Telamon wrote:
In article ,
D Peter Maus wrote:

Telamon wrote:
In article ,
dxAce wrote:

David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...
SFTV_troy wrote:
I don't really understand why people are upset about the loss of
DX'ing over AM (only temporarily; it will be restored when AM goes
pure digital). You can still do DX'ing via using services like
shoutcast.com. Just yesterday at work I was listening to an
Australian station. Another favorite of mine is located in England.
DX'ing is still alive and well on the internet.
Uh... that's NOT DX'ing.

It may well become the DXing of the 21st Century.
Edwina, you're an idiot.
It just looks that way to us DxAce because you and I don't share the
level of self delusion that Eduardo has attained.


I honestly believe this is not delusion. I honestly believe he
believes this noise.

His comments blaming DXers for abandoning broadcasters, while
delineating precisely how broadcasters have developed their disdain for
DXers is evidence that he's really looking at snapshots of this party,
but not attending the party, itself. Taking the Broadcaster/Dxer enmity
out of chronological order, as he did, suggests that he's seeing what he
needs to focus on in order to justify his position, but not seeing a
good deal of the out-of-frame that gives the snapshot context. This is
common among manglement in Radio.

It's what used to be called not seeing the forest for the trees.

It's what pilots call flying instruments in VFR conditions: Paying so
much attention to the minutiae that they fail to look up and actually
see how the plane is being flown.

One of my mentors in the Physics department at UMSL used to say, as
the textbook he taught from explained, formulae and numbers are only
shorthand for English sentences. If you can't explain your case without
resorting to formulae and numbers, you can't explain your case.

Corporately, that is the equivalent of: If you can't convince someone
without quoting a policy, you're hiding behind a firewall because you
actually can't function amongst your clients/customers.

And if you notice, he doesn't really answer your questions,
Telamon...but like Johnny Cochran, he gives you the answer he would like
you to hear, whether it addresses your question or not.

Has he posted the link you've asked for yet?

There are several inconsistencies in our most recent discussion about
demographics and agencies. The kind of inconsistencies that someone with
major market experience in both sales and Manglement wouldn't have made.

And in these last discussions, about DXers and this thread about HD,
he's begun speaking openly out of both sides of his mouth, not only
contradicting himself but doing it with a kind of indignation that's
also inconsistent with someone of his knowledge and experience.

Someone made the statement, here, that a person of his stature and
position doesn't need the ego piece that is his website.

Perhaps, that's true. Although I know people in the business who are
still trying to prove something after 30 years in the big city. But when
you read it, and as Ace has pointed out several times that the content
of his website has changed more than once when his credentials were
called into question, it does give one reason to wonder not so much what
it is that's false, but what it is that may be true.

I think he believes his own noise and no he can't provide the link
because what he claims doesn't exist. At least not yet.

He has written some weird stuff like he has people around him looking
over his shoulder laughing at peoples critical responses to his posts on
Usenet as an attempt to bully the people critical of him. Very strange
he would need this imaginary support.

I have noted the deception and misdirection. It's madding.

Most lies have a kernel of truth in them so they are believable. All I
know is every time a take a poke at what he posts the stick goes right
through the one layer of the "story" he tells. All that he posts seem
very illusionary in nature.

At one time it seemed to me you thought he is for real. You still think
that way?



Yeah, I do. But, over the last few weeks, I've noticed some serious
inconsistencies in his positions. And, I've watched him, when pressed,
back away from his arguments. Now, sometimes we say things in the heat
of a moment, or when time is short, that may require some clarification.
But, I've noticed a consistent pattern of argumentation, and when
pressed for specifics, a termination of the discussion, so he can move
on to other things. Direct questions asked, but never addressed.
Specifics requested but never supplied. Your link request that was never
provided. And now, twice, in front of the group, he's promised to get
his engineers out here to take signal strength measurements at my
location to determine why I can't hear a local 50kw station, but
immediately dropped all conversation about it.

To date the only one who's bothered to investigate my reception
issues, is me.

Again, not terribly surprising. Not any of it. Most broadcasters, in
fact, most people in any profession are particularly good at spouting a
company line, but woefully inadequate at following through. Or directly
addressing matters that they feel are inconsequential to them, beneath
them, or in the most insidious cases, may threaten their position. A
lot of people I know are like this. You probably know some, too.

But, here of late, I've seen more of it than in months past. And I've
seen more attempts at abject dismissal, in lieu of substantive
conversation. Which I have seen more out of consultants, than actual
working frontline broadcasters. And some blatant inconsistencies in his
claims about agencies/sales. And his experience. These things make me
suspect that, though, he's still the David we've all come to know and
love, that he's getting low on the calm, educational patience he's
showed a year ago, and is now running out of both patience, and
appreciation of the intercourse.

