|
Yaesu rises again!?
Spike wrote in
: I'm sure there will be some of us about if you decide to look in again. ITMT, good luck with your project(s). Thankyou. :) One of the good things about Usenet is that familiar names often appear in groups I didn't expect. Maybe that's one of its successes, when divergent interests make interesting patterns and posts from a person who is often helpful elsewhere show up in a strange place. If I find myself missing that during a break from some other thing, I will look to see how Usenet is doing. |
Yaesu rises again!?
On 12/2/2014 7:15 AM, Lostgallifreyan wrote:
wrote in : I'm old enough that I've learned people like him just aren't worth getting all upset over. Then why bother responding at all? If you both cut each other a lot more slack, you'll both have more room to maneouvre. For past couple of days you both reminded me of boxers in a clinch, bounding together from rope to rope. Not a lot I can do about that, but I can at least say how it looks. :) Notice how he has to respond to my comments even when I'm not talking to him? Another trait of a troll. The poor guy. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry, AI0K ================== |
Yaesu rises again!?
On 12/2/2014 1:11 AM, the well-known troll wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote: snip I'm old enough that I've learned people like him just aren't worth getting all upset over. Then why bother responding at all? Because I try to be polite - even to trolls. Don't confuse politeness with rage. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry Stuckle ================== |
Yaesu rises again!?
On 12/2/2014 4:30 AM, Spike wrote:
On 02/12/14 00:11, Lostgallifreyan wrote: BT are going to kill Giganews, and due to recent events I decided I'd not be chasing Usenet after I lose easy access, but this point is too interesting for me not to post, even if I don't see any replies. (BT puls the plug in under 48 hours from now). Open a free account with the well-regarded Eternal September, or pay a massive 10 euro for News Individual Net's excellent service. Both text only. http://www.eternal-september.org/ http://news.individual.net/ Keep in mind the forthcoming vote for the formation of a UK Usenet Amateur Radio moderated group. If you want to see how successful the US version has been - they have the same US chap behind their formation, and the US Charter has been virtually cut-and-pasted - visit rec.radio.amateur.moderated. Which is an entirely different newsgroup, with entirely different moderators. There are many who refuse to take part in that newsgroup for various reasons. There is no relationship between the two. You're really stretching now, Spike. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry Stuckle ================== |
Yaesu rises again!?
On 02/12/14 13:41, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 12/2/2014 4:30 AM, Spike wrote: Keep in mind the forthcoming vote for the formation of a UK Usenet Amateur Radio moderated group. If you want to see how successful the US version has been - they have the same US chap behind their formation, and the US Charter has been virtually cut-and-pasted - visit rec.radio.amateur.moderated. Which is an entirely different newsgroup, with entirely different moderators. There are many who refuse to take part in that newsgroup for various reasons. There is no relationship between the two. *For now* the moderators are different. but with a freemason-type succession policy nothing can be guaranteed. You're really stretching now, Spike. Only by noting that the chap who is behind the RFD is the same chap who brought 'order' to the US groups (and RRAM can be seen by all to be the roaring success of this policy[1,2,3]), and the Charter and ModPol for the proposed group being little more than a cut-and-paste job, even down to the Americanisms. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and has the antecedents of a duck, it's a duck. [1] 61.7% blog posts [2] Less than 1 post per day from individuals over 18 months [3] The last gap between individual's posts was 4 days 2 hours. -- Spike "Hard cases, it has frequently been observed, are apt to introduce bad law". Judge Rolfe |
Yaesu rises again!?
On 12/2/2014 10:07 AM, Spike wrote:
On 02/12/14 13:41, Jerry Stuckle wrote: On 12/2/2014 4:30 AM, Spike wrote: Keep in mind the forthcoming vote for the formation of a UK Usenet Amateur Radio moderated group. If you want to see how successful the US version has been - they have the same US chap behind their formation, and the US Charter has been virtually cut-and-pasted - visit rec.radio.amateur.moderated. Which is an entirely different newsgroup, with entirely different moderators. There are many who refuse to take part in that newsgroup for various reasons. There is no relationship between the two. *For now* the moderators are different. but with a freemason-type succession policy nothing can be guaranteed. More unfounded conjecture. You're really stretching now, Spike. Only by noting that the chap who is behind the RFD is the same chap who brought 'order' to the US groups (and RRAM can be seen by all to be the roaring success of this policy[1,2,3]), and the Charter and ModPol for the proposed group being little more than a cut-and-paste job, even down to the Americanisms. So? If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and has the antecedents of a duck, it's a duck. [1] 61.7% blog posts [2] Less than 1 post per day from individuals over 18 months [3] The last gap between individual's posts was 4 days 2 hours. Which has absolutely nothing to do with a completely different newsgroup. But you have to continue to try to compare apples and oranges. Many of us refuse to post to rram for various reasons, but would gladly embrace ukrram. But why do you care? You can use it or not - it's your choice. Why are you trying to prevent others from having a group free from the crap on ukrra? -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry, AI0K ================== |
Yaesu rises again!?
In message , Jerry Stuckle
writes On 12/2/2014 10:07 AM, Spike wrote: *For now* the moderators are different. but with a freemason-type succession policy nothing can be guaranteed. More unfounded conjecture. If the moderation policies out to be unsatisfactory, there are remedies - and if all else fails, simply pretend that the moderated NG doesn't exist - which is what I already do with the 98,299 NGs out there, but I don't subscribe to. -- Ian |
Yaesu rises again!?
