Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old October 14th 05, 05:48 PM
Senior Member
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Oct 2005
Posts: 156
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by

But with all due respect, how do we know your scorecard is accurate?

Does anyone check your work? You do make mistakes, Len. We've seen some
of them here.

Also, it's clear to anyone who reads your posts here that you're hardly
unbiased on the subject of code testing.

Indeed, you used the phrase "unbiased by local groups' opinions on
morsemanship as either vital or neccessary [sic] in amateur radio" as
if *others* scorecards are somehow biased - but not yours. You've
previously accused others of 'massaged numbers' and 'fraud' when their
data did not match yours, too.

So why should anyone *assume* the accuracy of your scorecard, Len? I'm
not saying you're intentionally cooking the books.....
No, you're not actually SAYING he's cooked the books (you're too slippery to make a blunt statement) but you're certainly spotlighting the possibility.

If Anderson was too "cook the books", do you really think the score would be nearly an even tie between the two camps (about 55:45 at last tabulation)?

Grow up.

The Man in the Maze
QRV from Baboquivari Peak, AZ
__________________
The Man in the Maze
QRV at Baboquivari Peak
  #2   Report Post  
Old October 14th 05, 10:42 PM
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Iitoi wrote:
Wrote:


But with all due respect, how do we know your scorecard is accurate?


Does anyone check your work? You do make mistakes, Len. We've seen
some of them here.

Also, it's clear to anyone who reads your posts here that you're
hardly unbiased on the subject of code testing.

Indeed, you used the phrase "unbiased by local groups' opinions on
morsemanship as either vital or neccessary [sic] in amateur radio" as
if *others* scorecards are somehow biased - but not yours. You've
previously accused others of 'massaged numbers' and 'fraud' when their
data did not match yours, too.

So why should anyone *assume* the accuracy of your scorecard, Len? I'm
not saying you're intentionally cooking the books.....


No, you're not actually SAYING he's cooked the books (you're too
slippery to make a blunt statement) but you're certainly spotlighting
the possibility.


Is "spotlighting the possibility" of something not allowed?

Besides, "cooking the books" implies an intent to deceive. There's
also the possibility of honest mistakes.

There doesn't seem to be anybody checking Len's 'work', anyway.

If Anderson was too "cook the books", do you really think the score
would be nearly an even tie between the two camps (about 55:45 at last
tabulation)?


Maybe. That's not the point, anyway.

Grow up.


What does that mean in this context? That I should accept Len's
scorecard without question, just because he says so?

  #3   Report Post  
Old October 17th 05, 12:41 AM
an_old_friend
 
Posts: n/a
Default Docket Scorecard


wrote:
Iitoi wrote:
Wrote:

But with all due respect, how do we know your scorecard is accurate?


Does anyone check your work? You do make mistakes, Len. We've seen
some of them here.

Also, it's clear to anyone who reads your posts here that you're
hardly unbiased on the subject of code testing.

Indeed, you used the phrase "unbiased by local groups' opinions on
morsemanship as either vital or neccessary [sic] in amateur radio" as
if *others* scorecards are somehow biased - but not yours. You've
previously accused others of 'massaged numbers' and 'fraud' when their
data did not match yours, too.

So why should anyone *assume* the accuracy of your scorecard, Len? I'm
not saying you're intentionally cooking the books.....


No, you're not actually SAYING he's cooked the books (you're too
slippery to make a blunt statement) but you're certainly spotlighting
the possibility.


Is "spotlighting the possibility" of something not allowed?


it certainly is

Besides, "cooking the books" implies an intent to deceive. There's
also the possibility of honest mistakes.

There doesn't seem to be anybody checking Len's 'work', anyway.


then go for it

no one else is conceed enough

If Anderson was too "cook the books", do you really think the score
would be nearly an even tie between the two camps (about 55:45 at last
tabulation)?


Maybe. That's not the point, anyway.


sure is

Grow up.


What does that mean in this context? That I should accept Len's
scorecard without question, just because he says so?


that you should do the work yourself or shut up about it

Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Docket 05-235 Scorecard [email protected] Policy 83 September 7th 05 05:32 PM
Stonewalling on WT Docket 05-235? [email protected] Policy 13 September 6th 05 01:13 AM
Stonewalling WT Docket 05-235? [email protected] Policy 2 August 31st 05 09:10 PM
Status of WT Docket 05-235 [email protected] Policy 7 August 2nd 05 11:37 PM
WT Docket 04-140 Billy Preston Digital 0 July 22nd 04 09:15 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:42 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017