In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

N2EY wrote:
In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

N2EY wrote:

In article ,

(Len Over 21) writes:

After you've lived and experienced a few eras in anything, you'll
find lots and lots of "experts" in that anything, who either "know
all about (from reading a book or seeing a movie)" or are some-
how so gifted in their relative youth that they are divine
messengers sent to enlighten all the hoi polloi and the koi.
:-)

Gee, Len, that's interesting....

You mean like someone who's never held any class of amateur license, nor
been involved in radio regulation in any way, yet loudly and repeatedly
proclaims what changes should be made to the amateur radio regulations?

Or someone who has never been directly invoved in the raising of children,
yet proclaims what they can and cannot do at various ages - even to the
point
of not allowing them to be amateur radio operators before a certain age?

Or someone who has never really learned or used Morse Code, yet loudly and
repeatedly denies its usefulness - even to the point of denying its
historical importance?

Or someone who claims a desire for "civil discussion", yet will not carry
on a civil discussion with someone of differing opinions, and instead
refers to
the other parties by ad-hominem insults to their age, work, gender,
license
class, education, name, ethnicity, and military service?

You forgot to add:

"Someone that has a main purpose here of antagonizing people into
e-battles as a master troll." And in this case, his lack of experience
in certain areas only serves as more bait.

Well, if the shoe fits...

Sorry for replies to some older posts. I've been through two weeks of
hell at work, and didn't get to respond to everything. Now I'm taking a
well deserved day off and can get back to it.

Good to have you back, Mike

Yes, the shoe does fit.

Well, there you have it.

I for one, am impressed by just how GOOD Mr. Anderson is at this!

I'm not.

There are all sorts of reasons to be involved in a newsgroup. Some of
us like to post to exchange knowledge, some to debate, and others to
have an adventure - using other posters as pro or antagonists in a sort
of text based adventure game.

Lots of other reasons, too. One can only speculate on Mr. Anderson's reasons.
;-)

With the different personalities involved, the games can get pretty
interesting and funny, or sometimes they can become boring and
repetitive. The MARS is Ham radio stuff is a good example of the latter.

No it isn't.*

If a poster is the type that is trying to antagonize others - that is
to say one that is using the group in the text adventure mode - he or
she does not want to get people so angry that they don't respond. That
would be losing the game. This player will want to be antagonistic of
course, but will want to allow other posters to stay just this side of
filtering or ignoring him or her.

In some cases, yes.

Some here filter Len, but enough do not that he finds a steady stream
of willing participants in his game.

Perhaps.

Face it, he is good at it.

Not really. I have seen many other posters get the better of Mr. Anderson. It's
not hard to do at all.

All I've done is present a differing opinion than his, and point out some of
his mistakes. His responses have been - predictable.

It's fascinating how a few words of a different opinion can cause Mr. Anderson
to produce volumes of verbiage. And how a calm, polite correction of even one
of his errors brings such a torrent of anger and abuse.

It may not be what you are in here for, but
he succeeds in his game.

Sometimes.

Note this does not apply to the strange fringe postings that appear to
be personal battles, such as the one that Dave seems involved in with
some hams in his locale. That is just really wierd stuff.

Just different versions of the same game. And the "game" sometimes extends
beyond the newsgroup. For example, some time back I and some others received
several unsolicited emails from Mr. Anderson, with attachments that were
allegedly pictures. I deleted them unopened, as is standard procedure for
unsolicited attachments. I found out later they were supposedly a picture of
his commercial radiotelephone license and a picture that included adult male
nudity. Of course this is second hand information because I simply deleted the
emails, but you have to kinda wonder why such Mr. Anderson would send me such
things.

You
(or anyone here) know what will happen when you rise to the bait, you
know pretty much what the resulting exchange will be, and yet it is
irresistable.

Naw, it's totally resistible. And predictable.

And yet you are now involved once more!

Only by choice.

Whereas most antagonists eventually find no one to write to in a news
group, Len has managed to generate enough interest to make himself and
those who would spar with him into some of the leading posters.

Nothing new there, Mike.

This is no small accomplishment. I for one have to respect that.

I don't.


You don't have to, that much is true.

Well, there you have it.

73 de Jim, N2EY

* pop culture reference to "The Argument Clinic" - classic Monty Python sketch

In article , PAMNO
(N2EY) writes:

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

N2EY wrote:
In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

N2EY wrote:

There are all sorts of reasons to be involved in a newsgroup. Some of
us like to post to exchange knowledge, some to debate, and others to
have an adventure - using other posters as pro or antagonists in a sort
of text based adventure game.

