Leo wrote in message . ..
On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 04:26:39 -0600, "Kim"
wrote:

Another interesting little snippit... If I recall, it was only after I
"took on" some of the things Larry (and his ilk) was posting that he decided
to take a dislike to my callsign.

Makes one wonder if it is the callsign that is the reason for the attitude;
or that they just plain dislike me and can't think of any other way to
express it.

The statements of those who voice the strongest objections tend to
support your observation, Kim.

Jim himself, who insists that it is just the "inappropriate callsign"
that bothers him, stated (regarding his negative opinion towards the
callsign):

"It wasn't formed beforehand. It was formed only after I encountered
the callsign and its owner here, and considered all the issues."

This statement indicates that it isn't just the call that bothers him
- it's a combination of the call plus other 'factors'. The 'package',
as it were.

You are mistaken, Leo.

That statement of mine was in response to claims that I was "prejudiced"
about Kim's callsign.

The word "prejudice" means to "pre-judge". IOW, to come to a conclusion
before knowing all the relevant facts. My statement

"It wasn't formed beforehand. It was formed only after I encountered
the callsign and its owner here, and considered all the issues."

simply proves that I wasn't prejudiced because I didn't pre-judge. And I
did not encounter that callsign, or ones like it, before I saw it here
on rrap, in use by its holder.

IOW, I did not hear about it somewhere else, see it used by someone other
than Kim, etc. And I did not rush to judgement.

In fact, when I first saw it, I thought "Kim" and the callsign were
pseudonyms being used to hide the identity of the poster. Like your
use of only your first name, rather than your callsign. Imagine
my surprise when I discovered it was for-real!

Look at the context in which I wrote that statement, and it is clear
that it simply means I formed my opinion of Kim's callsign based on
experiences here, not on prejudice.

73 de Jim, N2EY