Like the parent who, when set with a barrage of questions he/she no
longer wants to deal with, because he/she can't make a compelling case,
retreats into 'because I said so.'

He speaks a corporate line. He speaks a policy statement. He
speaks...well, he speaks like he's reading out of a textbook. But he
doesn't speak with a level of personal intimacy that someone with his
experience would employ. You and I, for instance, barely know each
other. And have only corresponded once or twice within the group. But,
here, you've asked a direct question based on existing conversation, but
with a level of personal interaction that David does not employ. You ask
me about what I think and whether or not it's changed. And you phrased
it in a very personal way. Two people exchanging ideas....one to the other.

But when David speaks, he speaks like a policy statement. There's
only a level of personal interaction after it's been brought to his
attention that there is none. Hell, even Eric Richards, with whom I
share no personal cordiality, will address a post as though he's talking
TO me, but not AT me. David doesn't do that. He speaks AT his opponent.
Overwhelming with statistics, where a conversational sentence will do.
Jumping into conversations with material that brings nothing to the
topic at hand, but definitely puts his expertise and policy positions on
display.

Like a textbook. Very much like a textbook. General practices,
expectations and limitatons. But no personal experiential variations on
the textbook case. And everyone, EVERYONE, has personal experiences
where the textbook doesn't tell the story.

Then there was the issue of his ham credentials. When pressed he
gave a credible story about corruption in the testing process in
Ecuador. Nothing out of the ordinary, actually. Nothing outside the
realm of possibility. Certainly, something we'd all believe based on the
politics of the region. But when pressed, he gave no clarification, with
any personal experiential content. Just something that sounds a likely
story.

Which is all, really, that he needs to present. If that. But all of
his stories sound like that. Textbook, obvious and not unexpected likely
stories, without any personal variations, or counterintuitive wrinkles.

Somewhere you'd expect some.

Colleagues, whether vocational or avocational, don't address each
other like that. He claims to be a DXer, but disdains DXers. He claims
to be an SWL, but contributes almost nothing to SW related
conversations. He keeps his content almost entirely on BC related
matters, and, again speaks not TO, but AT the topic. Like we're not
here. Or beneath him. Ignorant USENet savages, who could not be informed
if we could BUY a clue.

As I said, I've known people in the Radio business like that. But
then don't rise to the level of corporate oversight, or management. And
they are certainly not leaders. Usually they're middle manglement. And
consultants.

So, yeah, to answer your question, I think he's for real. I just
think he's not as good at keeping it real as he wants to believe.

D Peter Maus wrote:


Hell, even Eric Richards, with whom I
share no personal cordiality,

Laf.

That's YOUR choice, Peter, not mine. And, FWIW, it inspired some
interesting email from former participants in this group.

will address a post as though he's talking
TO me, but not AT me. David doesn't do that. He speaks AT his opponent.
Overwhelming with statistics, where a conversational sentence will do.

Actually, I disagree. He overwhemlms with statistical buzzwords
rather than statistics. It's easy to talk about normal distributions
if you have read about statistics, but what if you don't know where a
normal distribution simply doesn't apply?

Jumping into conversations with material that brings nothing to the
topic at hand, but definitely puts his expertise and policy positions on
display.

Just an ego trip. "Let me show you how much I know." Only it doesn't
work.

Generally a post I would agree with. It doesn't take a radio insider
to see it, though.


--
Eric F. Richards,
"It's the Din of iBiquity." -- Frank Dresser

Eric F. Richards wrote:
D Peter Maus wrote:


Hell, even Eric Richards, with whom I
share no personal cordiality,

Laf.

That's YOUR choice, Peter, not mine. And, FWIW, it inspired some
interesting email from former participants in this group.


No doubt. What doesn't.


will address a post as though he's talking
TO me, but not AT me. David doesn't do that. He speaks AT his opponent.
Overwhelming with statistics, where a conversational sentence will do.

Actually, I disagree. He overwhemlms with statistical buzzwords
rather than statistics. It's easy to talk about normal distributions
if you have read about statistics, but what if you don't know where a
normal distribution simply doesn't apply?


Both good points.



Jumping into conversations with material that brings nothing to the
topic at hand, but definitely puts his expertise and policy positions on
display.

Just an ego trip. "Let me show you how much I know." Only it doesn't
work.

Generally a post I would agree with. It doesn't take a radio insider
to see it, though.


