Subject: Proposal to rename RRAP ... (was - New Candidate for
'Youngest Extra')
From: (Len Over 21)
Date: 4/3/2004 2:28 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

In article , "Carl R. Stevenson"
writes:

I hereby propose that we rename RRAP to "rec.Steve, Len, and a few others
rag on each other endlessly.alt"
and create a new newsgroup for those of us who really would like to discuss
amateur radio regulatory and policy
issues ...

Carl, I've made a suggestion repeatedly for at least six years in
here that it should be shut off from public access with only
"authorized access" and a moderator to attempt keeping the
peace. That way everyone can be "among their own kind," happy
and content, no evil independent thoughts intruding nirvana.

YOU wouldn't want a moderator here, Lennie.

I'm getting REALLY tired of all of this endless, childish bickering that is
OT and doesn't belong here ...
most days, it's hard to find the stuff that this newsgroup is supposed to
be for because of the volume
of petty, personal bickering that you guys load the newsgroup up with ...

I agree. But, having practiced computer-modem communications for
17+ years, slightly longer than that via time-share systems on the
old Arpanet, then Usenet, then BBSs, and finally the Internet after
1991, I'd say that human nature hasn't changed much.

Ahhhhhh....some of that time-in-grade sets you apart, eh, Lennie?

Tell you what, Carl, let's see you hang in there with mild, civil
manners as a model of comportment after another has threatened
to abrogate your First Amendment rights in public, repeatedly
called you "putz" (Yiddish for asshole), "scum" in various forms,
"ignorant of everything in amateur radio," a "pathological liar,"
"dishonorable" towards the USA military after conjuring up obvious
untruthful conditions...plus...various forms of personal insults
including alleged homosexual acts, insulting my wife, my parents,
my work experience, my education, educational institutions who
provide college-credit courses away from normal hours.

Kinda miserable being treated in kind, isn't, Lennie?

Is the point getting across to you?

Of course you've weathered those contentious conditions of an
equal nature with the highest possible conduct befitting an
executive directorship. All the PCTA have done equally calm,
reasoned, civil replies in here, haven't they?

OK, there ... I've said my peace and now you can tell me to [expletive
deleted for Jim's benefit] off ...

Wouldn't think of it. Heavens, no civilized person uses [expletive
deleted] [expletive deleted] words in newsgroups...that's for the
lower-class, inferior, non-amateur bourgoise, the riff-raff, the
underbelly of society peasantry. Self-righteousness and
sanctimonious behavior are the true rulers on an enlighted
superior society.

"Profanity is the adjective of the weak mind"...Anon.

Seems the FCC shares the same opinion, as do countless other organizations
that are pressing the government to make the airwaves more "family friendly".

Do you disagree with this concept, Lennie?

Now back to the present-day amateur policy newsgroup where the
main topics are immunization, diseases, past military experience,
national policy, and - especially - much angst over long-past
message exchanges which must be argued over and over and over
and over and over again until the original non-winner considers they
have "won."

Please excuse my absence. I am preparing some Replies to
Comments to my government on federal regulations. No doubt I
will once again by rewarded by an Amateur Extra licensee
demanding I be censored and censured for exercising my First
Amendment Rights to my government.

Censorship is wonderful, don't you wish everyone had it?

Funny how what is your "right" to comment on anything you desire
(regardless of who you hurt and why) is "censorship" when redirected at you,
Lennie.

Steve, K4YZ

Subject: New Candidate for 'Youngest Extra'
From: (Len Over 21)
Date: 4/4/2004 1:22 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

In article ,
(Steve
Robeson K4CAP) writes:

You belittle every licensed Radio Amateur for alledgedly being
predisposed
with "rank, title and priviledge", yet it's your own "rank, title and
priviledge" that you want to talk about here.

I'm not interested in talking about myself. I was answering your
ugly little charge of homosexual activity while doing janitor work
at Rocketdyne.

WHOA!

Since when were YOU "not interested in talking about myself"...?!?!

BBWWWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
AHAHA! ! ! ! ! ! !

You have enough demonstrated symptoms of mental illness from
all the public displays of inability to interface with other humans.
You should seek mental therapy to alleviate that. Do so.

Now who's the order-giving "dill sergeant", Lennie?

I'll tell you what...

I'll spend an hour with a mental health counsellor just as soon as
evidence of YOUR having spent an hour at a VE session shows up in the FCC
database.

How's THAT for a deal...?!?!

Heck, Lennie...I'll even rebate you your exam fee with a PMO. How's THAT
for a deal?

Up to you, Lennie!

Steve, K4YZ

Subject: Proposal to rename RRAP
From: "Carl R. Stevenson"
Date: 4/4/2004 7:27 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:


"Steve Robeson, K4CAP" wrote in message
. com...

Carl, why do YOU seem to have a problem with me giving a nod to
veterans for having been able to provide you YOUR right to post your
uncensored opinion?

Because your "nod to veterans" was just an obviously insincere, self-serving
"shot" at me, and not a genuine "hats off" to those who made sacrifices.

