments, statements, etc. I have heard many in that
group call the present amateur exams "dumbed down."

Here, you have blatantly lied as to your purposes. You seek a forum
where a very limited band of ideas, concepts, beliefs and discussion can
take forth. You seek to establish a "class based newsgroup", this class
system will VERY MUCH depend on the ancient art of morse code and the
amateur exam.

If any here doubt, they only have to sift though the old posts and check
past posts of you and those you name as would be-moderators and they
will know. What I say, I say with great belief.

You wish to establish a "masonic temple type of brotherhood" here in the
public newsgroups. You and a few of your cronies wish to establish
tight and strict control over this group. And, from what I can see and
guess to your goals, you do this SOLELY for the purpose of stroking your
own egos.

Many of the "weirdos", hecklers and vulgar individuals in the other
amateur groups are due to you and those sharing your same views and
using your "street smart" methods--in effect, your "control freak"
attitude and "better-than-thou" stance has created them.

It would serve justice if you were forced to stay and learn to "get
along and play well" with the other "children."

Your words show a fine demonstration of stealth and deception; I don't
believe I have ever seen a better example than you have presented to us
here. I certainly would nominate you for the "Silver Tongue Award."

However, I would certainly NOT vote to allow you to slink and sneak off
from the tragedy you have helped to create.

Although you make this request and proposal out of your personal need to
feed your ego, and surround yourself with those who would feed your ego
for you, and "live in your own little world", I think it would be a
crime to allow you to do so.

The potential you have to abuse this proposed-moderated newsgroup to the
detriment of others demands it should not be allowed ... I for one would
vote NO, but then, you already knew that ...

Regards,
John Smith I

Schlecks' Schlock!
 

"John Smith I" wrote in message
...
John Smith I wrote:
To Whom It May Concern:

Just so you have a complete picture of Paul W. Schleck, I took the
following from one of his posts in news.groups.proposals:
...
Now that just speaks volumes about this man, his caliber, his "ethical
standards", etc. Now, doesn't it?

Gawd! I feel sick ...

Warmest regards,
JS

Unbelievable, is there ANYONE here who believes Mr. Schlock... err, Mr.
Schleck would be "fair" and just to ALL? That he would consider ANYTHING
other than his own petty gripes and bitches? If so, step right up here to
defend the man, I am waiting ...

My gawd, the man is so crooked he makes my dogs hind legs look straight!

Regards,
JS


There is nothing in the statement as printed that would justify your
conclusion.

Dee, N8UZE

Schlecks' Schlock!
 

"John Smith I" wrote in message
...
Wodger wrote:

...
Schleck is all about self-aggrandizement. His posts are all about
himself.
Read his posts, the few that he sends. Paul is convinced that he, and
only
he, has true insight into Ham matters and that he, Paul Schleck, knows
better than us, the Great Unwashed.
Does the term, "Stuffed Shirt" come to mind?





Wodger:

ABSOLUTELY! And, he is much, much more. That bit of his just took the
GREATEST LIAR I have ever known and made that liar look like nothing ...

Schleck is good alright, the man has brass b*lls the size of basketballs,
and his little trolling bunch of henchmen are sickening--strange they ALL
seem to have extra licenses, isn't it?

Course, he just "swore" to the committee that they would not be "unfair"
or "judgmental", what a GREAT FARCE!

Warmest regards,
JS

As of this point in time you have no proof of that. Let us see what happens
first.

Dee, N8UZE

Schlecks' Schlock!
 

"John Smith I" wrote in message
...

Here is what my response to Mr. Schleck would be on his proposed moderated
newsgroup:

Mr. Paul W. Schleck:

I would question your ability to be a fair and just moderator. I have
participated in the rec.radio.amateur.??? newsgroups, I have witnessed
your abilities and goals.

There, I have seen you and your extra class henchmen attempt to constantly
steer the course of its' flow, intimidation and threats have often been
your tools. I have watched you and others look down upon other amateurs
who will now be allowed to take a "No Code Amateur Exam." In no way have I
ever seen you be even close to being "fair" or "just" in your opinions,
judgments, statements, etc. I have heard many in that group call the
present amateur exams "dumbed down."