And that's my point...a real conversation doesn't.

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
. And now, twice, in front of the group, he's promised to get his engineers
out here to take signal strength measurements at my location to determine
why I can't hear a local 50kw station, but immediately dropped all
conversation about it.

And that, whille none of your business, is due to the fact that Paul Easter,
an talented and wonderful engineer, moved to a corporate position at Salem,
and we are short handed in the middle of two transmitter moves.

To date the only one who's bothered to investigate my reception issues,
is me.

Good for you.

. And some blatant inconsistencies in his claims about agencies/sales.

Your experiences of a decade or more ago have little to do with the current
situation, where interactive media is far more attractive to advertising
agencies than radio because there are more creative dollars to be made
there.

And his experience. These things make me suspect that, though, he's still
the David we've all come to know and love, that he's getting low on the
calm, educational patience he's showed a year ago, and is now running out
of both patience, and appreciation of the intercourse.

I'm out of patience with the people who insist that there is listening to
distant skywave signals, when there is no such thing documented and with
those who think AM is not on a horrible decline, with its main and majority
format, news talk, moving to FM. And I'm out of patience with you, who think
a radio station in 2007 can change the demos on a buy because he once saw a
station changed on a buy. I spoke with the head or our naitonal rep about
changing demos on a campaign, and she simply laughed.

But when David speaks, he speaks like a policy statement. There's only
a level of personal interaction after it's been brought to his attention
that there is none. Hell, even Eric Richards, with whom I share no
personal cordiality, will address a post as though he's talking TO me, but
not AT me. David doesn't do that. He speaks AT his opponent. Overwhelming
with statistics, where a conversational sentence will do. Jumping into
conversations with material that brings nothing to the topic at hand, but
definitely puts his expertise and policy positions on display.

When the responses I get are idiotic, I react as one does to an idiot. At
some point, it came to me that DXers were now enemies of radio stations...
which is when I dropped my Northamerican radio club memberships... because
supporting one's enemies with money is hardly rational. The inability of the
DX community to realize that AM has changed from a music medium to a talk
one, and that shows like Noory are necessary, and that technical changes
have to come if there is any chace of AM survival make the DXer a Luddite of
the first order.

Then there was the issue of his ham credentials. When pressed he gave a
credible story about corruption in the testing process in Ecuador. Nothing
out of the ordinary, actually. Nothing outside the realm of possibility.
Certainly, something we'd all believe based on the politics of the region.
But when pressed, he gave no clarification, with any personal experiential
content. Just something that sounds a likely story.

Drivers licences, visas, import permits, bulding permits, licences, tax
audits, etc., were all facilitated in a way that is accepted outside the US,
and not called "corrupt" as you have called it. It's just a different
system. And while I was there, there was no exam for a ham license at all...
you had to be sponsored by the RCE (Radio Club del Ecuador) or other of the
ham associations, and you got a license. My sponsor was Ing. Fred Simon.

But, with about 30 years of living outside the US, and even more working
there, I am used to US gringo standards being applied to other cultures as a
metric. Other cultures do not work like the American system, and can not be
compared to it, either.

Colleagues, whether vocational or avocational, don't address each other
like that. He claims to be a DXer, but disdains DXers.

Anyone with over 2000 AM veries has, I think, earned the right to be called
a DXer. But I am not a club member of any of the DX orgainzations because
the hobby, which led me into radio, now pretty universally hates
broadcasters and the very stations they listen to.

As I said, I've known people in the Radio business like that. But then
don't rise to the level of corporate oversight, or management. And they
are certainly not leaders. Usually they're middle manglement. And
consultants.

Of which I am neither.

David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
. And now, twice, in front of the group, he's promised to get his engineers
out here to take signal strength measurements at my location to determine
why I can't hear a local 50kw station, but immediately dropped all
conversation about it.

And that, whille none of your business, is due to the fact that Paul Easter,
an talented and wonderful engineer, moved to a corporate position at Salem,
and we are short handed in the middle of two transmitter moves.
To date the only one who's bothered to investigate my reception issues,
is me.

Good for you.

. And some blatant inconsistencies in his claims about agencies/sales.

Your experiences of a decade or more ago have little to do with the current
situation, where interactive media is far more attractive to advertising
agencies than radio because there are more creative dollars to be made
there.

And his experience. These things make me suspect that, though, he's still
the David we've all come to know and love, that he's getting low on the
calm, educational patience he's showed a year ago, and is now running out
of both patience, and appreciation of the intercourse.