Lots of other reasons, too. One can only speculate on Mr. Anderson's reasons.
;-)

Speculate away, Rev. Jim, in the most "civil" negative connotations
your lil imagination thunk up...:-)

Speculate until all you see are speckles...

Of course we can all speculate on Mr. Miccolis' reasons (to sound off
like some latter-day "T.O.M.") when that ARRL president-for-life
ceased mortal existance long before Rev. Jim got is first Good Book
(ARRL Handbook, that is).

With the different personalities involved, the games can get pretty
interesting and funny, or sometimes they can become boring and
repetitive. The MARS is Ham radio stuff is a good example of the latter.

No it isn't.*

If you are trying to be "with-it" (of two decades plus ago), try to
remember that everyone is NOT a Monty Python fan... :-)


Face it, he is good at it.

Not really. I have seen many other posters get the better of Mr. Anderson.
It's not hard to do at all.

Tsk, tsk, tsk...your Python was gored and you think everyone else's
was, too? :-)

All I've done is present a differing opinion than his, and point out some of
his mistakes. His responses have been - predictable.

BS, Rev. Jim. You've got a bad habit of trying to convince others
that you "know" things you can't verify. Tsk, tsk, tsk.

It's fascinating how a few words of a different opinion can cause Mr. Anderson
to produce volumes of verbiage. And how a calm, polite correction of even one
of his errors brings such a torrent of anger and abuse.

"Torrent of anger and abuse?!?!?" :-)

Poor baby. Wanting to be the hall monitor in here, ey?

Jimmah, da Google is NOT your friend in this case. :-)

It may not be what you are in here for, but
he succeeds in his game.

Sometimes.

More times than not. I'm still here... :-)

Note this does not apply to the strange fringe postings that appear to
be personal battles, such as the one that Dave seems involved in with
some hams in his locale. That is just really wierd stuff.

Just different versions of the same game. And the "game" sometimes extends
beyond the newsgroup. For example, some time back I and some others received
several unsolicited emails from Mr. Anderson, with attachments that were
allegedly pictures. I deleted them unopened, as is standard procedure for
unsolicited attachments. I found out later they were supposedly a picture of
his commercial radiotelephone license and a picture that included adult male
nudity. Of course this is second hand information because I simply deleted the
emails, but you have to kinda wonder why such Mr. Anderson would send me such
things.

Oh, dear. Isn't the nasty old Reverend getting out of hand with his
preachy moralizing? :-)

"Male nudity!" :-)

By accident, a JPG of an aerial photo of a converted B-26 with one of
the crew mooning the photo plane in the nose is considered "male
nudity!!!"

Several of the folks who are in here thought it was FUNNY.

But, the rigid moral majority, more self-righteous than mental
viagra overdosing, say it is "male nudity!!!" Good grief.
Grow up. Get a new fig leaf to cover your anguish...

If you had bothered to Google (your constant source of diss-material)
you would have found out the sequence of events was totally in public
in this venue.

By the way, I DID send the correct attachment which was, indeed, a
scan of my FIRST First Class Radiotelephone (Commercial) license.
I've had several of those licenses, all the way to the change-over to
the General Radiotelephone Operator license class.

You
(or anyone here) know what will happen when you rise to the bait, you
know pretty much what the resulting exchange will be, and yet it is
irresistable.

Naw, it's totally resistible. And predictable.

And yet you are now involved once more!

Only by choice.

Yes, "Mr. Miccolis" wants to keep on beating dead horses until they
die all over again to prove his point that He was "correct," and all
must accept that lest they get caught in an endless loop of Rev. Jim
preaching his self-righteousness. "Mr. Miccolis" can do no wrong,
ever, and he is compelled to repeat old arguments forever and ever
to demonstrate that.

"Mr. Miccolis" will try to repeat many ancient arguments, discussions,
et al, long after they quit being topics. Why? Apparently "Mr. Miccolis"
can't let sleeping dogs lie nor can he let beaten horses die, either.

It's sort of like watching re-runs of "Wheel of Fortune" (or any other quiz
show on TV) and hoping a guest will come up with a different answer! :-)

Tsk, tsk, tsk...such sore losers! :-)

LHA / WMD

N2EY wrote:

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:


N2EY wrote:

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:



N2EY wrote:


In article ,



(Len Over 21) writes:


After you've lived and experienced a few eras in anything, you'll
find lots and lots of "experts" in that anything, who either "know
all about (from reading a book or seeing a movie)" or are some-
how so gifted in their relative youth that they are divine
messengers sent to enlighten all the hoi polloi and the koi.
:-)


Gee, Len, that's interesting....


