|
Schlecks' Schlock!
On Jan 28, 1:48�am, John Smith I wrote: 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? What's wrong with what he wrote? 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 ... I'm willing to give him and his group of moderators a chance. Why aren't you? My gawd, the man is so crooked he makes my dogs hind legs look straight! Exactly how is he "crooked"? And just to give a complete pictu Paul has been a No Code Test advocate for many years. I have been a Pro Code Test advocate for many years. Yet we are both willing to read each other's postings without personal attacks. I know some of the folks in the group of moderators. They are all across the range of opinion on various subjects. I agree with some and disagree with others. The big question is this: To my knowledge, there has never been a moderated amateur radio newsgroup on Usenet. So this project is something completely new, progressive and different. We're supposed to support such things, aren't we? If someone is really interested in discussing amateur radio issues, why would they not give the new, progressive and different newsgroup a chance, without prejudging the result before it begins? Perhaps the problem some folks have is that they know they won't be able to post unsubstantiated claims or ad hominem attacks - and that just takes out all the fun for them. Jim, N2EY |
Schlecks' Schlock!
|
Schlecks' Schlock!
On Jan 28, 12:34 pm, wrote: On Jan 28, 1:48?am, John Smith I wrote: John Smith I wrote: My gawd, the man is so crooked he makes my dogs hind legs look straight!Exactly how is he "crooked"? And just to give a complete pictu Paul has been a No Code Test advocate for many years. I have been a Pro Code Test advocate for many years. funny this is the first I have heard of that Yet we are both willing to read each other's postings without personal attacks. I know some of the folks in the group of moderators. They are all across the range of opinion on various subjects. I agree with some and disagree with others. The big question is this: To my knowledge, there has never been a moderated amateur radio newsgroup on Usenet. So this project is something completely new, progressive and different. We're supposed to support such things, aren't we? why? If someone is really interested in discussing amateur radio issues, why would they not give the new, progressive and different newsgroup a chance, without prejudging the result before it begins? by having issues with likehood of the result based on testing that thery I have seen what sort of discussion paul will and will not permit in his NG by his own hand HE wil permit poster to deliberate misquote nad FORBID calling this deed what it in reply Perhaps the problem some folks have is that they know they won't be able to post unsubstantiated claims or ad hominem attacks - and that just takes out all the fun for them. Pauls clearly will premit and will NOT premit any response I have the proof of that by his own hand in my email box Jim, N2EY |
Schlecks' Schlock!
On Jan 28, 12:43�pm, John Smith I wrote:
wrote: On Jan 28, 1:48?am, John Smith I wrote: 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? What's wrong with what he wrote? 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 ... I'm willing to give him and his group of moderators a chance. Why aren't you? My gawd, the man is so crooked he makes my dogs hind legs look straight! Exactly how is he "crooked"? And just to give a complete pictu Paul has been a No Code Test advocate for many years. I have been a Pro Code Test advocate for many years. Yet we are both willing to read each other's postings without personal attacks. All anyone has to do to confirm this is to look up his comments to FCC, and mine. They're all in ECFS. I know some of the folks in the group of moderators. They are all across the range of opinion on various subjects. I agree with some and disagree with others. The big question is this: To my knowledge, there has never been a moderated amateur radio newsgroup on Usenet. So this project is something completely new, progressive and different. We're supposed to support such things, aren't we? If someone is really interested in discussing amateur radio issues, why would they not give the new, progressive and different newsgroup a chance, without prejudging the result before it begins? Perhaps the problem some folks have is that they know they won't be able to post unsubstantiated claims or ad hominem attacks - and that just takes out all the fun for them. Jim, N2EY N2EY: Don't let this be a shock to you, I thought of you specifically when I constructed that text. Why? Paul is slick, he is prejudiced, he thinks the extras are the best captains for this ship. Show me how he is "slick" and "prejudiced". Well, we have decades of their piloting to look at, I am not happy with their steerage. What's your alternative? btw, it's the FCC that makes the rules. Moderation is hardly an open forum, it can easily be abused. *I, even if I alone, believe Paul is NOT the man to provide leadership. *I do not believe him to be either "fair" nor "just." Why? *Because Paul does possess a VERY strong personality. *This is NOT bad in and of itself. *But, if abused, it is. *I am claiming he has demonstrated his abuse and that only members of this group, at large, can rein him in. Show me. As I directly have stated, I fear Paul only seeks a "good ole' boys club" composed of ego stroking extras, what part of that don't you understand? The part where you claim to know how the group will turn out before it even starts. *Are you asking me to dig up old posts are re-post them to make my point un-undeniably clear? Yes. If Paul is as "slick" and "prejudiced" as you claim, that should be easy to show from his old postings. Best way to show that is to provide direct links to the Google archives. There might be a few posts from you I would like to include also ... Go right ahead. I fear Pauls' strong personality has had a "crowd control" effect upon your tendencies also, and even you have fallen prey to the "mass-hysteria-of-the-EXTRAS" ... What does that mean, exactly? It sounds a little like a form of ad hominem attack, in which being an Extra somehow disqualifies someone from being objective. What discussions do you want to have that you think would not be allowed in a moderated group? JIm, N2EY |
Schlecks' Schlock!