I'm out of patience with the people who insist that there is listening to
distant skywave signals, when there is no such thing documented and with
those who think AM is not on a horrible decline, with its main and majority
format, news talk, moving to FM. And I'm out of patience with you, who think
a radio station in 2007 can change the demos on a buy because he once saw a
station changed on a buy. I spoke with the head or our naitonal rep about
changing demos on a campaign, and she simply laughed.

But when David speaks, he speaks like a policy statement. There's only
a level of personal interaction after it's been brought to his attention
that there is none. Hell, even Eric Richards, with whom I share no
personal cordiality, will address a post as though he's talking TO me, but
not AT me. David doesn't do that. He speaks AT his opponent. Overwhelming
with statistics, where a conversational sentence will do. Jumping into
conversations with material that brings nothing to the topic at hand, but
definitely puts his expertise and policy positions on display.

When the responses I get are idiotic, I react as one does to an idiot. At
some point, it came to me that DXers were now enemies of radio stations...
which is when I dropped my Northamerican radio club memberships... because
supporting one's enemies with money is hardly rational. The inability of the
DX community to realize that AM has changed from a music medium to a talk
one, and that shows like Noory are necessary, and that technical changes
have to come if there is any chace of AM survival make the DXer a Luddite of
the first order.
Then there was the issue of his ham credentials. When pressed he gave a
credible story about corruption in the testing process in Ecuador. Nothing
out of the ordinary, actually. Nothing outside the realm of possibility.
Certainly, something we'd all believe based on the politics of the region.
But when pressed, he gave no clarification, with any personal experiential
content. Just something that sounds a likely story.

Drivers licences, visas, import permits, bulding permits, licences, tax
audits, etc., were all facilitated in a way that is accepted outside the US,
and not called "corrupt" as you have called it. It's just a different
system. And while I was there, there was no exam for a ham license at all...
you had to be sponsored by the RCE (Radio Club del Ecuador) or other of the
ham associations, and you got a license. My sponsor was Ing. Fred Simon.

But, with about 30 years of living outside the US, and even more working
there, I am used to US gringo standards being applied to other cultures as a
metric. Other cultures do not work like the American system, and can not be
compared to it, either.
Colleagues, whether vocational or avocational, don't address each other
like that. He claims to be a DXer, but disdains DXers.

Anyone with over 2000 AM veries has, I think, earned the right to be called
a DXer. But I am not a club member of any of the DX orgainzations because
the hobby, which led me into radio, now pretty universally hates
broadcasters and the very stations they listen to.

As I said, I've known people in the Radio business like that. But then
don't rise to the level of corporate oversight, or management. And they
are certainly not leaders. Usually they're middle manglement. And
consultants.

Of which I am neither.



You've underscored all my points. Thank you.

I may keep you around.


p

And, by the way.....


David Eduardo wrote:

Your experiences of a decade or more ago have little to do with the current
situation,


Actually, I worked for CBS until December 20, 1999. The last contract
work I did for them was in 2001.

The last work I did for WLS was some production this spring.


Not exactly a decade or more ago, Brother David.






"But if it makes you more comfortable to think so, by all means...you
be comfortable."

-- John Newland.

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
And, by the way.....


David Eduardo wrote:

Your experiences of a decade or more ago have little to do with the
current situation,


Actually, I worked for CBS until December 20, 1999. The last contract
work I did for them was in 2001.

The last work I did for WLS was some production this spring.


Not exactly a decade or more ago, Brother David.

But your sales experience is very dated. The days when country was not
automatically on a 25-54 buy have been gone for some time.... even longer
than the "Black" dictates.

David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
And, by the way.....


David Eduardo wrote:

Your experiences of a decade or more ago have little to do with the
current situation,

Actually, I worked for CBS until December 20, 1999. The last contract
work I did for them was in 2001.

The last work I did for WLS was some production this spring.


Not exactly a decade or more ago, Brother David.

But your sales experience is very dated. The days when country was not
automatically on a 25-54 buy have been gone for some time.... even longer
than the "Black" dictates.



LOL!

I've been in the business since I was 6, some of my experiences are
going to be very old.

That certainly doesn't mean all of them are. I'm not working in the
50's, here.




"But if it makes you more comfortable to think so, by all means...you
be comfortable."

-- John Newland.

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
. And now, twice, in front of the group, he's promised to get his engineers
out here to take signal strength measurements at my location to determine
why I can't hear a local 50kw station, but immediately dropped all
conversation about it.

And that, whille none of your business, is due to the fact that Paul Easter,
an talented and wonderful engineer, moved to a corporate position at Salem,
and we are short handed in the middle of two transmitter moves.

