Sure is easy to read this newsgroup!

[Terry]

Over the last month I've "kill filed" or "blocked sender" in IE
express all the obvious non-pilot posters. Troll posters AND troll
feeders. Only about 10 people left! I know I've "killed" a few
posters that were knowledgeable and I admit, enjoyed reading their
post when it applied to piloting but just couldn't keep from
responding to idiot posters as well. So, I did what I had to do.

Sure is easy to read this newsgroup now and solely about "piloting"
which is after all, the name of this group!

Terry N6401F

[Morgans[_2_]]

"Terry" > wrote in message
...
> Over the last month I've "kill filed" or "blocked sender" in IE express
> all the obvious non-pilot posters. Troll posters AND troll feeders. Only
> about 10 people left! I know I've "killed" a few posters that were
> knowledgeable and I admit, enjoyed reading their post when it applied to
> piloting but just couldn't keep from responding to idiot posters as well.
> So, I did what I had to do.
>
> Sure is easy to read this newsgroup now and solely about "piloting" which
> is after all, the name of this group!

I have done the same, but perhaps saved a few more posters than you; ones
that still post on topic most of the time, with a few annoying exceptions.
--
Jim in NC

[Terry]

"Morgans" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Terry" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Over the last month I've "kill filed" or "blocked sender" in IE
>> express all the obvious non-pilot posters. Troll posters AND troll
>> feeders. Only about 10 people left! I know I've "killed" a few
>> posters that were knowledgeable and I admit, enjoyed reading their
>> post when it applied to piloting but just couldn't keep from
>> responding to idiot posters as well. So, I did what I had to do.
>>
>> Sure is easy to read this newsgroup now and solely about "piloting"
>> which is after all, the name of this group!
>
> I have done the same, but perhaps saved a few more posters than you;
> ones that still post on topic most of the time, with a few annoying
> exceptions.
> --
> Jim in NC
>

Just for your info Jim.... your not "Kill filed"... your still one
of the "10"... :)

[Morgans[_2_]]

"Terry" > wrote

> Just for your info Jim.... your not "Kill filed"... your still one of
> the "10"... :)

Hee-Hee! I was wondering...

I try to never respond to trolls, or act in trolling types of ways. I do
chide those who respond to trolls at times too vigorously, perhaps. I try
to keep that as low key as possible most of the time, but if that is a sin I
am guilty...

I am but a lowly student waiting for funds to proceed much further, but am
still firmly attached to reality and don't respond to subjects that I don't
know about, either.

You are right about the group being easy to read, and not take much time,
either. I wish for the days of over 100 posts, mostly on topic. There was
a lot to be learned by a person like me.
--
Jim in NC

[Jim Logajan]

"Terry" > wrote:
> Over the last month I've "kill filed" or "blocked sender" in IE
> express all the obvious non-pilot posters. Troll posters AND troll
> feeders. Only about 10 people left! I know I've "killed" a few
> posters that were knowledgeable and I admit, enjoyed reading their
> post when it applied to piloting but just couldn't keep from
> responding to idiot posters as well. So, I did what I had to do.

Marcus Licinius Crassus: "In every city and province, lists of the disloyal
have been compiled. Tomorrow they will learn the cost of their terrible
folly... their treason."

Gracchus: "And where does my name appear on the list of disloyal enemies of
the state?"

Marcus Licinius Crassus: "First."

;-)

[george]

On May 5, 1:16*pm, "Terry" > wrote:
> Over the last month I've "kill filed" or "blocked sender" in IE
> express all the obvious non-pilot *posters. Troll posters AND troll
> feeders. *Only about 10 people left! *I know I've "killed" a few
> posters that were knowledgeable and I admit, enjoyed reading their
> post when it applied to piloting but just couldn't *keep from
> responding to idiot posters as well. *So, I did what I had to do.
>
> Sure is easy to read this newsgroup now and solely about "piloting"
> which is after all, the name of this group!
>
Just lately the non aviation threads have been so obvious its not
worth using a killfile.
Just go past them.

