| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#10
July 12th 04, 12:22 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Subject: Amateur Radio Newsline ...
From: "D. Stussy" Date: 7/12/2004 1:38 AM Central Standard Time Message-id: On Sat, 10 Jul 2004, Steve Robeson K4CAP wrote: Subject: Amateur Radio Newsline ... I don't see you "protesting" any of the "ENLARGE YOUR !@#$%" spam, or the "MAKE MONEY FAST" spam, nor do I see you protesting any of the "SEE MY TEEN WIFE !@#$%^" spam. Like ANYONE can do anything about the spam problem nowadays?.... Seem's to me AOL and Yahoo are. Some pretty hefty lawsuits are in the mill. NONE of that is even REMOTELY related to Amateur Radio, yet where's Dieter's outrageous indignation about THOSE "guidelines/charter violation(s)"...?!?! SO? That just means that I chose to put my resources where I CAN accomplish an end to the violation.... No, it doesn't. It means that your ulterior motives are glaring. This is not about "spam". It's about Dieter Stussy-vs-Bill Pasternak. Period. I reiterate my previous assertion: It's directly pertinent TO Amateur Radio, BY a licensed Radio Amateur IN an Amateur Radio forum. Much of what is in Bill's "news releases" IS pertinent to Amateur Radio policy discussions....And certainly MORE pertinent than most of the other stuff that transpires here. All I can say is that what ever Bill did/said that got you in such a wedgie must have hit pretty close to home! You're obviously still stinging from it! 1) I have not made it any secret what he has done to one of my associates by misreporting the story he was involved in. 2) If newsline is supposed to be a "non-profit" operation then why is BP practically LIVING off of the donations? There are laws that govern what "reasonable compensation" is for a non-profit, and he's exceeding them, as I have previously demonstrated. You've only demonstrated that you're PO'ed at Bill Pasternak. If you want to make your point, why don't you either document your concerns to the FCC or the IRS, since they are the two most likely agencies to have an official opinion on the matter... Lastly, the federal tax codes allow for a percentage of "charitable donations" to be used for administrative (eg: salaries) purposes. I've met Bill Pasternak and I dare say he's sharp enough to have made sure that his finances are TDC with the law. Unless you can prove differently...?!?!? (My bet's on "PO'd indignation" more than valid complaint) 73 Steve, K4YZ |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Threaded Mode