|
Schlecks' Schlock!
|
Schlecks' Schlock!
From: John Smith I on Sun, Jan 28 2007 9:43 am
wrote: And just to give a complete pictu [a distorted one, a la Dali] Paul has been a No Code Test advocate for many years. I have been a Pro Code Test advocate for many years. Yet we are both willing to read each other's postings without personal attacks. I know some of the folks in the group of moderators. They are all across the range of opinion on various subjects. I agree with some and disagree with others. That is NOT a "complete picture" by any means...:-( The big question is this: To my knowledge, there has never been a moderated amateur radio newsgroup on Usenet. So this project is something completely new, progressive and different. We're supposed to support such things, aren't we? That's total bull**** pronounced from ignorance of over a decade of BBS activity in the USA prior to the Internet becoming public in 1991. Note: "USENET" is carried ON the Internet...it is NOT some separate, distinct, nor original format venue that grew out of the original ARPANET. "Moderation" is NOT something "new" in computer-modem communications. It was practiced by Sysops on BBSs over a quarter century ago. N2EY: Don't let this be a shock to you, I thought of you specifically when I constructed that text. :-) Paul is slick, he is prejudiced, he thinks the extras are the best captains for this ship. Well, we have decades of their piloting to look at, I am not happy with their steerage. As is common in academia, rank-title-status plus tenure are the key ingredients to "leadership." In comparison to extras there is only commonality, no difference. :-) Moderation is hardly an open forum, it can easily be abused. I, even if I alone, believe Paul is NOT the man to provide leadership. I do not believe him to be either "fair" nor "just." He writes that he is fair. But, we can't put that to the test until around 2009 when the 11th (or so) RFD is completed and the moderated newsgroup actually exists...:-( Why? Because Paul does possess a VERY strong personality. This is NOT bad in and of itself. But, if abused, it is. I am claiming he has demonstrated his abuse and that only members of this group, at large, can rein him in. "Power corrupts...absolute power corrupts absolutely." [except in Newington, CT...] As I directly have stated, I fear Paul only seeks a "good ole' boys club" composed of ego stroking extras, what part of that don't you understand? Are you asking me to dig up old posts are re-post them to make my point un-undeniably clear? Miccolis Standard Operating Practice is to put on his barrister's robe and wig and DEMAND all to POST IT!!! QED. :-) There might be a few posts from you I would like to include also ... I fear Pauls' strong personality has had a "crowd control" effect upon your tendencies also, and even you have fallen prey to the "mass-hysteria-of-the-EXTRAS" ... All amateur extras "KNOW what is best for (their) ham radio." Intrinsic in their emotional psyches. They keep saying that so it must be "true," ey? :-) Big brother George Orwell would be proud of them... LA |
Schlecks' Schlock!
|
Schlecks' Schlock!
|
Schlecks' Schlock!
wrote:
Paul has been a No Code Test advocate for many years. I have been a Pro Code Test advocate for many years. Yet we are both willing to read each other's postings without personal attacks. All anyone has to do to confirm this is to look up his comments to FCC, and mine. They're all in ECFS. Its my conclusion, years ago, that many posters in this forum are not interested in things like "facts" when those facts contridict their own little perceptions of reality, hatred of amateur extras, hatred of the ARRL, etc. What does that mean, exactly? It sounds a little like a form of ad hominem attack, in which being an Extra somehow disqualifies someone from being objective. I suspect that if the moderators consisted of Len Anderson, Brian Burke, and Mark Morgan, the newsgroup would be perfectly fair and equitable to all viewpoints, right? I'm sure there would be a good balance of postings, including posts from Extra-class operators and ARRL members. *snicker* 73 kh6hz |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:31 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com