On Jan 28, 2:09?pm, wrote:
On Jan 28, 12:08 pm, John Smith I wrote:

wrote:

Many Extras consider themselves Einsteins...

They are not.

True...but they have Relatives!

[relatively speaking, that is... :-) ]


LA

On Jan 28, 11:44 am, John Smith I wrote:
wrote: ...

JS, I dunno. You have to recall that for the very longest time (and
still) there has been prejudice against No-Code Technicians. They are
"stupid, lazy, knuckledraggers with southern accents, welfare mothers
of color with their hands out, etc, etc, etc."

[and those were the least derogatory comments! :-) ]

Only recently have people questioned the megalomania of certain
Extras, their need to have a government crutch to maintain their self-
worth and status, etc.

[Okay, I'm not a "people"...I was saying that years ago :-)]

So just as the sword began to cut both ways...

What you won't be able to get to in this "judge ideas, and take posts
at face value" is the motivations of individuals who present ideas,
and make posts at face value. For example, we will never know why
people would eat Robesin's excrement, only that he says they do.

HHAC:

Yes, there is "prejudice" and it has been there a long, long time, I
kinda of like the ncts though (no code techs.) I think they may be
individuals who have no talent for code, are busy supporting a family
and use more of their time paying bills and medical expenses, more than
anything else--yes, paul and his bunch call them names ...

I haven't seen that from Paul.

I agree but only part way. Schleck's explanations word
it as if there was "never" any moderator activity anywhere
else and his Usenet-Internet group is the "only" group
that can handle it.

That is, to put it most delicately, utter cow-flop. The BBSs
were beginning to go national in networking in the early 1980s
and hundreds of BBS Sysops were having to MODERATE thousands
of users and subscribers. Their executive (main computer)
software was already designed with Moderator's Controls to
effect that moderation. I was there. I saw it. I used it.
I've even talked to two different BBS software writer-
designers. I've been a moderator on three different BBSs.

Apparently that doesn't "count." quizical look Not of
academia (despite having macadmias) I am brushed aside.

It SEEMS to be the usual academic NIT syndrome. It SEEMS
like only THEY (the academics) have the "smarts" to do it.
The usual brush-aside is mentioning USENET out of ARPANET,
supposedly all academic institutions. Actually no, both
involved BOTH academia and corporations involved in defense
work as well as instrumentation makers. Tsk, I was there
on ARPANET for a short while, on USENET for a short while.
Be damned if I ever saw any "moderation" on either many
years ago. :-(

And, yes, EXTRA class license holders tend to think of that paper as a
doctor degree--but, a doctorate degree in what, a darn hobby? It isn't ...

When I see a ham behaving badly, it doesn't surprise me when I learn
that the ham is an Extra. That isn't to say that all Extras behave
badly.

It's almost a truism that the visible percentage of voluble
amateur extras in here are that way. They wound so easily,
the poor dears.

KH2D for example. I consider him a friend. Most of the hams that
I've agreed with and disagreed with on RRAP could be a friend should I
ever meet them in person. There are several who I think are
dangerous.

By example of early DeJaVu archives (now Google's), Jim
Kehler was, in my honest opinion, one of the WORST of the
sarcastic, arrogant, in-your-face sort in his postings to
me. I'm sorry if that bothers you, Brian, but this
target of his frustrations and sarcasm didn't much like
him. I classify Cranky Spanky as a junior grade sissy
version of Kehler. Too bad Cranky was never stuck on
Guam for years...he would have loved being where all the
comms to the rest of the world were by HF. Wonder if
Cranky has ever taken up golf? :-)

I think after all the nicey-nice backslapping on the moderated group,
they'll get sick of hearing the same-o, same-o from their cloned
bretheren and be back on RRAP to hear what thinking people have to
say.

HAR! Beautiful, Brian. :-)

They will find, after a while, that their little clubhouse
elite is a very small place after all. Claustrophobia
will set in or they will get drunk on their own high-fives.
Or, they might bail to other places like eham.net and make
out like they single-handedly worked stations side by side
with Maxim or Marconi doing "pioneering" adventures in
radio...that none of them could possibly have done.

146s,
LA

On Jan 28, 8:36 pm, "
wrote:
On Jan 28, 11:44 am, John Smith I wrote:
wrote: ...
JS, I dunno. You have to recall that for the very longest time (and
still) there has been prejudice against No-Code Technicians. They are
"stupid, lazy, knuckledraggers with southern accents, welfare mothers
of color with their hands out, etc, etc, etc."

[and those were the least derogatory comments! :-) ]

You gotta wonder which of the regulars are/were posting anonymously.
Really hair-brained stuff.

Only recently have people questioned the megalomania of certain
Extras, their need to have a government crutch to maintain their self-
worth and status, etc.

[Okay, I'm not a "people"...I was saying that years ago :-)]

Yep, without naming names...