On 02/12/14 15:53, Ian Jackson wrote:
In message , Jerry Stuckle writes On 12/2/2014 10:07 AM, Spike wrote: *For now* the moderators are different. but with a freemason-type succession policy nothing can be guaranteed. More unfounded conjecture. If the moderation policies out to be unsatisfactory, there are remedies - and if all else fails, simply pretend that the moderated NG doesn't exist - which is what I already do with the 98,299 NGs out there, but I don't subscribe to. Wrong argument, Ian. We're talking about the succession, not about the moderation policies -- Spike "Hard cases, it has frequently been observed, are apt to introduce bad law". Judge Rolfe |
Yaesu rises again!?
On 02/12/14 15:43, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 12/2/2014 10:07 AM, Spike wrote: On 02/12/14 13:41, Jerry Stuckle wrote: On 12/2/2014 4:30 AM, Spike wrote: Keep in mind the forthcoming vote for the formation of a UK Usenet Amateur Radio moderated group. If you want to see how successful the US version has been - they have the same US chap behind their formation, and the US Charter has been virtually cut-and-pasted - visit rec.radio.amateur.moderated. Which is an entirely different newsgroup, with entirely different moderators. There are many who refuse to take part in that newsgroup for various reasons. There is no relationship between the two. *For now* the moderators are different. but with a freemason-type succession policy nothing can be guaranteed. More unfounded conjecture. It's a plain and simple fact, and explicitly stated. So simple that everyone should be able to understand it. You're really stretching now, Spike. Only by noting that the chap who is behind the RFD is the same chap who brought 'order' to the US groups (and RRAM can be seen by all to be the roaring success of this policy[1,2,3]), and the Charter and ModPol for the proposed group being little more than a cut-and-paste job, even down to the Americanisms. So? It's complete rebuttal of your claim that it "... is an entirely different newsgroup, with entirely different moderators". Which is why I said "If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and has the antecedents of a duck, it's a duck". If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and has the antecedents of a duck, it's a duck. [1] 61.7% blog posts [2] Less than 1 post per day from individuals over 18 months [3] The last gap between individual's posts was 4 days 2 hours. Which has absolutely nothing to do with a completely different newsgroup. But you have to continue to try to compare apples and oranges. An entirely different newsgroup, formed by the same chap and running a cut-and-paste Charter and ModPol, so the success of them can be already seen in the group this was all lifted from. It's, well, crap. Many of us refuse to post to rram for various reasons, but would gladly embrace ukrram. That's your problem. Please don't lumber us Brits with it. You can always RFD for change (or whatever you call it over there). But why do you care? You can use it or not - it's your choice. Why are you trying to prevent others from having a group free from the crap on ukrra? You've already got one, but because you've blotted your copybook you want another one to play with. I don't see why we should all be lumbered because of your shortcomings. -- Spike "Hard cases, it has frequently been observed, are apt to introduce bad law". Judge Rolfe |
Yaesu rises again!?
On 12/2/2014 11:16 AM, Spike wrote:
On 02/12/14 15:43, Jerry Stuckle wrote: On 12/2/2014 10:07 AM, Spike wrote: On 02/12/14 13:41, Jerry Stuckle wrote: On 12/2/2014 4:30 AM, Spike wrote: Keep in mind the forthcoming vote for the formation of a UK Usenet Amateur Radio moderated group. If you want to see how successful the US version has been - they have the same US chap behind their formation, and the US Charter has been virtually cut-and-pasted - visit rec.radio.amateur.moderated. Which is an entirely different newsgroup, with entirely different moderators. There are many who refuse to take part in that newsgroup for various reasons. There is no relationship between the two. *For now* the moderators are different. but with a freemason-type succession policy nothing can be guaranteed. More unfounded conjecture. It's a plain and simple fact, and explicitly stated. So simple that everyone should be able to understand it. And there is no reason to think the current moderators of rram will become the moderators of ukrram, You're really stretching now, Spike. Only by noting that the chap who is behind the RFD is the same chap who brought 'order' to the US groups (and RRAM can be seen by all to be the roaring success of this policy[1,2,3]), and the Charter and ModPol for the proposed group being little more than a cut-and-paste job, even down to the Americanisms. So? It's complete rebuttal of your claim that it "... is an entirely different newsgroup, with entirely different moderators". Which is why I said "If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and has the antecedents of a duck, it's a duck". Nope. No rebuttal at all. You're comparing apples and oranges. They are two different newsgroups with two different audiences and two different sets of moderators. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and has the antecedents of a duck, it's a duck. [1] 61.7% blog posts [2] Less than 1 post per day from individuals over 18 months [3] The last gap between individual's posts was 4 days 2 hours. Which has absolutely nothing to do with a completely different newsgroup. But you have to continue to try to compare apples and oranges. An entirely different newsgroup, formed by the same chap and running a cut-and-paste Charter and ModPol, so the success of them can be already seen in the group this was all lifted from. It's, well, crap. So he used another newsgroup's charter as a template? Here's something you don't obviously know - people don't create everything from scratch. They often use something that already exists as a template. And that isn't restricted to usenet charters. They are two different newsgroups. You're comparing apples and oranges. Many of us refuse to post to rram for various reasons, but would gladly embrace ukrram. That's your problem. Please don't lumber us Brits with it. I never said anything about it involving you. You can always RFD for change (or whatever you call it over there). Why? I'm quite happily ignoring it - as you should ukrram if you don't like it. But why do you care? You can use it or not - it's your choice. Why are you trying to prevent others from having a group free from the crap on ukrra? You've already got one, but because you've blotted your copybook you want another one to play with. I don't see why we should all be lumbered because of your shortcomings. This has zero to do with rram, but you can't seem to get that fact through your thick skull. And the creation of ukrram has absolutely nothing to do with rram. I know you can't understand that, either. So what's the real reason, Spike? -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry, AI0K ================== |
Yaesu rises again!?