Seems to me the "insincere, self serving shot" was yours...not mine,
especially since the exchange was initiated BY YOU, Carl.

Are you now insinuating that the sacrifices made by veterans in defense
of your freedom to do so was wrong?

You have a perverse way of trying to twist things to your own purpose Steve.

And you don't, Carl?

Congrats on the Veteran status. After you're done brow-beating
me for having made an affirmative comment to Vets, reach around and
give yourself a pat on the back from me...You deserve it.

Had your "affirmative comments to Vets" been sincere and legitimate, rather
than a self-serving attempt at a cheap shot, I wouldn't have said anything.
But, I resent *your* constantly trying to suck some personal debating
advantage (not that you get it) or "holier than thoubrownie points" out of
your service ... why do you think Len refers to you as "the gunnery nurse?"
(Hint - it's to emphasize the way you make a fool out of yourself by trying
to "play the vet card.")

Hint, Carl...

Lennie has ALWAYS played the "vet card", even to the point of signing
posts with his former service number, claiming that his rear-area support
duties were somehow akin to having made the ultimate sacrifice in combat, and
having tried to embellish his own service with that of men who died three years
before he was even inducted.

And if Lennie has fun calling me the "gunnery nurse", so what?

OK ... now you can call *me* a putz ... and you're at the top of the
potential kill-file list - but I wish you'd give EVERYONE a break for the
benefit of the newsgroup.

ARE you a putz, Carl? Would it make you feel better if I did? I don't
think you are, but you seem anxious for me to do so.

I don't care for many of your opinions or ideas, but overall I think
you're an OK guy.

73

Steve, K4YZ

Subject: Proposal to rename RRAP ... (was - New Candidate for
'Youngest Extra')
From: (William)
Date: 4/3/2004 9:09 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message
...

Veterans, Take a bow. Carl made use of your sacrifices.

73

Steve, K4YZ

Steve abuses your sacrifice.

Uh huh...riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.....

Steve, K4YZ

Subject: Proposal to rename RRAP ... (was - New Candidate for
'Youngest Extra')
From: "Carl R. Stevenson"
Date: 4/3/2004 7:11 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:


"Steve Robeson K4CAP" wrote in message
...
Subject: Proposal to rename RRAP ... (was - New Candidate for
'Youngest Extra')
[snip]

Gentlemen, your comments are well spoken and have much merit.

I wonder why, however, many of you selectively decide when to complain
about the "noise".

Steve,

The endless bickering and personal attacks that fundamentally have nothing
to do with amateur radio policy and everything to do with personal grudges
and vendettas have reached a level where they are almost totally dominating
the newsgroup on many, if not most, days.

I see.

And you see my "crap" as being solely responsible.

Uh huh...

73

Steve, K4YZ

N2EY wrote:
In article . net, "Bill Sohl"
writes:


Newsgroup BPL, Carl. If there is an upside to this sad state of
affairs, it is pretty easy to see who all is posting the acrimony and
avoid it.
- Mike KB3EIA -

I much agree...which is why I have stopped the
posting that I used to.

I also agree with Carl's concerns and would "HOPE" that enough
of us can just ignore the obvious dumb, stupid bickering about
individuals and personalities and just try to stay on topic.


Agreed, Bill. I find myself deleting most posts here, adn ignoring certain
regular posters because no matter how civilly they are approached, they
inevitably resort to name calling, false information and insults.

But what do we do about those who post information that is simply not true?

Do you reply to all the spam email that you get that promises you cheap
prescription drugs, some poor schmedlock from Nigeria needs YOU to
participate in some weird scam he's pulling off, or to increase the size
of little willie to gargantuan proportions?

You probably don't, I know I don't. Point is that 90 percent of the
email I get is worthless spam. I'm not going to control it, and my
option is therefore to opt out of email if I really can't handle it.
This newsgroup has a higher s/n ratio than my personal email.

If we approach the newsgroup noise as spam, it might make it a little
easier to handle.

Do you think that any of us can modify Len's behavior? Or Steve or
Brian's? Not hardly likely! I don't even want to. I like 'em all just
the way they are. If a person has problems with what they post, they can
avoid reading them. Not a hard thing to do, as aside from Brian changing
his addy to avoid spam, they aren't disguising themselves.

- Mike KB3EIA -

In article , PAMNO
(N2EY) writes:

So what should folks like you and I do about it?

In particular, when someone posts information that is flat out wrong, should
we
simply ignore it or challenge it?

Your first step is to PROVE your "information" is the "truth" that
cannot ever be "flat out wrong."

You must separate your OPINION from so-called irrefutable
"truth." Opinion is opinion, not some universal truth just because
you think it is so.

After you've done all that, you have to consider that some folks
will still be against you. That is the nature of the computer-modem
beast. That will not change, not even if you think you speak the
most truthful words possible by mortals. Get used to it.