For those who are using Google Groups go to http://www.penney.org/ and
download his Google groups killfile doohicky

[vaughn[_3_]]

"Terry" > wrote in message
...
> Over the last month I've "kill filed" or "blocked sender" in IE express all
> the obvious non-pilot posters. Troll posters AND troll feeders. Only about
> 10 people left!

I have been doing much the same for years, but the reduction in on-topic
activity is similar across all of the groups I read. For many reasons, the
Usenet has been steadily sickening and dying. The elimination of NNTP access
by most Internet providers is part of the reason, and the terrible spam that
Google chooses to allow via its abysmal Google Groups interface is another.
--
-
Vaughn



.................................................. .......
Nothing personal, but if you are posting through Google Groups I may not receive
your message. Google refuses to control the flood of spam messages originating
in their system, so on any given day I may or may not have Google blocked. Try
a real NNTP server & news reader program and you will never go back. All you
need is access to an NNTP server (AKA "news server") and a news reader program.
You probably already have a news reader program in your computer (Hint: Outlook
Express). Assuming that your Usenet needs are modest,
usehttp://www.eternal-september.org/ and/or, http://news.aioe.org/ and/or
https://www.x-privat.org/index.php for free. http://www.teranews.com/ charges a
one-time $3.95 setup fee. Newsguy,
http://www.newsguy.com/ offers a variety of reasonably priced services. If you
wish to experiment with real Usenet access, they will give you a free 2-day
trial account. http://www.cnntp.org/ provides vari

[Terry]

<snipped>

Just lately the non aviation threads have been so obvious its not
worth using a killfile.
Just go past them.

For those who are using Google Groups go to http://www.penney.org/ and
download his Google groups killfile doohicky

Hi George
When you say "just go past them" I understand. But, when you
block senders, you don't have to go past anything. They do not appear
in the newsgroup at all. You don't see their post period!. Maybe
15-30 post each day instead of 100's.

Safe flying...Terry

[[email protected]]

On May 4, 10:40*pm, "Morgans" > wrote:

> *I wish for the days of over 100 posts, mostly on topic. *There was
> a lot to be learned by a person like me.

And a lot to be learned by a person like me approaching 1000 hours of
flight time.... Learning stops when I am put 6 feet under.

[Mark]

On May 5, 8:10*am, "Terry" > wrote:
>Maybe
> 15-30 post each day instead of 100's.
>
> Safe flying...Terry

Hundreds? Wow, I don't even get a dozen without
a filter.

I suspect things may normalize a bit now that this
Ari Silverstein character has painted himself into a
corner by bringing attention to his own posting
history. He's been instructed to shut his mouth
while third parties look over the situation. Most
likely his false allegations, and attempted
malicious prosecution efforts will land him in the
county pokey for a few months, or in the unemployment
line for good.

---
Mark

[Blanche]

vaughn > wrote:
>
>"Terry" > wrote in message
>> Over the last month I've "kill filed" or "blocked sender" in IE express all
>> the obvious non-pilot posters. Troll posters AND troll feeders. Only about
>> 10 people left!
>
>I have been doing much the same for years, but the reduction in on-topic
>activity is similar across all of the groups I read. For many reasons, the
>Usenet has been steadily sickening and dying. The elimination of NNTP access
>by most Internet providers is part of the reason, and the terrible spam that
>Google chooses to allow via its abysmal Google Groups interface is another.
>--
>-
>Vaughn

No, it's the fact that you can buy a computer at the grocery store and need
no background using a computer - it's now an appliance. Which means those same
rude, ill-mannered people can now trash this electronic environment as
well as the real one.

[John Smith]

On 05.05.10 03:16, Terry wrote:
> Over the last month I've "kill filed" or "blocked sender" in IE
....
> Sure is easy to read this newsgroup now and solely about "piloting"
> which is after all, the name of this group!

And just to fill the gap, you post off-topic posts yourself now...