Here, you have blatantly lied as to your purposes. You seek a forum where
a very limited band of ideas, concepts, beliefs and discussion can take
forth. You seek to establish a "class based newsgroup", this class system
will VERY MUCH depend on the ancient art of morse code and the amateur
exam.

If any here doubt, they only have to sift though the old posts and check
past posts of you and those you name as would be-moderators and they will
know. What I say, I say with great belief.

You wish to establish a "masonic temple type of brotherhood" here in the
public newsgroups. You and a few of your cronies wish to establish tight
and strict control over this group. And, from what I can see and guess to
your goals, you do this SOLELY for the purpose of stroking your own egos.

Many of the "weirdos", hecklers and vulgar individuals in the other
amateur groups are due to you and those sharing your same views and using
your "street smart" methods--in effect, your "control freak" attitude and
"better-than-thou" stance has created them.

It would serve justice if you were forced to stay and learn to "get along
and play well" with the other "children."

Your words show a fine demonstration of stealth and deception; I don't
believe I have ever seen a better example than you have presented to us
here. I certainly would nominate you for the "Silver Tongue Award."

However, I would certainly NOT vote to allow you to slink and sneak off
from the tragedy you have helped to create.

Although you make this request and proposal out of your personal need to
feed your ego, and surround yourself with those who would feed your ego
for you, and "live in your own little world", I think it would be a crime
to allow you to do so.

The potential you have to abuse this proposed-moderated newsgroup to the
detriment of others demands it should not be allowed ... I for one would
vote NO, but then, you already knew that ...

Regards,
John Smith I

OK John, clean up this newsgroup so I don't have to add filters on an almost
daily basis to eliminate the constant deluge of sex posts, vulgar posts,
etc.

Dee, N8UZE

Schlecks' Schlock!
 

John,

I don't see a serious problem with Paul considering your quote or
anything else that I've seen so far.

Let's see... He clearly says that we are not going to require a
specific licence class to be a moderator. That seems fair.

So Where's the beef in your quote?

I can tell you that nobody in the team even noticed that we all where
extras until Mark brought it up. So to my knowledge that was not a pre-
condition for acceptance in the team. I do recall that they needed to
be Hams, but that seems reasonable. I was there from the start of
this, being responsible for setting up the mail reflector we use as
well as setting up the shell account we use for the moderation
software, so I should know.

It seems to me that you guys just oppose the creation of the moderated
group and you have chosen to engage in personal attacks on the
proponents in an effort to keep it from happening.

This is the best you can do? Do you have any real evidence here?

-= KC4UAI =-

On Jan 28, 12:39 am, John Smith I wrote:
To Whom It May Concern:

Just so you have a complete picture of Paul W. Schleck, I took the
following from one of his posts in news.groups.proposals:

Schlecks' Schlock!
 

Dee Flint wrote:

...
As of this point in time you have no proof of that. Let us see what happens
first.

Dee, N8UZE



Dee:

I live in California, we have rattlesnakes here. Due to the nature of
snakes, I don't have to "see what happens first", the snake is a snake
due to the nature of that snake--that snake cannot change his nature ...

Regards,
JS

Schlecks' Schlock!
 

Dee Flint wrote:

...
There is nothing in the statement as printed that would justify your
conclusion.

Dee, N8UZE



Dee:

I am not the only man who has sat witness to the display of text paul
and his cronies have put on--go back and examine the posts yourself, a
pattern has developed here ... schleck is more a corrupt politician than
anything else I can find to compare him to ...

Regards,
JS

Schlecks' Schlock!
 

Dee Flint wrote:

...
OK John, clean up this newsgroup so I don't have to add filters on an almost
daily basis to eliminate the constant deluge of sex posts, vulgar posts,
etc.

Dee, N8UZE



Dee:

There I agree with you 100%. The vulgarity and sheer non-sense makes me
embarrassed for them. I cringe at the mental state they must exist in
to wish to provide such a display in front of women and younger users here.

I fear that this does not just exist in the newsgroups, here with us,
but also is becoming "something bad" in America :(

I can only admire you in finding the tools and having the determination
to be here with us in spite of all that non-sense ...