Once adjusted to all those very real environmental conditions, but
you still feel that your god-like words are irrefutable truisms, it is
time to pack it in, quit the newsgroup, and perhaps establish
yourself as a swami of a cult somewhere. That's much better
than to hang in and constantly complaining that some just don't
believe your truths to be self-evident and are so irreverent to
your magnificent words. :-)

LHA / WMD

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

N2EY wrote:
In article . net, "Bill
Sohl"
writes:

Newsgroup BPL, Carl. If there is an upside to this sad state of
affairs, it is pretty easy to see who all is posting the acrimony and
avoid it.
- Mike KB3EIA -

I much agree...which is why I have stopped the
posting that I used to.

I also agree with Carl's concerns and would "HOPE" that enough
of us can just ignore the obvious dumb, stupid bickering about
individuals and personalities and just try to stay on topic.

Agreed, Bill. I find myself deleting most posts here, adn ignoring certain
regular posters because no matter how civilly they are approached, they
inevitably resort to name calling, false information and insults.

But what do we do about those who post information that is simply not true?

Do you reply to all the spam email that you get that promises you cheap

prescription drugs, some poor schmedlock from Nigeria needs YOU to
participate in some weird scam he's pulling off, or to increase the size
of little willie to gargantuan proportions?

You probably don't, I know I don't. Point is that 90 percent of the
email I get is worthless spam. I'm not going to control it, and my
option is therefore to opt out of email if I really can't handle it.
This newsgroup has a higher s/n ratio than my personal email.

If we approach the newsgroup noise as spam, it might make it a little
easier to handle.

Do you think that any of us can modify Len's behavior?

Why do you think anyone's "behavior" needs modification?

Consider that the few clues of just written words are not always
interpreted the same by different human beans.

Some folks cannot write well. Others can. A very few others
have considerable practice with writing in many different venues.

Individual perception needs honing in written-only environments.

Or Steve or
Brian's? Not hardly likely! I don't even want to. I like 'em all just
the way they are.

I don't think you "like" them, but that's beside the point. :-)

Since Arpanet started, since Usenet spun off of Arpanet, since
BBSs emulated both and, finally, Internet took over for the majority
of computer-modem communication, and the behavior patterns
have all been the same. Some folks think their magnificent
words are golden words of wisdom from veritable gods and are,
as Hans Brakob once pointed out, filled with murderous rage at
any who DARE challenge that magnificence! A verbal firefight
then erupts from the furious volcano of the noble slighted.

If a person has problems with what they post, they can
avoid reading them.

Extremely easy for normal folks. Most browsers will just skip
to the next message with the Enter/Return key.

Obsessive-compulsives with a Fight! attitude cannot skip them.

Not a hard thing to do, as aside from Brian changing
his addy to avoid spam, they aren't disguising themselves.

Anyone with some normal practice in reading can see the word,
phrase, syntactic structure of individuals and thus identify them.
[that's much easier than the alleged "fist" of telegraphers...
there are far more clues to identities with written languages]

However, individual emotions can override such identitification
clues, particularly true of obsessive-compulsives with some sort
of grudge bias...or they need the cathartic effects of safely tossing
snit on others as a relief from daily frustrations away from the
newsgroups. [time and distance separation insures no risk from
physical retribution, hence so many, usually new modemists,
will toss away normal social manners and let their inner rages
predominate] Those who've been members of social types of
Bulletin Board Systems will know this by experience of
comparing on-screen appearance with in-person identity clues
and spoken communication, the in-person identification offering
many more clues to the inside workings of others.

Meanwhile, back at the raunch, there's still 4 petitions alive for
comments at the FCC. While the ECFS is in standby over the
weekend, it's hard to see who contributed on Saturday or Sunday,
but I don't see many rrap-ers' names in the ECFS listings. Not
enough "dedication and committment to the amateur community?"
:-)

LHA / WMD

In article , "Carl R. Stevenson"
writes:

I agree 100%, Carl.

So what should folks like you and I do about it?

Jim,

I hate to "kill-file" folks - they *might* just say something relevant at
some point, but I'm considering it for a few individuals whose posts are
mostly personal vendetta-like attacks and insults ...

Me, too. The amount of relevant stuff is overwhelmed by the nasty stuff. In
practice I often don't get past the first line or two before deleting because
of an author's demonstrated behavior here.

In particular, when someone posts information that is flat out wrong,
should we simply ignore it or challenge it?

If we see it and know it to be wrong, I think we should challenge it.
However, it is not my job (nor, I suspect yours) to wade through all of
their drivel in search of a relevant, incorrect assertion so that it might
be challenged.

Agreed. But sometimes the errors just leap out at you.

I tend to think that most people will give little credence to whatever some
of these folks say, just on the basis of the tone and content of most of
their messages.

Hopefully.

I am just finding it annoying to have the newsgroup
polluted with so much OT stuff - newsgroup BPL, I think Mike called it.

That's an excellent term.

73 de Jim, N2EY

Titles...

You belittle every licensed Radio Amateur for alledgedly being
predisposed
with "rank, title and priviledge", yet it's your own "rank, title and
priviledge" that you want to talk about here.

It is getting pretty rank here.... :-)