[Mxsmanic]

Blanche writes:

> No, it's the fact that you can buy a computer at the grocery store and need
> no background using a computer - it's now an appliance. Which means those same
> rude, ill-mannered people can now trash this electronic environment as
> well as the real one.

Quite so, and unfortunate.

[george]

On May 6, 12:10*am, "Terry" > wrote:
> <snipped>
>
> Just lately the non aviation threads have been so obvious its not
> worth using a killfile.
> Just go past them.
>
> For those who are using Google Groups go tohttp://www.penney.org/ and
> download his Google groups killfile doohicky
>
> Hi George
> * * When you say "just go past them" I understand. *But, when you
> block senders, you don't have to go past anything. They do not appear
> in the newsgroup at all. You don't see their post period!. *Maybe
> 15-30 post each day instead of 100's.
>
What I meant was that you ignore the ignorant unless it all gets to
much.
Then use a killfile.
The kooks will get tired and go away and normal service will
(hopefully) resume

[XXXXX]

On May 5, 9:34*am, Blanche > wrote:
> No, it's the fact that you can buy a computer at the grocery store and need
> no background using a computer - it's now an appliance. Which means those same
> rude, ill-mannered people can now trash this electronic environment as
> well as the real one.

I don't think it's a function of intelligence, per se.

It's more about people not having respect for the venue. And quite
honestly, I don't blame them.

[Mark]

On May 8, 3:20*am, XXXXX > wrote:

> It's more about people not having respect for the venue. And quite
> honestly, I don't blame them.

And you're proud of this?

Modern times. No moral compass.

---

[Ari[_2_]]

On Sat, 8 May 2010 00:20:44 -0700 (PDT), XXXXX wrote:

> On May 5, 9:34*am, Blanche > wrote:
>> No, it's the fact that you can buy a computer at the grocery store and need
>> no background using a computer - it's now an appliance. Which means those same
>> rude, ill-mannered people can now trash this electronic environment as
>> well as the real one.
>
> I don't think it's a function of intelligence, per se.
>
> It's more about people not having respect for the venue. And quite
> honestly, I don't blame them.

It's difficult to parlay a great deal of respect when the number one
poster/troll, fully supported by the participants in this newsgruppe,
is a sim pilot.
--
A fireside chat not with Ari!
http://tr.im/holj
Motto: Live To Spooge It!

[XXXXX]

On May 8, 7:13*am, Mark > wrote:
> On May 8, 3:20*am, XXXXX > wrote:
>
> > It's more about people not having respect for the venue. And quite
> > honestly, I don't blame them.
>
> And you're proud of this?

What makes you think I'm proud of anything? Even circa 2004 when this
forum was in it's "glory days" it was still a cesspit. Back then it
was a small group of pilots basically using the forum to further their
own mythology. The same occurs to this day, albeit with a few more
cusswords and a lot less aviation content.

> Modern times. No moral compass.

Yes, making **** posts on a **** internet forum. No moral compass.
Analogous to murder.

[XXXXX]

On May 8, 12:56*pm, Ari > wrote:
> It's difficult to parlay a great deal of respect when the number one
> poster/troll, fully supported by the participants in this newsgruppe,
> is a sim pilot.

I agree, but I'd word it differently:

It's difficult to parlay a great deal of respect for a group when the
number one cause of conflict and off topic drivel amongst users is due
to the fact that the most prolific poster of on topic posts is
universally hated solely on the basis that he is a sim pilot.

[george]

On May 9, 9:02*am, XXXXX > wrote:

> It's difficult to parlay a great deal of respect for a group when the
> number one cause of conflict and off topic drivel amongst users is due
> to the fact that the most prolific poster of on topic posts is
> universally hated solely on the basis that he is a sim pilot.

He isn't hated.
You don't 'hate' ignorance.
You try to cure it.
And his only connection to aviation is a game
He is not a pilot.
The group was here before him and will be here long after all those
posting now are dead...