You mean like someone who's never held any class of amateur license, nor
been involved in radio regulation in any way, yet loudly and repeatedly
proclaims what changes should be made to the amateur radio regulations?


Or someone who has never been directly invoved in the raising of children,
yet proclaims what they can and cannot do at various ages - even to the

point

of not allowing them to be amateur radio operators before a certain age?

Or someone who has never really learned or used Morse Code, yet loudly and
repeatedly denies its usefulness - even to the point of denying its
historical importance?

Or someone who claims a desire for "civil discussion", yet will not carry
on a civil discussion with someone of differing opinions, and instead

refers to

the other parties by ad-hominem insults to their age, work, gender,

license

class, education, name, ethnicity, and military service?

You forgot to add:

"Someone that has a main purpose here of antagonizing people into
e-battles as a master troll." And in this case, his lack of experience
in certain areas only serves as more bait.


Well, if the shoe fits...

Sorry for replies to some older posts. I've been through two weeks of
hell at work, and didn't get to respond to everything. Now I'm taking a
well deserved day off and can get back to it.


Good to have you back, Mike

Yes, the shoe does fit.


Well, there you have it.


I for one, am impressed by just how GOOD Mr. Anderson is at this!

I'm not.

There are all sorts of reasons to be involved in a newsgroup. Some of
us like to post to exchange knowledge, some to debate, and others to
have an adventure - using other posters as pro or antagonists in a sort
of text based adventure game.


Lots of other reasons, too. One can only speculate on Mr. Anderson's reasons.
;-)

With the different personalities involved, the games can get pretty
interesting and funny, or sometimes they can become boring and
repetitive. The MARS is Ham radio stuff is a good example of the latter.


No it isn't.*


Yow - the Mostly Steve Brian MARS argument has gotten to the point
where I can hardly hack it. YMMV!

That was a good skit, though!


If a poster is the type that is trying to antagonize others - that is
to say one that is using the group in the text adventure mode - he or
she does not want to get people so angry that they don't respond. That
would be losing the game. This player will want to be antagonistic of
course, but will want to allow other posters to stay just this side of
filtering or ignoring him or her.


In some cases, yes.

Some here filter Len, but enough do not that he finds a steady stream
of willing participants in his game.


Perhaps.

Face it, he is good at it.

Not really. I have seen many other posters get the better of Mr. Anderson. It's
not hard to do at all.

All I've done is present a differing opinion than his, and point out some of
his mistakes. His responses have been - predictable.

I must not be getting my point across here. This isn't about being
right. It's about the discourse. Sometimes he's right, sometimes he's
wrong, and a lot of it is just neutral as in opinion.



It's fascinating how a few words of a different opinion can cause Mr. Anderson
to produce volumes of verbiage. And how a calm, polite correction of even one
of his errors brings such a torrent of anger and abuse.

Yes, I've had that happen.


It may not be what you are in here for, but
he succeeds in his game.


Sometimes.

Note this does not apply to the strange fringe postings that appear to
be personal battles, such as the one that Dave seems involved in with
some hams in his locale. That is just really wierd stuff.


Just different versions of the same game.

Oh, that other one is some pretty severe stuff. Between the perverse
accusations, the threats, the obscenities and the stuff that just might
end up as courtroom evidence, this stuff is tame by comparison.


And the "game" sometimes extends
beyond the newsgroup. For example, some time back I and some others received
several unsolicited emails from Mr. Anderson, with attachments that were
allegedly pictures. I deleted them unopened, as is standard procedure for
unsolicited attachments. I found out later they were supposedly a picture of
his commercial radiotelephone license and a picture that included adult male
nudity. Of course this is second hand information because I simply deleted the
emails, but you have to kinda wonder why such Mr. Anderson would send me such
things.

I've heard about that one.

You
(or anyone here) know what will happen when you rise to the bait, you
know pretty much what the resulting exchange will be, and yet it is
irresistable.


Naw, it's totally resistible. And predictable.

And yet you are now involved once more!


Only by choice.


Well, sure! Steve is involved by choice too!