So just as the sword began to cut both ways...

What you won't be able to get to in this "judge ideas, and take posts
at face value" is the motivations of individuals who present ideas,
and make posts at face value. For example, we will never know why
people would eat Robesin's excrement, only that he says they do.

HHAC:

Yes, there is "prejudice" and it has been there a long, long time, I
kinda of like the ncts though (no code techs.) I think they may be
individuals who have no talent for code, are busy supporting a family
and use more of their time paying bills and medical expenses, more than
anything else--yes, paul and his bunch call them names ...

I haven't seen that from Paul.

I agree but only part way. Schleck's explanations word
it as if there was "never" any moderator activity anywhere
else and his Usenet-Internet group is the "only" group
that can handle it.

That is, to put it most delicately, utter cow-flop. The BBSs
were beginning to go national in networking in the early 1980s
and hundreds of BBS Sysops were having to MODERATE thousands
of users and subscribers. Their executive (main computer)
software was already designed with Moderator's Controls to
effect that moderation. I was there. I saw it. I used it.
I've even talked to two different BBS software writer-
designers. I've been a moderator on three different BBSs.

Apparently that doesn't "count." quizical look Not of
academia (despite having macadmias) I am brushed aside.

It SEEMS to be the usual academic NIT syndrome. It SEEMS
like only THEY (the academics) have the "smarts" to do it.
The usual brush-aside is mentioning USENET out of ARPANET,
supposedly all academic institutions. Actually no, both
involved BOTH academia and corporations involved in defense
work as well as instrumentation makers. Tsk, I was there
on ARPANET for a short while, on USENET for a short while.
Be damned if I ever saw any "moderation" on either many
years ago. :-(

I'm disturbed that there was little or no discussion, and suddenly we
have a "solution," complete with with a list of moderators that no one
has ever heard of, nevermind that they are all Extras.

And, yes, EXTRA class license holders tend to think of that paper as a
doctor degree--but, a doctorate degree in what, a darn hobby? It isn't ...

When I see a ham behaving badly, it doesn't surprise me when I learn
that the ham is an Extra. That isn't to say that all Extras behave
badly.

It's almost a truism that the visible percentage of voluble
amateur extras in here are that way. They wound so easily,
the poor dears.

They wouldn't be good moderators. Skin too thin.

KH2D for example. I consider him a friend. Most of the hams that
I've agreed with and disagreed with on RRAP could be a friend should I
ever meet them in person. There are several who I think are
dangerous.

By example of early DeJaVu archives (now Google's), Jim
Kehler was, in my honest opinion, one of the WORST of the
sarcastic, arrogant, in-your-face sort in his postings to
me.

He could be "grumpy" in person, too.

I'm sorry if that bothers you, Brian, but this
target of his frustrations and sarcasm didn't much like
him. I classify Cranky Spanky as a junior grade sissy
version of Kehler. Too bad Cranky was never stuck on
Guam for years...he would have loved being where all the
comms to the rest of the world were by HF.

He couldn't have handled the pileups.

Wonder if
Cranky has ever taken up golf? :-)

"They" built a big golf course on Guam. Seems it is cheaper to fly to
Guam for a weekend of golf than to pay greens fees in Japan.

Anyway, they needed a lot of sand for the constructions, and brought a
barge load of it from China. Welp, in China, any flowing water is
considered a mechanism of taking care of waste. The sand they dredged
was full of e-coli, and this was deposited over our freshwater
well...

I think after all the nicey-nice backslapping on the moderated group,
they'll get sick of hearing the same-o, same-o from their cloned
bretheren and be back on RRAP to hear what thinking people have to
say.

HAR! Beautiful, Brian. :-)

They will find, after a while, that their little clubhouse
elite is a very small place after all. Claustrophobia
will set in or they will get drunk on their own high-fives.

Their "safe room" will have to get padding.

Or, they might bail to other places like eham.net and make
out like they single-handedly worked stations side by side
with Maxim or Marconi doing "pioneering" adventures in
radio...that none of them could possibly have done.

They didn't?

146s,
LA- Hide quoted text -- Show quoted text -

243s

wrote:

You gotta wonder which of the regulars are/were posting anonymously.
Really hair-brained stuff.

Hair-brained, was it?

Did your mom ever take the "hare brush" to you?

Dave K8MN

On Jan 29, 12:39 am, Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
You gotta wonder which of the regulars are/were posting anonymously.
Really hair-brained stuff.

Hair-brained, was it?

Did your mom ever take the "hare brush" to you?

Dave K8MN

Do you think Ed Hare is back, posting anonymously?

wrote:

On Jan 29, 12:39 am, Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
You gotta wonder which of the regulars are/were posting anonymously.
Really hair-brained stuff.

Hair-brained, was it?
Did your mom ever take the "hare brush" to you?