[Mxsmanic]

george writes:

> He isn't hated.
> You don't 'hate' ignorance.
> You try to cure it.

If you wish to cure ignorance, you correct what is wrong. But I see no
corrections here.

> And his only connection to aviation is a game

So?

> He is not a pilot.

So?

> The group was here before him and will be here long after all those
> posting now are dead...

Both statements are incorrect.

[a[_3_]]

On May 8, 8:13*pm, george > wrote:
> On May 9, 9:02*am, XXXXX > wrote:
>
> > It's difficult to parlay a great deal of respect for a group when the
> > number one cause of conflict and off topic drivel amongst users is due
> > to the fact that the most prolific poster of on topic posts is
> > universally hated solely on the basis that he is a sim pilot.
>
> He isn't hated.
> You don't 'hate' ignorance.
> You try to cure it.
> And his only connection to aviation is a game
> He is not a pilot.
> The group was here before him and will be here long after all those
> posting now are dead...

The truth is, MX's 'questions' sometimes provoke interesting
discussions and some of the posts offer insights that are useful to
those of us who actually commit aviation. I'm a fairly high time pilot
and in the past adopted a couple of things mentioned here: they had
not come from MX's keyboard but may have, in a case or two, were part
of a thread he started. "Like what?" Well on long XCs at night, I go
on oxygen at 10,000 feet -- earlier I left the O2 tank untapped until
a good deal higher. I am more apt to fly clearing turns going into
uncontrolled airports, and being in a Mooney tend to fly my entry legs
at pattern altitude from 3 miles out, downwinds and bases a bit lower
and a bit faster, it's easier to see and avoid slower and/or high wing
traffic that way.

Of course his naivety for real world aviation issues is often good for
a chuckle. Have you ever talked with a person with ten year's
experience, and discovered he had one year of experience ten times? MX
believes literacy in sim derived aviation talk means expertise. We
think otherwise, a gulf that will not be bridged. It is entertaining
though an image shaking on a screen prepares a pilot for turbulence?
Vertigo at a desk?

Read what you will, sometimes there's a nugget among the crap posts.

[george]

On May 9, 12:29*pm, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> george writes:
> > He isn't hated.
> > You don't 'hate' ignorance.
> > You try to cure it.
>
> If you wish to cure ignorance, you correct what is wrong. But I see no
> corrections here.

This is an explanation not a placebo

[Mark]

On Sat, 8 May 2010 13:55:51 -0700 (PDT), XXXXX wrote:

> On May 8, 7:13*am, Mark > wrote:
>> On May 8, 3:20*am, XXXXX > wrote:
>>
>>> It's more about people not having respect for the venue. And quite
>>> honestly, I don't blame them.
>>
>> And you're proud of this?
>
> What makes you think I'm proud of anything? Even circa 2004 when this
> forum was in it's "glory days" it was still a cesspit. Back then it
> was a small group of pilots basically using the forum to further their
> own mythology. The same occurs to this day, albeit with a few more
> cusswords and a lot less aviation content.

This has always been a wonderful place as it was in the year when I
founded a school of the arts in my name.

>> Modern times. No moral compass.
>
> Yes, making **** posts on a **** internet forum. No moral compass.
> Analogous to murder.

Great another Mooslim I bet.

Muhammed was a camel ****ing warlord that couldn't get along with his
own family. Islam is an ignorant knock-off religion of Christianity.
Go build a plane out of Elmer's glue, and hit 20k ft. Merry Christmas
rag head.
--
Mark's webstuff - www.geodon.com/images/homeBipolarAvatarHead.gif
http://static.open.salon.com/files/bipolar1255029439.jpg
My website http://www.hosanna1.com/ www.myspace.com/gayincarolina
www.gotitans.com/goForum/image.php?u=1948&dateline=1248991084

[Ari[_2_]]

On Sat, 8 May 2010 14:02:17 -0700 (PDT), XXXXX wrote:

> On May 8, 12:56*pm, Ari > wrote:
>> It's difficult to parlay a great deal of respect when the number one
>> poster/troll, fully supported by the participants in this newsgruppe,
>> is a sim pilot.
>
> I agree, but I'd word it differently:
>
> It's difficult to parlay a great deal of respect for a group when the
> number one cause of conflict and off topic drivel amongst users is due
> to the fact that the most prolific poster of on topic posts is
> universally hated solely on the basis that he is a sim pilot.