On 12/2/2014 10:52 AM, Brian Morrison wrote:
On Tue, 02 Dec 2014 10:43:08 -0500 Jerry Stuckle wrote: *For now* the moderators are different. but with a freemason-type succession policy nothing can be guaranteed. More unfounded conjecture. Not at all, Spike is quite correct that fair and intelligent moderation is in no way guaranteed with the initial moderators certain to remain in post until the death of Usenet. That is not what he said, Brian. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry, AI0K ================== |
Yaesu rises again!?
On Tue, 02 Dec 2014 11:40:45 -0500, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
So what's the real reason, Spike? He's set his chins against it, and aligned his bloated usenet ego with a no vote? |
Yaesu rises again!?
On 02/12/14 16:40, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 12/2/2014 11:16 AM, Spike wrote: It's a plain and simple fact, and explicitly stated. So simple that everyone should be able to understand it. And there is no reason to think the current moderators of rram will become the moderators of ukrram, "*For now* the moderators are different. but with a freemason-type succession policy nothing can be guaranteed" It's complete rebuttal of your claim that it "... is an entirely different newsgroup, with entirely different moderators". Which is why I said "If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and has the antecedents of a duck, it's a duck". Nope. No rebuttal at all. You're comparing apples and oranges. They are two different newsgroups with two different audiences and two different sets of moderators. "Only by noting that the chap who is behind the RFD is the same chap who brought 'order' to the US groups (and RRAM can be seen by all to be the roaring success of this policy[1,2,3]), and the Charter and ModPol for the proposed group being little more than a cut-and-paste job, even down to the Americanisms". An entirely different newsgroup, formed by the same chap and running a cut-and-paste Charter and ModPol, so the success of them can be already seen in the group this was all lifted from. It's, well, crap. So he used another newsgroup's charter as a template? Here's something you don't obviously know - people don't create everything from scratch. They often use something that already exists as a template. And that isn't restricted to usenet charters. They are two different newsgroups. You're comparing apples and oranges. The chap who is behind the RFD is the same chap who brought 'order' to the US groups (and RRAM can be seen by all to be the roaring success of this policy[1,2,3]), and the Charter and ModPol for the proposed group being little more than a cut-and-paste job, even down to the Americanisms. [1] 61.7% blog posts [2] Less than 1 post per day from individuals over 18 months [3] The last gap between individual's posts was 4 days 2 hours. Many of us refuse to post to rram for various reasons, but would gladly embrace ukrram. That's your problem. Please don't lumber us Brits with it. I never said anything about it involving you. Non sequitur. You can always RFD for change (or whatever you call it over there). Why? I'm quite happily ignoring it - as you should ukrram if you don't like it. You're not happy at all. You want the Brits to host you a moderated group so you can play in it. You've already got one, but because you've blotted your copybook you want another one to play with. I don't see why we should all be lumbered because of your shortcomings. This has zero to do with rram, but you can't seem to get that fact through your thick skull. And the creation of ukrram has absolutely nothing to do with rram. I know you can't understand that, either. I think you're struggling with this: "Only by noting that the chap who is behind the RFD is the same chap who brought 'order' to the US groups (and RRAM can be seen by all to be the roaring success of this policy[1,2,3]), and the Charter and ModPol for the proposed group being little more than a cut-and-paste job, even down to the Americanisms". So what's the real reason, Spike? The chap who is behind the RFD is the same chap who brought 'order' to the US groups (and RRAM can be seen by all to be the roaring success of this policy[1,2,3]), and the Charter and ModPol for the proposed group being little more than a cut-and-paste job, even down to the Americanisms. [1] 61.7% blog posts [2] Less than 1 post per day from individuals over 18 months [3] The last gap between individual's posts was 4 days 2 hours. And we don't want Stuckle over here. Isn't the US big enough for you? -- Spike "Hard cases, it has frequently been observed, are apt to introduce bad law". Judge Rolfe |
Yaesu rises again!?