- Mike KB3EIA -

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

N2EY wrote:

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

N2EY wrote:

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

N2EY wrote:

In article ,



(Len Over 21) writes:

After you've lived and experienced a few eras in anything, you'll
find lots and lots of "experts" in that anything, who either "know
all about (from reading a book or seeing a movie)" or are some-
how so gifted in their relative youth that they are divine
messengers sent to enlighten all the hoi polloi and the koi.
:-)

Gee, Len, that's interesting....

You mean like someone who's never held any class of amateur license, nor
been involved in radio regulation in any way, yet loudly and repeatedly
proclaims what changes should be made to the amateur radio regulations?

Or someone who has never been directly invoved in the raising of
children,
yet proclaims what they can and cannot do at various ages - even to the
point
of not allowing them to be amateur radio operators before a certain age?

Or someone who has never really learned or used Morse Code, yet loudly
and
repeatedly denies its usefulness - even to the point of denying its
historical importance?

Or someone who claims a desire for "civil discussion", yet will not carry
on a civil discussion with someone of differing opinions, and instead
refers to
the other parties by ad-hominem insults to their age, work, gender,
license
class, education, name, ethnicity, and military service?

You forgot to add:

"Someone that has a main purpose here of antagonizing people into
e-battles as a master troll." And in this case, his lack of experience
in certain areas only serves as more bait.

Well, if the shoe fits...

Sorry for replies to some older posts. I've been through two weeks of
hell at work, and didn't get to respond to everything. Now I'm taking a
well deserved day off and can get back to it.

Good to have you back, Mike

Yes, the shoe does fit.

Well, there you have it.

I for one, am impressed by just how GOOD Mr. Anderson is at this!

I'm not.

There are all sorts of reasons to be involved in a newsgroup. Some of
us like to post to exchange knowledge, some to debate, and others to
have an adventure - using other posters as pro or antagonists in a sort
of text based adventure game.

Lots of other reasons, too. One can only speculate on Mr. Anderson's
reasons.
;-)

With the different personalities involved, the games can get pretty
interesting and funny, or sometimes they can become boring and
repetitive. The MARS is Ham radio stuff is a good example of the latter.

No it isn't.*

Rev. Jim must have gotten his shoes at Hobson's... :-)

[old Brit film, "Hobson's Choice" :-) ]

Yow - the Mostly Steve Brian MARS argument has gotten to the point
where I can hardly hack it. YMMV!

That was a good skit, though!

I doubt it is over. :-)

More one-sided name-calling and cussing from the hospital
PA...

If a poster is the type that is trying to antagonize others - that is
to say one that is using the group in the text adventure mode - he or
she does not want to get people so angry that they don't respond. That
would be losing the game. This player will want to be antagonistic of
course, but will want to allow other posters to stay just this side of
filtering or ignoring him or her.

In some cases, yes.

Some here filter Len, but enough do not that he finds a steady stream
of willing participants in his game.

Perhaps.

Face it, he is good at it.

Not really. I have seen many other posters get the better of Mr. Anderson.
It's
not hard to do at all.

All I've done is present a differing opinion than his, and point out some of
his mistakes. His responses have been - predictable.

I must not be getting my point across here. This isn't about being
right. It's about the discourse. Sometimes he's right, sometimes he's
wrong, and a lot of it is just neutral as in opinion.

Opinion is opinion.

Problem is, too many amateurs are totally inflexible and any
deviation, however slight, from established Newington
instructions is considered "perverse." :-)

It's fascinating how a few words of a different opinion can cause
Mr.Anderson
to produce volumes of verbiage. And how a calm, polite correction of even
one
of his errors brings such a torrent of anger and abuse.

Yes, I've had that happen.

It's the nature of the computer-modem beast, Mike. You can't
escape it.

Neither are you assured of having the "last word." :-)

It may not be what you are in here for, but
he succeeds in his game.

Sometimes.

Tsk, tsk, tsk, Jimmie. :-)

Note this does not apply to the strange fringe postings that appear to
be personal battles, such as the one that Dave seems involved in with
some hams in his locale. That is just really wierd stuff.

Just different versions of the same game.

Oh, that other one is some pretty severe stuff. Between the perverse
accusations, the threats, the obscenities and the stuff that just might
end up as courtroom evidence, this stuff is tame by comparison.