Warmest regards,
JS

Schlecks' Schlock!
 

KC4UAI wrote:

...
Let's see... He clearly says that we are not going to require a
specific licence class to be a moderator. That seems fair.

So Where's the beef in your quote?
...

KC4UAI:

What part of "LIAR" don't you understand, I don't believe I have miniced
my words when it comes to "Paul W. Schleck."

The man has NO credibility with me, he could stand next to my
representative in congress and I could not tell them apart--smooth liars
are that way.

I think he would brow beat the new licensees who pass a no code exam, I
think he supports henchmen would would do this also. I think past posts
can be dug up to support that rather nicely! I think the man is all
about a world where "EXTRAS RULE" the school yard!

Regards,
JS

Schlecks' Schlock!
 

"John Smith I" wrote in message
...
Dee Flint wrote:

...
As of this point in time you have no proof of that. Let us see what
happens first.

Dee, N8UZE

Dee:

I live in California, we have rattlesnakes here. Due to the nature of
snakes, I don't have to "see what happens first", the snake is a snake due
to the nature of that snake--that snake cannot change his nature ...

Regards,
JS

Sufficient data already exists on the poison content of rattlesnakes. In
addition, don't lump all snakes with rattlesnakes. The common garter snake
is quite harmless.

Dee, N8UZE

Schlecks' Schlock!
 

"Dee Flint" wrote in message
...

"John Smith I" wrote in message
...
Dee Flint wrote:

...
As of this point in time you have no proof of that. Let us see what
happens first.

Dee, N8UZE

Dee:

I live in California, we have rattlesnakes here. Due to the nature of
snakes, I don't have to "see what happens first", the snake is a snake
due to the nature of that snake--that snake cannot change his nature ...

Regards,
JS

Sufficient data already exists on the poison content of rattlesnakes. In
addition, don't lump all snakes with rattlesnakes. The common garter snake
is quite harmless.

Dee, N8UZE

In addition, the rattlesnake forms a useful role in keeping rodents and
other small vermin under control.

Sensible people leave them alone and make sure that the snakes don't come
into their immediate area.

Dee, N8UZE

Schlecks' Schlock!
 

Dee Flint wrote:

...
Sufficient data already exists on the poison content of rattlesnakes. In
addition, don't lump all snakes with rattlesnakes. The common garter snake
is quite harmless.

Dee, N8UZE



Dee:

I appreciate your sense of humor, you are a welcome and pleasant
addition to my morning cup of coffee. Sundays are always a bit boring
here, diversion is enjoyed :)

Warmest regards,
JS

Schlecks' Schlock!
 

Dee Flint wrote:

...
In addition, the rattlesnake forms a useful role in keeping rodents and
other small vermin under control.

Sensible people leave them alone and make sure that the snakes don't come
into their immediate area.

Dee, N8UZE



Dee:

EXCELLENT advice!

I can see you are accustomed to dealing with such. :)

Warmest regards,
JS

Schlecks' Schlock!
 

"Dee Flint" wrote in message
. ..

"Dee Flint" wrote in message
...

"John Smith I" wrote in message
...
Dee Flint wrote:

...
As of this point in time you have no proof of that. Let us see what
happens first.

Dee, N8UZE

Dee:

I live in California, we have rattlesnakes here. Due to the nature of
snakes, I don't have to "see what happens first", the snake is a snake
due to the nature of that snake--that snake cannot change his nature
....

Regards,
JS

Sufficient data already exists on the poison content of rattlesnakes.
In
addition, don't lump all snakes with rattlesnakes. The common garter
snake
is quite harmless.

Dee, N8UZE

In addition, the rattlesnake forms a useful role in keeping rodents and
other small vermin under control.

Sensible people leave them alone and make sure that the snakes don't come
into their immediate area.

Dee, N8UZE

Yes, sensible people avoid rattlesnakes and have nothing to do with them.
That is why Paul's proposed moderated group will fall flat on its face
within six weeks of going on line. The man is a self-centered blowhard.

Schlecks' Schlock!
 

John Smith I wrote:
Now that just speaks volumes about this man, his caliber, his "ethical
standards", etc. Now, doesn't it?