To date the only one who's bothered to investigate my reception issues,
is me.

Good for you.

. And some blatant inconsistencies in his claims about agencies/sales.

Your experiences of a decade or more ago have little to do with the current
situation, where interactive media is far more attractive to advertising
agencies than radio because there are more creative dollars to be made
there.

And his experience. These things make me suspect that, though, he's still
the David we've all come to know and love, that he's getting low on the
calm, educational patience he's showed a year ago, and is now running out
of both patience, and appreciation of the intercourse.

I'm out of patience with the people who insist that there is listening to
distant skywave signals, when there is no such thing documented and with
those who think AM is not on a horrible decline, with its main and majority
format, news talk, moving to FM. And I'm out of patience with you, who think
a radio station in 2007 can change the demos on a buy because he once saw a
station changed on a buy. I spoke with the head or our naitonal rep about
changing demos on a campaign, and she simply laughed.

But when David speaks, he speaks like a policy statement. There's only
a level of personal interaction after it's been brought to his attention
that there is none. Hell, even Eric Richards, with whom I share no
personal cordiality, will address a post as though he's talking TO me, but
not AT me. David doesn't do that. He speaks AT his opponent. Overwhelming
with statistics, where a conversational sentence will do. Jumping into
conversations with material that brings nothing to the topic at hand, but
definitely puts his expertise and policy positions on display.

When the responses I get are idiotic, I react as one does to an idiot. At
some point, it came to me that DXers were now enemies of radio stations...
which is when I dropped my Northamerican radio club memberships... because
supporting one's enemies with money is hardly rational. The inability of the
DX community to realize that AM has changed from a music medium to a talk
one, and that shows like Noory are necessary, and that technical changes
have to come if there is any chace of AM survival make the DXer a Luddite of
the first order.

Then there was the issue of his ham credentials. When pressed he gave a
credible story about corruption in the testing process in Ecuador. Nothing
out of the ordinary, actually. Nothing outside the realm of possibility.
Certainly, something we'd all believe based on the politics of the region.
But when pressed, he gave no clarification, with any personal experiential
content. Just something that sounds a likely story.

Drivers licences, visas, import permits, bulding permits, licences, tax
audits, etc., were all facilitated in a way that is accepted outside the US,
and not called "corrupt" as you have called it. It's just a different
system. And while I was there, there was no exam for a ham license at all...
you had to be sponsored by the RCE (Radio Club del Ecuador) or other of the
ham associations, and you got a license. My sponsor was Ing. Fred Simon.

But, with about 30 years of living outside the US, and even more working
there, I am used to US gringo standards being applied to other cultures as a
metric. Other cultures do not work like the American system, and can not be
compared to it, either.

Colleagues, whether vocational or avocational, don't address each other
like that. He claims to be a DXer, but disdains DXers.

Anyone with over 2000 AM veries has, I think, earned the right to be called
a DXer. But I am not a club member of any of the DX orgainzations because
the hobby, which led me into radio, now pretty universally hates
broadcasters and the very stations they listen to.

As I said, I've known people in the Radio business like that. But then
don't rise to the level of corporate oversight, or management. And they
are certainly not leaders. Usually they're middle manglement. And
consultants.

Of which I am neither.

Yeah, but we know you fake at least half of what you post.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

David Eduardo wrote:

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
. And now, twice, in front of the group, he's promised to get his engineers
out here to take signal strength measurements at my location to determine
why I can't hear a local 50kw station, but immediately dropped all
conversation about it.

And that, whille none of your business, is due to the fact that Paul Easter,
an talented and wonderful engineer, moved to a corporate position at Salem,
and we are short handed in the middle of two transmitter moves.

To date the only one who's bothered to investigate my reception issues,
is me.

Good for you.

. And some blatant inconsistencies in his claims about agencies/sales.

Your experiences of a decade or more ago have little to do with the current
situation, where interactive media is far more attractive to advertising
agencies than radio because there are more creative dollars to be made
there.

And his experience. These things make me suspect that, though, he's still
the David we've all come to know and love, that he's getting low on the
calm, educational patience he's showed a year ago, and is now running out
of both patience, and appreciation of the intercourse.

I'm out of patience with the people who insist that there is listening to
distant skywave signals, when there is no such thing documented and with
those who think AM is not on a horrible decline, with its main and majority
format, news talk, moving to FM. And I'm out of patience with you, who think
a radio station in 2007 can change the demos on a buy because he once saw a
station changed on a buy. I spoke with the head or our naitonal rep about
changing demos on a campaign, and she simply laughed.

Yeah! She was laughing at you. Many do.