Works for me,

RAP is no place to trust the content of even the simplest aviation
discussions.
--
A fireside chat not with Ari!
http://tr.im/holj
Motto: Live To Spooge It!

[Ari[_2_]]

On Sat, 8 May 2010 17:54:03 -0700 (PDT), a wrote:

> The truth is, MX's 'questions' sometimes provoke interesting
> discussions and some of the posts offer insights that are useful to
> those of us who actually commit aviation...

Less than a week ago, you called RAP "a **** poor place for aviation
information especially for newbies" so make up your ****ing,
pea-brained mind.

> Read what you will, sometimes there's a nugget among the crap posts.

Email them to me. I'll let /you/ get your fingernails full of ****.
--
A fireside chat not with Ari!
http://tr.im/holj
Motto: Live To Spooge It!

[XXXXX]

On May 9, 1:38 pm, Ari > wrote:
> RAP is no place to trust the content of even the simplest aviation
> discussions.

what forum is?

[Mark]

On May 10, 3:20*am, XXXXX > wrote:
> On May 9, 1:38 pm, Ari > wrote:
>
> > RAP is no place to trust the content of even the simplest aviation
> > discussions.
>
> what forum is?

Toot your little horn all you want charlie, but I'll
tell you one thing, you can bet your sweet ass I'll
never descend 4000 ft again without clearing the
engine. There are decent people in this group.
Negativity is for the unaccomplished, period. Life
is what you make of it.

---
Mark

[a[_3_]]

On May 8, 8:54*pm, a > wrote:
> On May 8, 8:13*pm, george > wrote:
>
> > On May 9, 9:02*am, XXXXX > wrote:
>
> > > It's difficult to parlay a great deal of respect for a group when the
> > > number one cause of conflict and off topic drivel amongst users is due
> > > to the fact that the most prolific poster of on topic posts is
> > > universally hated solely on the basis that he is a sim pilot.
>
> > He isn't hated.
> > You don't 'hate' ignorance.
> > You try to cure it.
> > And his only connection to aviation is a game
> > He is not a pilot.
> > The group was here before him and will be here long after all those
> > posting now are dead...
>
> The truth is, MX's 'questions' sometimes provoke interesting
> discussions and some of the posts offer insights that are useful to
> those of us who actually commit aviation. I'm a fairly high time pilot
> and in the past adopted a couple of things mentioned here: they had
> not come from MX's keyboard but may have, in a case or two, were part
> of a thread he started. "Like what?" *Well on long XCs at night, I go
> on oxygen at 10,000 feet -- earlier I left the O2 tank untapped until
> a good deal higher. I am more apt to fly clearing turns going into
> uncontrolled airports, and being in a Mooney tend to fly my entry legs
> at pattern altitude from 3 miles out, *downwinds and bases a bit lower
> and a bit faster, it's easier to see and avoid slower and/or high wing
> traffic that way.
>
> Of course his naivety for real world aviation issues is often good for
> a chuckle. Have you ever talked with a person with ten year's
> experience, and discovered he had one year of experience ten times? MX
> believes literacy in sim derived aviation talk means expertise. We
> think otherwise, a gulf that will not be bridged. It is entertaining
> though *an image shaking on a screen prepares a pilot for turbulence?
> Vertigo at a desk?
>
> Read what you will, sometimes there's a nugget among the crap posts.

Here are a couple of habits I have that real aviators might find worth
considering. MS sim drivers can ignore what follows.