Your impression of Paul is completely wrong. He is singlehandedly
responsible for the creation of the entire rec.radio hierarchy. He
wrote the charters, solicited the calls for discussions and calls
for votes for each and every rr ng.

It was either Paul or Brian who wrote the Usenet software that's
universally used to carry the newsgroups. (Paul, help me out
here; that seems like a century ago...)

No 73 for you,
Jeff KH6O



--

Schlecks' Schlock!
 

Jeffrey Herman wrote:
John Smith I wrote:
Now that just speaks volumes about this man, his caliber, his "ethical
standards", etc. Now, doesn't it?

Your impression of Paul is completely wrong. He is singlehandedly
responsible for the creation of the entire rec.radio hierarchy. He
wrote the charters, solicited the calls for discussions and calls
for votes for each and every rr ng.

It was either Paul or Brian who wrote the Usenet software that's
universally used to carry the newsgroups. (Paul, help me out
here; that seems like a century ago...)

No 73 for you,
Jeff KH6O




No. I am far from being "completely wrong." However, you name things
the man deserves credit for, those speak well for him. Thanks Paul!

He is a politician ... he is an ARRL yes man ...

Regards,
JS

Schlecks' Schlock!
 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

In (Jeffrey Herman) writes:

John Smith I wrote:
Now that just speaks volumes about this man, his caliber, his "ethical
standards", etc. Now, doesn't it?

Your impression of Paul is completely wrong. He is singlehandedly
responsible for the creation of the entire rec.radio hierarchy. He
wrote the charters, solicited the calls for discussions and calls
for votes for each and every rr ng.

Oh, let's not forget Brian Kantor WB6CYT (Info-Hams administrator), Jay
Maynard K5ZC (1991 rec.radio.amateur.* reorg proponent), Ian Kluft KO6YQ
(1993 rec.radio.amateur.* reorg proponent), Mark Salyzyn AG4YD/ex-VE3MGS
(rec.radio.info proponent and moderator), Ralph Brandi
(rec.radio.shortwave proponent/FAQ maintainer and originator of the
rec.radio.* hierarchy), Rick Stealey K2XT (rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors
proponent), Richard Eckman KO4MR (rec.radio.amateur.dx proponent) and
many others, I'm sure. I've mostly felt like I've just come along for
the ride, or at best, "stood on the shoulders of giants" like Jonathan
Kamens, Tim Skirvin, Ron Dippold, et al.

It was either Paul or Brian who wrote the Usenet software that's
universally used to carry the newsgroups. (Paul, help me out
here; that seems like a century ago...)

Alas, the only software that's used regularly on Usenet that I had a
hand in was auto-faq:

http://www.novia.net/~pschleck/auto-faq/

Though Brian did have a big hand in the early history of the Info-Hams
mailing list, from which the amateur radio newsgroups owe their origin
via a gateway.

- --
73, Paul W. Schleck, K3FU

http://www.novia.net/~pschleck/
Finger for PGP Public Key
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (SunOS)

iD8DBQFFvYRE6Pj0az779o4RAhotAJ9LFVWMBeisgUqVMh7iS0 rn82y9GACgmMrZ
quwL+mmuM5FAOXKLv5Oc/vE=
=Jc5q
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Schlecks' Schlock!
 

KC4UAI wrote:

...

KC4UAI:

If you don't take the first post in this thread as "proof", then there
will never be proof for you.

The man stacked the deck with himself and his henchmen, then he
proceeded to lie to the committee. Not only is that proof, it is a
disgrace!

JS

Schlecks' Schlock!
 

KC4UAI wrote:

...

KC4UAI:

However, if they are just patient, rethink their proposal, write it up
differently and lose all the "control freak" text, guess what? That
charter for the moderated group will float! It would be granted!

Don't you think they are smart enough to figure that out? Don't you
think Paul is enough of a politician to realize that? I think so!

That newsgroup will come into being, if only they get their chit
together and "fly right."

Then, guess what, we will see what type of people we deal with. Guess
what? I am betting exactly what has been stated here will happen.

Be patient man, the universe unfolds to you in its' own time ...

Regards,
JS