On 12/2/2014 11:52 AM, Spike wrote:
On 02/12/14 16:40, Jerry Stuckle wrote: On 12/2/2014 11:16 AM, Spike wrote: It's a plain and simple fact, and explicitly stated. So simple that everyone should be able to understand it. And there is no reason to think the current moderators of rram will become the moderators of ukrram, "*For now* the moderators are different. but with a freemason-type succession policy nothing can be guaranteed" Unsupported conjecture and fear mongering. IOW, FUD. It's complete rebuttal of your claim that it "... is an entirely different newsgroup, with entirely different moderators". Which is why I said "If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and has the antecedents of a duck, it's a duck". Nope. No rebuttal at all. You're comparing apples and oranges. They are two different newsgroups with two different audiences and two different sets of moderators. "Only by noting that the chap who is behind the RFD is the same chap who brought 'order' to the US groups (and RRAM can be seen by all to be the roaring success of this policy[1,2,3]), and the Charter and ModPol for the proposed group being little more than a cut-and-paste job, even down to the Americanisms". So he used another newsgroup's charter as a template? Here's something you don't obviously know - people don't create everything from scratch. They often use something that already exists as a template. And that isn't restricted to usenet charters. They are two different newsgroups. You're comparing apples and oranges. An entirely different newsgroup, formed by the same chap and running a cut-and-paste Charter and ModPol, so the success of them can be already seen in the group this was all lifted from. It's, well, crap. So he used another newsgroup's charter as a template? Here's something you don't obviously know - people don't create everything from scratch. They often use something that already exists as a template. And that isn't restricted to usenet charters. They are two different newsgroups. You're comparing apples and oranges. The chap who is behind the RFD is the same chap who brought 'order' to the US groups (and RRAM can be seen by all to be the roaring success of this policy[1,2,3]), and the Charter and ModPol for the proposed group being little more than a cut-and-paste job, even down to the Americanisms. [1] 61.7% blog posts [2] Less than 1 post per day from individuals over 18 months [3] The last gap between individual's posts was 4 days 2 hours. So? They are two entirely different newsgroup. You're comparing apples and oranges. Many of us refuse to post to rram for various reasons, but would gladly embrace ukrram. That's your problem. Please don't lumber us Brits with it. I never said anything about it involving you. Non sequitur. You asked me not to lumber you Brits with it. No one is. You can always RFD for change (or whatever you call it over there). Why? I'm quite happily ignoring it - as you should ukrram if you don't like it. You're not happy at all. You want the Brits to host you a moderated group so you can play in it. No, I want a moderated newsgroup so that I can chat with some of the people I've met on ukraa without having to put up with the cesspool that certain people have made it to be. You've already got one, but because you've blotted your copybook you want another one to play with. I don't see why we should all be lumbered because of your shortcomings. This has zero to do with rram, but you can't seem to get that fact through your thick skull. And the creation of ukrram has absolutely nothing to do with rram. I know you can't understand that, either. I think you're struggling with this: "Only by noting that the chap who is behind the RFD is the same chap who brought 'order' to the US groups (and RRAM can be seen by all to be the roaring success of this policy[1,2,3]), and the Charter and ModPol for the proposed group being little more than a cut-and-paste job, even down to the Americanisms". No, you're struggling with the fact that they are two different newsgroups with two different audiences and two different sets of moderators. The chap who is behind the RFD only submitted the RFD. He has NOTHING to do with the moderation of the newsgroup or any other operation of the newsgroup. But you seem to have trouble with that very simple concept. So what's the real reason, Spike? The chap who is behind the RFD is the same chap who brought 'order' to the US groups (and RRAM can be seen by all to be the roaring success of this policy[1,2,3]), and the Charter and ModPol for the proposed group being little more than a cut-and-paste job, even down to the Americanisms. [1] 61.7% blog posts [2] Less than 1 post per day from individuals over 18 months [3] The last gap between individual's posts was 4 days 2 hours. And you can't understand that you're comparing apples and oranges. And we don't want Stuckle over here. Isn't the US big enough for you? Since when do YOU speak for the entire UK? What you REALLY mean is YOU don't want me there - probably because I don't put up with trolls. But you still haven't answered a simple question - what's the REAL reason you don't want it? Since you can't seem to answer such a simple question, let me do it for you. You are well known to be one of the main instigators causing ukrra to be suck a cesspool. You are deathly afraid that you won't be allowed to post your crap in a moderated newsgroup. And you're afraid all the "good" people will leave ukrra for ukrram, and only you and your fellow instigators will be left on ukrra. And that takes all the fun out of it. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry, AI0K ================== |
Yaesu rises again!?
On Tue, 02 Dec 2014 08:46:41 +0000, gareth wrote:
I agree with much that you've posted in this thread. That is because you are as two peas in a pod; both posting page after page of non-technical waffle; Oh come on, we all do that at times. Look at how you go on nineteen to the dozen, Brian too. I often waffle on in a kind hearted liberal kind of way. -- M0WYM Sales @ radiowymsey http://stores.ebay.co.uk/Sales-At-Radio-Wymsey/ |
Yaesu rises again!?
On Tue, 02 Dec 2014 17:17:56 +0000, Brian Morrison wrote:
Spike is not one of the badly behaved posters, Oh yes he is. |
Yaesu rises again!?
On Tue, 02 Dec 2014 11:40:45 -0500, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
it's a duck". Nope. No rebuttal at all. You're comparing apples and oranges. If it sounds like Christmas ............... -- M0WYM Sales @ radiowymsey http://stores.ebay.co.uk/Sales-At-Radio-Wymsey/ |
Yaesu rises again!?
In message , Spike
writes On 02/12/14 15:53, Ian Jackson wrote: In message , Jerry Stuckle writes On 12/2/2014 10:07 AM, Spike wrote: *For now* the moderators are different. but with a freemason-type succession policy nothing can be guaranteed. More unfounded conjecture. If the moderation policies out to be unsatisfactory, there are remedies - and if all else fails, simply pretend that the moderated NG doesn't exist - which is what I already do with the 98,299 NGs out there, but I don't subscribe to. Wrong argument, Ian. We're talking about the succession, not about the moderation policies So you are objecting to the moderators, and their heirs and successors, regardless of their actual moderation policies? -- Ian |
Yaesu rises again!?
On 02/12/14 15:53, Ian Jackson wrote:
In message , Jerry Stuckle writes On 12/2/2014 10:07 AM, Spike wrote: *For now* the moderators are different. but with a freemason-type succession policy nothing can be guaranteed. More unfounded conjecture. If the moderation policies out to be unsatisfactory, there are remedies - and if all else fails, simply pretend that the moderated NG doesn't exist - which is what I already do with the 98,299 NGs out there, but I don't subscribe to. If people don't like how the group is run, it will fall into disuse, just as RealOPs has. |
Yaesu rises again!?