1 --I keep a couple of Ziplock bags in my brain bag -- useful for both
motion sickness and frankly sometimes on a long XC can provide the
immediate relief someone (in one or two cases the PIC) needed from too
much en route coffee,

2 -- that Five Hour Energy drink (in my case half a bottle) is much
more effective in increasing alertness than a thermos of en-route
coffee, and as an additional benefit can save on zip lock bags (see 1
above).

[Ari[_2_]]

On Mon, 10 May 2010 00:20:07 -0700 (PDT), XXXXX wrote:

> On May 9, 1:38 pm, Ari > wrote:
>> RAP is no place to trust the content of even the simplest aviation
>> discussions.
>
> what forum is?

The blue and red forums are excellent; AOPA and PilotsofAmerica
--
A fireside chat not with Ari!
http://tr.im/holj
Motto: Live To Spooge It!

[Mark]

On Mon, 10 May 2010 00:20:07 -0700 (PDT), XXXXX wrote:

> On May 9, 1:38 pm, Ari > wrote:
>> RAP is no place to trust the content of even the simplest aviation
>> discussions.
>
> what forum is?

If you don't like it around our group, then get the **** out.

You need to know that I will go to the utmost lengths including
*real threats on your life* to save our forum here.

So shove it up your ass.
--
Mark

[VOR-DME[_3_]]

I agree, and if truth be told I have always given him deference for the
things he _does_ know, though he probably doesn't recognize this.

In fact, I'll do it again - I think he is right concerning the limitations
of the "Light Sport" rating. The main reason a majority of pilots quit
after their initial rating is that they lack the means (financial, time,
psychological) to go further. Yet there is a huge difference between 1000h
and 1h, a thousand times. Both have the same cost, but the benefits are
completely different.

It is funny though to see MX characterise all his imagined adversaries as
"testosterone soaked males" when he doesn't understand which amongst us are
really women.



In article
>,
says...
>
>The truth is, MX's 'questions' sometimes provoke interesting
>discussions and some of the posts offer insights that are useful to
>those of us who actually commit aviation. I'm a fairly high time pilot
>and in the past adopted a couple of things mentioned here: they had
>not come from MX's keyboard but may have, in a case or two, were part
>of a thread he started. "Like what?" Well on long XCs at night, I go
>on oxygen at 10,000 feet -- earlier I left the O2 tank untapped until
>a good deal higher. I am more apt to fly clearing turns going into
>uncontrolled airports, and being in a Mooney tend to fly my entry legs
>at pattern altitude from 3 miles out, downwinds and bases a bit lower
>and a bit faster, it's easier to see and avoid slower and/or high wing
>traffic that way.
>
>Of course his naivety for real world aviation issues is often good for
>a chuckle. Have you ever talked with a person with ten year's
>experience, and discovered he had one year of experience ten times? MX
>believes literacy in sim derived aviation talk means expertise. We
>think otherwise, a gulf that will not be bridged. It is entertaining
>though an image shaking on a screen prepares a pilot for turbulence?
>Vertigo at a desk?
>
>Read what you will, sometimes there's a nugget among the crap posts.
>
>
>
>
>

[Mxsmanic]

VOR-DME writes:

> It is funny though to see MX characterise all his imagined adversaries as
> "testosterone soaked males" when he doesn't understand which amongst us are
> really women.

The term is generic for a certain type of mindset, which is predominantly (but
not exclusivley) found among young males. It's rare to see it among women, and
when it occurs in women, it is often negatively correlated with IQ, much more
so than in men.

Why do you consider yourself an adversary?

[VOR-DME[_3_]]

Did I say that?
I thought I said your adversaries were imagined, and that you had missed some obvious gender
clues.


In article >, says...

>
>Why do you consider yourself an adversary?

[Mxsmanic]

VOR-DME writes:

> Did I say that?

You said "us," implying that you are among my imagined adversaries.

> I thought I said your adversaries were imagined, and that you
> had missed some obvious gender clues.

Why would you be among my imagined adversaries, then?