:-)

And the "game" sometimes extends
beyond the newsgroup. For example, some time back I and some others received
several unsolicited emails from Mr. Anderson, with attachments that were
allegedly pictures. I deleted them unopened, as is standard procedure for
unsolicited attachments. I found out later they were supposedly a picture of
his commercial radiotelephone license and a picture that included adult male
nudity. Of course this is second hand information because I simply deleted
the
emails, but you have to kinda wonder why such Mr. Anderson would send me
such
things.

I've heard about that one.

I might have it on an old CD archive, available for e-mail attachment if so.

It's good for about 3 days as a private web page. :-)

You
(or anyone here) know what will happen when you rise to the bait, you
know pretty much what the resulting exchange will be, and yet it is
irresistable.

Naw, it's totally resistible. And predictable.

And yet you are now involved once more!

Only by choice.

Well, sure! Steve is involved by choice too!

Not quite. There's an obsessive-compulsive disorder going on
there and he can't help jumping back in. Wait. Once time is
available, he will bring out the putz can and start polishing
some more insults. :-)

LHA / WMD

Mike Coslo wrote in message ...
N2EY wrote:
With the different personalities involved, the games can get pretty
interesting and funny, or sometimes they can become boring and
repetitive. The MARS is Ham radio stuff is a good example of the latter.


No it isn't.*


Yow - the Mostly Steve Brian MARS argument has gotten to the point
where I can hardly hack it. YMMV!

I don't read most of it.

That was a good skit, though!

Exactly.

If a poster is the type that is trying to antagonize others - that is
to say one that is using the group in the text adventure mode - he or
she does not want to get people so angry that they don't respond. That
would be losing the game. This player will want to be antagonistic of
course, but will want to allow other posters to stay just this side of
filtering or ignoring him or her.

In some cases, yes.

Some here filter Len, but enough do not that he finds a steady stream
of willing participants in his game.

Perhaps.

Face it, he is good at it.

Not really. I have seen many other posters get the better of Mr. Anderson. It's not hard to do at all.

All I've done is present a differing opinion than his, and point out some of
his mistakes. His responses have been - predictable.

Totally predictable, in fact.

I must not be getting my point across here. This isn't about being
right. It's about the discourse. Sometimes he's right, sometimes he's
wrong, and a lot of it is just neutral as in opinion.

What isn't neutral is the undeserved abuse dealt out to others for
simply disagreeing or pointing out mistakes. But see below about the
"game".

It's fascinating how a few words of a different opinion can cause Mr.
Anderson
to produce volumes of verbiage. And how a calm, polite correction of even
one
of his errors brings such a torrent of anger and abuse.

Yes, I've had that happen.

Exactly.

It may not be what you are in here for, but
he succeeds in his game.

Sometimes.

Note this does not apply to the strange fringe postings that appear to
be personal battles, such as the one that Dave seems involved in with
some hams in his locale. That is just really wierd stuff.

Just different versions of the same game.

The game you describe is simple attention-getting behavior. It's
exactly the same as the small child who tries all sorts of behaviors
in order to get adult (typically parental) attention. That the
attention takes the form of punishments doesn't matter to the child as
much as the attention itself.

A variation is to get the adult/parent to lose control, start
screaming and yelling, etc., as a way of getting the child and adult
on the same behavioral level.

Much if not most of what Len does with his newsgroup postings here is
exactly the same thing.

You may think he is "good at it" but the reverse is true. Compare how
much response he gets for the amount of posting he does. Or if you
want to be specific, note how many of my posts elicit a response from
him, and how many of his posts elicit a response from me. Note also
the length, content and tone of the responses.

"Good at it"? Not at all.

Oh, that other one is some pretty severe stuff. Between the perverse
accusations, the threats, the obscenities and the stuff that just might
end up as courtroom evidence, this stuff is tame by comparison.

And the "game" sometimes extends
beyond the newsgroup. For example, some time back I and some others received
several unsolicited emails from Mr. Anderson, with attachments that were
allegedly pictures. I deleted them unopened, as is standard procedure for
unsolicited attachments. I found out later they were supposedly a picture of
his commercial radiotelephone license and a picture that included adult male
nudity. Of course this is second hand information because I simply deleted the
emails, but you have to kinda wonder why such Mr. Anderson would send me such
things.

I've heard about that one.

Exactly.

You
(or anyone here) know what will happen when you rise to the bait, you
know pretty much what the resulting exchange will be, and yet it is
irresistable.

Naw, it's totally resistible. And predictable.

And yet you are now involved once more!

Only by choice.

Well, sure! Steve is involved by choice too!

Yep. There are good choices and not-so-good choices.

73 de Jim, N2EY