On 02/12/14 15:52, Brian Morrison wrote:
On Tue, 02 Dec 2014 10:43:08 -0500 Jerry Stuckle wrote: *For now* the moderators are different. but with a freemason-type succession policy nothing can be guaranteed. More unfounded conjecture. Not at all, Spike is quite correct that fair and intelligent moderation is in no way guaranteed with the initial moderators certain to remain in post until the death of Usenet. Afraid not Brian. Spike is just being emotive. If nothing else, the phrase 'freemason-type succession policy' is meaningless, another figment of Spikes over active imagination. |
Yaesu rises again!?
g8dgc wrote:
Spike wrote: And we don't want Stuckle over here. Isn't the US big enough for you? TINW +1 -- Stephen Thomas Cole // Sent from my iPhone |
Yaesu rises again!?
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
But you still haven't answered a simple question - what's the REAL reason you don't want it? Since you can't seem to answer such a simple question, let me do it for you. You are well known to be one of the main instigators causing ukrra to be suck a cesspool. You are deathly afraid that you won't be allowed to post your crap in a moderated newsgroup. And you're afraid all the "good" people will leave ukrra for ukrram, and only you and your fellow instigators will be left on ukrra. And that takes all the fun out of it. +1 The main fear that the vocal anti group have is, as you describe, being left with no-one to squabble with. It's utterly transparent and becomes ever more so with the increasingly petty "concerns" that they're raising. I sincerely hope that the moderated group passes the vote and is created. There's well over a decade of abuse and insanity on the record in the ukra archives and absolutely no hope whatsoever that those who have contributed to that library of shame and degredation will change their ways if left to their own devices. Creating the moderated group will at least give us normal folk a place to hold civil and constructive conversation on amateur radio while these maniacs consume themselves. -- Stephen Thomas Cole // Sent from my iPhone |
Yaesu rises again!?
Ian Jackson wrote:
In message , Spike writes On 02/12/14 15:53, Ian Jackson wrote: In message , Jerry Stuckle writes On 12/2/2014 10:07 AM, Spike wrote: *For now* the moderators are different. but with a freemason-type succession policy nothing can be guaranteed. More unfounded conjecture. If the moderation policies out to be unsatisfactory, there are remedies - and if all else fails, simply pretend that the moderated NG doesn't exist - which is what I already do with the 98,299 NGs out there, but I don't subscribe to. Wrong argument, Ian. We're talking about the succession, not about the moderation policies So you are objecting to the moderators, and their heirs and successors, regardless of their actual moderation policies? He's objecting to anything and everything he can think of, regardless of whether it makes sense or not. Desperate times, desperate measures. There's a very good chance that the moderated group will pass the vote, you see. -- Stephen Thomas Cole // Sent from my iPhone |
Yaesu rises again!?
On 12/2/2014 12:12 PM, Brian Morrison wrote:
On Tue, 02 Dec 2014 11:41:10 -0500 Jerry Stuckle wrote: On 12/2/2014 10:52 AM, Brian Morrison wrote: On Tue, 02 Dec 2014 10:43:08 -0500 Jerry Stuckle wrote: *For now* the moderators are different. but with a freemason-type succession policy nothing can be guaranteed. More unfounded conjecture. Not at all, Spike is quite correct that fair and intelligent moderation is in no way guaranteed with the initial moderators certain to remain in post until the death of Usenet. That is not what he said, Brian. Moderators don't have to continue for ever, they can be replaced by other people without any vote being held. If the group creation succeeds then the moderation team could change to people who are not so well regarded as the current two moderator candidates. Yes, but there is no indication the moderators of rram will take over as moderators of ukrram. It is unfounded conjecture and FUD. Even if they did - the worse that would happen is the newsgroup would die. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry, AI0K ================== |
Yaesu rises again!?
On 12/2/2014 12:17 PM, Brian Morrison wrote:
On Tue, 02 Dec 2014 12:06:44 -0500 Jerry Stuckle wrote: You are well known to be one of the main instigators causing ukrra to be suck a cesspool. Spike is often combative and questioning, but one thing he isn't is rude and abusive in an ad hominem manner. He also uses facts in his arguments that are drawn from documented sources. Objections seem to hinge on people who don't like his attitude conflating that with abuse. His criticism is founded on what people say and do but that seems to be too far for some. Spike is not one of the badly behaved posters, but he will press his point. His unfounded conjectures about the moderators do not pass this test, Brian. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry, AI0K ================== |
Yaesu rises again!?
On 02/12/14 17:17, Brian Morrison wrote:
On Tue, 02 Dec 2014 12:06:44 -0500 Jerry Stuckle wrote: You are well known to be one of the main instigators causing ukrra to be suck a cesspool. Spike is often combative and questioning, but one thing he isn't is rude and abusive in an ad hominem manner. Nonsense. He also uses facts in his arguments that are drawn from documented sources. Nonsense. His use of red herrings is beyond belief. Not to mention his Walter Mitty stories. Objections seem to hinge on people who don't like his attitude conflating that with abuse. He is abusive. His criticism is founded on what people say and do but that seems to be too far for some. His criticism is founded on his own prejudice and imaginary evidence. Spike is not one of the badly behaved posters, but he will press his point. Nonsense, in particular as it relates to the formation of uk.ram. He is so fearful it will happen he has lost control. |
Yaesu rises again!?