Dave K8MN

Do you think Ed Hare is back, posting anonymously?

I don't think so but if he was doing so anonymously, how could I be sure?

Now, tell me about "hair-brained".

Dave K8MN

On Jan 28, 4:09 pm, wrote:
...Many Extras consider themselves Einsteins...

They are not.

Yea, I would agree.. We are not above average as a group....

Personally, I took the test expecting to fail, having just taken the
General to upgrade my Tech Plus. I figured, what the heck? It didn't
cost anymore to try and I had studied some. I didn't think I was
ready, but I passed so here I am, lucky to be an Extra in my
estimation.

So, do I consider myself an expert in all things Ham Radio by virtue
of my license class? Nope, I got a lot to learn and I'm sure there
are some folks out there who have a boat load more practical
experience than I, but have less privileges. The two Elmers who are
largely responsible for me getting my original license among them.
Thanks guys! (WB0WMP, K4GRW )

-= Bob =-

"KC4UAI" wrote:

So, do I consider myself an expert in all things Ham Radio by
virtue of my license class? Nope

Oddly enough, virtually all the "extras" I met during my tenure as a
"non-extra" didn't consider themselves Einsteins either. Now that I'm an
Extra, I do not consider myself an Einstein either.

It seems that only a small subset of hams (and non-hams) who post to this
forum seem to run into these self-proclaimed Einstein Extras.

But then, if you read their postings long enough, you'll begin to understand
that this bias towards Extras really isn't due to the fact these extras are
self-proclaimed Einsteins, but rather the fact that these Extras passed a
20wpm code test at one point or another.

73
kh6hz

From: on Sun, Jan 28 2007 7:06 pm

On Jan 28, 8:36 pm, " wrote:
On Jan 28, 11:44 am, John Smith I wrote:
wrote: ...

I'm disturbed that there was little or no discussion, and suddenly we
have a "solution," complete with with a list of moderators that no one
has ever heard of, nevermind that they are all Extras.

After at least three years of some of the total crap
in here had been going on. WHERE were the "powers-that-
be"? Sleeping? The Google folks were unresponsive to
"objectionable posting." They just let it accumulate.

Since every newsgroup was created by humankind, it can
ALSO be "un-created" by humankind. Nobody in power
apparently wanted to delete any group...so very un-liberal
and "anti-democratic" or something.

"Oh, we can't impinge on the freedom of speech!" seemed
to be the "Powers" shine-off. No, no, no, NO we can't
remove, halt, or put ANY stoppage on freedom of speech!

What of the massive cross-posting? Vince Fiscus under
his nom-deguerre of "Slow Code" deliberately (and with
malice aforethought) mass-posted to many amateur
newsgroups knowing full well that most browsers would
automatically mass-post replies. Filled up all kinds
of computer mass storage at many ISPs, all with dupes.

Had this been a BBS or BBS network, the offenders would
have been summarily yanked, terminated without prejudice,
and the blessed freedom-of-speech WOULD HAVE CONTINUED,
but without troublemakers. I've seen that done, been a
party to it in a few cases. Free speech went on.
Ordinary folk could tell the difference between real
freedom and deliberate one-sidedness overlaid by
arrogant self-defined "superiority."

No collitsch degrease needed to tell the difference.
But, here we have the academia nuts telling us they
all but invented "moderating." :-( Then we've got
a bunch of "movers and shakers" recently listed which
all but says out loud they "made it all possible."

Pfooey, a decade before the Internet went public there
were BBSs and BBS nets with amateur radio "pubs"
(public boards, common name of what are called
"newsgroups" now) in the USA, a few interconnecting
with other continents. Wasn't my cuppa but I knew of
them, looked in a few. Some of those conversations
got wild and wooly but outright miscreants, filth-
spouters, and attempted take-over artists were
summarily deleted. Gone. Fini. Full thirty.

Not to worry now. We have the "third RFD" in progress.
By the time of the eleventh (when, in 2011?) there
might - finally - be a decision. The "moderated
group" may then become a reality. This is JUST LIKE
some of those "study groups" on local government
projects where a "study" might as for an "action
committee" to be formed, which then leads to another
"study group" be formed to "study" the problem. :-(

Idiocy in action...with "credentials."

LA

On Jan 29, 10:20 am, Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:

On Jan 29, 12:39 am, Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
You gotta wonder which of the regulars are/were posting anonymously.
Really hair-brained stuff.

Hair-brained, was it?
Did your mom ever take the "hare brush" to you?

Dave K8MN

Do you think Ed Hare is back, posting anonymously?

I don't think so but if he was doing so anonymously, how could I be sure?

The same as when a French Ham tells you he's operating more than 200
KHz out of band - you just have to take his word for it.

Now, tell me about "hair-brained".

Dave K8MN

You tell me about it.