On Tue, 02 Dec 2014 20:58:17 +0000, Brian Morrison wrote:
On Tue, 02 Dec 2014 13:19:30 -0500 Jerry Stuckle wrote: Yes, but there is no indication the moderators of rram will take over as moderators of ukrram. I have not seen that suggested, what Spike is trying to say is that if the initial moderation team disbands and is replaced, those replacements could have any attitude and agenda and there would be no recourse to any mechanism to prevent it. Still playing in defence then, Bri'. |
Yaesu rises again!?
"Stephen Thomas Cole" wrote in message
... Ian Jackson wrote: In message , Spike writes On 02/12/14 15:53, Ian Jackson wrote: In message , Jerry Stuckle writes On 12/2/2014 10:07 AM, Spike wrote: *For now* the moderators are different. but with a freemason-type succession policy nothing can be guaranteed. More unfounded conjecture. If the moderation policies out to be unsatisfactory, there are remedies - and if all else fails, simply pretend that the moderated NG doesn't exist - which is what I already do with the 98,299 NGs out there, but I don't subscribe to. Wrong argument, Ian. We're talking about the succession, not about the moderation policies So you are objecting to the moderators, and their heirs and successors, regardless of their actual moderation policies? He's objecting to anything and everything he can think of, regardless of whether it makes sense or not. Desperate times, desperate measures. There's a very good chance that the moderated group will pass the vote, you see. What happens if all voters abstain? -- ;-) .. 73 de Frank Turner-Smith G3VKI - mine's a pint. .. http://turner-smith.co.uk |
Yaesu rises again!?
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 12/2/2014 7:15 AM, Lostgallifreyan wrote: wrote in : I'm old enough that I've learned people like him just aren't worth getting all upset over. Then why bother responding at all? If you both cut each other a lot more slack, you'll both have more room to maneouvre. For past couple of days you both reminded me of boxers in a clinch, bounding together from rope to rope. Not a lot I can do about that, but I can at least say how it looks. :) Notice how he has to respond to my comments even when I'm not talking to him? Another trait of a troll. The poor guy. If you had been on USENET as long as you claim, you would know USENET is an open forum and everybody is free to respond to anybody. And you can shove your troll comment up your egomaniacal Stuckle. -- Jim Pennino |
Yaesu rises again!?
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 12/2/2014 1:11 AM, the well-known troll wrote: Jerry Stuckle wrote: snip I'm old enough that I've learned people like him just aren't worth getting all upset over. Then why bother responding at all? Because I try to be polite Since when? Do you think calling people trolls, liars, incompetent, etc. is being polite? If you were polite you wouldn't be in ****ing contests on a regular basis that only stop when the other person no longer responds to you. -- Jim Pennino |
Yaesu rises again!?
On 02/12/14 17:07, g8dgc wrote:
Spike wrote: And we don't want Stuckle over here. Isn't the US big enough for you? TINW This is not working? I've tried to keep the explanation simple and straightforward. -- Spike "Hard cases, it has frequently been observed, are apt to introduce bad law". Judge Rolfe |
Yaesu rises again!?
On 02/12/14 17:17, Brian Morrison wrote:
On Tue, 02 Dec 2014 12:06:44 -0500 Jerry Stuckle wrote: You are well known to be one of the main instigators causing ukrra to be suck a cesspool. Spike is often combative and questioning, but one thing he isn't is rude and abusive in an ad hominem manner. He also uses facts in his arguments that are drawn from documented sources. Objections seem to hinge on people who don't like his attitude conflating that with abuse. His criticism is founded on what people say and do but that seems to be too far for some. Spike is not one of the badly behaved posters, but he will press his point. Thanks for the supporting comments, Brian. I'm only sorry someone has had to spell out the obvious. -- Spike "Hard cases, it has frequently been observed, are apt to introduce bad law". Judge Rolfe |
Yaesu rises again!?
On 02/12/14 20:58, Brian Morrison wrote:
On Tue, 02 Dec 2014 13:19:30 -0500 Jerry Stuckle wrote: Yes, but there is no indication the moderators of rram will take over as moderators of ukrram. I have not seen that suggested, what Spike is trying to say is that if the initial moderation team disbands and is replaced, those replacements could have any attitude and agenda and there would be no recourse to any mechanism to prevent it. Thanks for that, Brian. I was sure I had made myself clear. -- Spike "Hard cases, it has frequently been observed, are apt to introduce bad law". Judge Rolfe |
Yaesu rises again!?
On 02/12/14 17:48, Ian Jackson wrote:
In message , Spike writes On 02/12/14 15:53, Ian Jackson wrote: If the moderation policies out to be unsatisfactory, there are remedies - and if all else fails, simply pretend that the moderated NG doesn't exist - which is what I already do with the 98,299 NGs out there, but I don't subscribe to. Wrong argument, Ian. We're talking about the succession, not about the moderation policies So you are objecting to the moderators, and their heirs and successors, regardless of their actual moderation policies? Could you point me to where you think I said that? -- Spike "Hard cases, it has frequently been observed, are apt to introduce bad law". Judge Rolfe |
Yaesu rises again!?
On 02/12/14 17:06, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 12/2/2014 11:52 AM, Spike wrote: On 02/12/14 16:40, Jerry Stuckle wrote: On 12/2/2014 11:16 AM, Spike wrote: It's a plain and simple fact, and explicitly stated. So simple that everyone should be able to understand it. And there is no reason to think the current moderators of rram will become the moderators of ukrram, "*For now* the moderators are different. but with a freemason-type succession policy nothing can be guaranteed" Unsupported conjecture and fear mongering. IOW, FUD. It's a plain and simple fact, and explicitly stated. So simple that everyone should be able to understand it. "Only by noting that the chap who is behind the RFD is the same chap who brought 'order' to the US groups (and RRAM can be seen by all to be the roaring success of this policy[1,2,3]), and the Charter and ModPol for the proposed group being little more than a cut-and-paste job, even down to the Americanisms". So he used another newsgroup's charter as a template? Here's something you don't obviously know - people don't create everything from scratch. They often use something that already exists as a template. And that isn't restricted to usenet charters. Are you an engineer or technician? You sound like one or the other. The chap who is behind the RFD is the same chap who brought 'order' to the US groups (and RRAM can be seen by all to be the roaring success of this policy[1,2,3]), and the Charter and ModPol for the proposed group being little more than a cut-and-paste job, even down to the Americanisms. [1] 61.7% blog posts [2] Less than 1 post per day from individuals over 18 months [3] The last gap between individual's posts was 4 days 2 hours. So? They are two entirely different newsgroup. You're comparing apples and oranges. The chap who is behind the RFD is the same chap who brought 'order' to the US groups (and RRAM can be seen by all to be the roaring success of this policy[1,2,3]), and the Charter and ModPol for the proposed group being little more than a cut-and-paste job, even down to the Americanisms. You asked me not to lumber you Brits with it. No one is. Why? I'm quite happily ignoring it - as you should ukrram if you don't like it. You're not happy at all. You want the Brits to host you a moderated group so you can play in it. No, I want a moderated newsgroup so that I can chat with some of the people I've met on ukraa without having to put up with the cesspool that certain people have made it to be. You want.... You've got a moderated group. Don't the people there like you, or something? I think you're struggling with this: "Only by noting that the chap who is behind the RFD is the same chap who brought 'order' to the US groups (and RRAM can be seen by all to be the roaring success of this policy[1,2,3]), and the Charter and ModPol for the proposed group being little more than a cut-and-paste job, even down to the Americanisms". No, you're struggling with the fact that they are two different newsgroups with two different audiences and two different sets of moderators. The chap who is behind the RFD only submitted the RFD. He has NOTHING to do with the moderation of the newsgroup or any other operation of the newsgroup. But you seem to have trouble with that very simple concept. False argument. So what's the real reason, Spike? The chap who is behind the RFD is the same chap who brought 'order' to the US groups (and RRAM can be seen by all to be the roaring success of this policy[1,2,3]), and the Charter and ModPol for the proposed group being little more than a cut-and-paste job, even down to the Americanisms. [1] 61.7% blog posts [2] Less than 1 post per day from individuals over 18 months [3] The last gap between individual's posts was 4 days 2 hours. And you can't understand that you're comparing apples and oranges. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and has the antecedents of a duck, it's a duck. And we don't want Stuckle over here. Isn't the US big enough for you? Since when do YOU speak for the entire UK? What you REALLY mean is YOU don't want me there - probably because I don't put up with trolls. Oh, I'm not alone in this. Trust me. But you still haven't answered a simple question - what's the REAL reason you don't want it? Since you can't seem to answer such a simple question, let me do it for you. You are well known to be one of the main instigators causing ukrra to be suck a cesspool. You are deathly afraid that you won't be allowed to post your crap in a moderated newsgroup. And you're afraid all the "good" people will leave ukrra for ukrram, and only you and your fellow instigators will be left on ukrra. The chap who is behind the RFD is the same chap who brought 'order' to the US groups (and RRAM can be seen by all to be the roaring success of this policy[1,2,3]), and the Charter and ModPol for the proposed group being little more than a cut-and-paste job, even down to the Americanisms. And that takes all the fun out of it. Not my problem. -- Spike "Hard cases, it has frequently been observed, are apt to introduce bad law". Judge Rolfe |
Yaesu rises again!?
On 12/2/2014 5:52 PM, the well-known troll wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote: On 12/2/2014 7:15 AM, Lostgallifreyan wrote: wrote in : I'm old enough that I've learned people like him just aren't worth getting all upset over. Then why bother responding at all? If you both cut each other a lot more slack, you'll both have more room to maneouvre. For past couple of days you both reminded me of boxers in a clinch, bounding together from rope to rope. Not a lot I can do about that, but I can at least say how it looks. :) Notice how he has to respond to my comments even when I'm not talking to him? Another trait of a troll. The poor guy. If you had been on USENET as long as you claim, you would know USENET is an open forum and everybody is free to respond to anybody. And you can shove your troll comment up your egomaniacal Stuckle. Yes, I know USENET is an open forum for everybody. Including TROLLS like you, unfortunately. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry Stuckle ================== |
Yaesu rises again!?
On 12/2/2014 3:58 PM, Brian Morrison wrote:
On Tue, 02 Dec 2014 13:19:30 -0500 Jerry Stuckle wrote: Yes, but there is no indication the moderators of rram will take over as moderators of ukrram. I have not seen that suggested, what Spike is trying to say is that if the initial moderation team disbands and is replaced, those replacements could have any attitude and agenda and there would be no recourse to any mechanism to prevent it. No, he is not. But you obviously cannot understand that. But then you were also one of the instigators - and a supporter of Spike. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry, AI0K ================== |
Yaesu rises again!?
On 12/2/2014 6:20 PM, Spike wrote:
On 02/12/14 17:06, Jerry Stuckle wrote: On 12/2/2014 11:52 AM, Spike wrote: On 02/12/14 16:40, Jerry Stuckle wrote: On 12/2/2014 11:16 AM, Spike wrote: It's a plain and simple fact, and explicitly stated. So simple that everyone should be able to understand it. And there is no reason to think the current moderators of rram will become the moderators of ukrram, "*For now* the moderators are different. but with a freemason-type succession policy nothing can be guaranteed" Unsupported conjecture and fear mongering. IOW, FUD. It's a plain and simple fact, and explicitly stated. So simple that everyone should be able to understand it. Even you? ROFLMAO! More FUD. "Only by noting that the chap who is behind the RFD is the same chap who brought 'order' to the US groups (and RRAM can be seen by all to be the roaring success of this policy[1,2,3]), and the Charter and ModPol for the proposed group being little more than a cut-and-paste job, even down to the Americanisms". So he used another newsgroup's charter as a template? Here's something you don't obviously know - people don't create everything from scratch. They often use something that already exists as a template. And that isn't restricted to usenet charters. Are you an engineer or technician? You sound like one or the other. Yes. And I have been for around 40 years. The chap who is behind the RFD is the same chap who brought 'order' to the US groups (and RRAM can be seen by all to be the roaring success of this policy[1,2,3]), and the Charter and ModPol for the proposed group being little more than a cut-and-paste job, even down to the Americanisms. [1] 61.7% blog posts [2] Less than 1 post per day from individuals over 18 months [3] The last gap between individual's posts was 4 days 2 hours. So? They are two entirely different newsgroup. You're comparing apples and oranges. The chap who is behind the RFD is the same chap who brought 'order' to the US groups (and RRAM can be seen by all to be the roaring success of this policy[1,2,3]), and the Charter and ModPol for the proposed group being little more than a cut-and-paste job, even down to the Americanisms. So? They are two entirely different newsgroups. You're comparing apples and oranges. You asked me not to lumber you Brits with it. No one is. Why? I'm quite happily ignoring it - as you should ukrram if you don't like it. You're not happy at all. You want the Brits to host you a moderated group so you can play in it. No, I want a moderated newsgroup so that I can chat with some of the people I've met on ukraa without having to put up with the cesspool that certain people have made it to be. You want.... You've got a moderated group. Don't the people there like you, or something? Yes, I want a moderated group - where the cesspool you helped create is not allowed. I think you're struggling with this: "Only by noting that the chap who is behind the RFD is the same chap who brought 'order' to the US groups (and RRAM can be seen by all to be the roaring success of this policy[1,2,3]), and the Charter and ModPol for the proposed group being little more than a cut-and-paste job, even down to the Americanisms". No, you're struggling with the fact that they are two different newsgroups with two different audiences and two different sets of moderators. The chap who is behind the RFD only submitted the RFD. He has NOTHING to do with the moderation of the newsgroup or any other operation of the newsgroup. But you seem to have trouble with that very simple concept. False argument. Only in your mind. But that's not surprising, considering how small your mind is. So what's the real reason, Spike? The chap who is behind the RFD is the same chap who brought 'order' to the US groups (and RRAM can be seen by all to be the roaring success of this policy[1,2,3]), and the Charter and ModPol for the proposed group being little more than a cut-and-paste job, even down to the Americanisms. [1] 61.7% blog posts [2] Less than 1 post per day from individuals over 18 months [3] The last gap between individual's posts was 4 days 2 hours. And you can't understand that you're comparing apples and oranges. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and has the antecedents of a duck, it's a duck. If it walks like a troll, quacks like a troll, and has the antecedents of a troll, then it's a troll And trolls don't understand there is a difference between apples and oranges. And we don't want Stuckle over here. Isn't the US big enough for you? Since when do YOU speak for the entire UK? What you REALLY mean is YOU don't want me there - probably because I don't put up with trolls. Oh, I'm not alone in this. Trust me. ROFLMAO! You and a couple of other trolls who made ukram the cesspool it is. But you still haven't answered a simple question - what's the REAL reason you don't want it? Since you can't seem to answer such a simple question, let me do it for you. You are well known to be one of the main instigators causing ukrra to be suck a cesspool. You are deathly afraid that you won't be allowed to post your crap in a moderated newsgroup. And you're afraid all the "good" people will leave ukrra for ukrram, and only you and your fellow instigators will be left on ukrra. The chap who is behind the RFD is the same chap who brought 'order' to the US groups (and RRAM can be seen by all to be the roaring success of this policy[1,2,3]), and the Charter and ModPol for the proposed group being little more than a cut-and-paste job, even down to the Americanisms. And that takes all the fun out of it. Not my problem. And you still don't understand the difference between apples and oranges. But trolls don't. We don't want YOU in ukram. That's why the RFD to create it. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry, AI0K ================== |
Yaesu rises again!?
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 12/2/2014 5:52 PM, the well-known troll wrote: Jerry Stuckle wrote: On 12/2/2014 7:15 AM, Lostgallifreyan wrote: wrote in : I'm old enough that I've learned people like him just aren't worth getting all upset over. Then why bother responding at all? If you both cut each other a lot more slack, you'll both have more room to maneouvre. For past couple of days you both reminded me of boxers in a clinch, bounding together from rope to rope. Not a lot I can do about that, but I can at least say how it looks. :) Notice how he has to respond to my comments even when I'm not talking to him? Another trait of a troll. The poor guy. If you had been on USENET as long as you claim, you would know USENET is an open forum and everybody is free to respond to anybody. And you can shove your troll comment up your egomaniacal Stuckle. Yes, I know USENET is an open forum for everybody. Including TROLLS like you, unfortunately. Then why the snide "he has to respond to my comments even when I'm not talking to him"? You can shove your troll comment up your egomaniacal Stuckle. -- Jim Pennino |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:53 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com