Re: Victimizing Aircraft Designers - An American Specialty? (wasFetters)

[Dennis Fetters]

Poultry in Motion wrote:
> Dennis Fetters wrote:
>
>> This is an open challenge, and request to Mr. Agusto Cicare, so will
>> someone in touch please let him know;
>
>
> Try Glenn Ryerson
> http://www.3cats.com/helicopter/
> He knows both you and Cicare well.

Yes, indeed Mr. Ryerson knows him well, he was the first one to publish
on his website the letter where Mr. Cicare admitted that the two designs
were different.

Boob Boob again!

> "I came back to the USA, and started with what I could do. First we
> needed money, and I needed to find an investor to help us out. We also
> wrote the contract for the deal we had agreed to and sent it to him to
> sign. Now the 1990 Oshkosh was coming up fast, so I paid for the
> prototype to be sent here so I could fly it in the show. This would help
> bring an investor to the table and allow us to raise the money to pay
> the $30,000 for the prototype and all the expenses for the development.
> After the air show, we put the prototype into a storage building, and
> Mr. Cicare had the only key. We never had access after that to the
> prototype."
> <http://groups.google.co.in/group/rec.aviation.rotorcraft/msg/e6653542c044a2ef>

So what's your point? This is exactly what I said. You just backed up my
side of the event?

>> First, I was never alone 5 minutes with the Cicare prototype. Even
>> then, I never seen the inside of anything. Now, if anyone thinks that
>> I can take a tape measure and in moments sneaking around in the dark
>> take down enough information from the Cicare prototype to turn around
>> an built the Mini-500 within one year.......
>
>
> You had lots of time. And you took Cicare's CH-6 away on a trailer after
> the airshow. He retrieved it later.

Yes, but I also took Cicare and his wife away from the airshow with it.
His prototype was never left alone in our hands.

I paid for the shipping and airline tickets, Cicare and his wife
traveled from Argentina with it, and when it arrived Cicare unboxed it
and assembled it. We even let him padlock our shop after hours with his
own lock, and unlock it every morning. And after the airshow and before
he left, he rented a building at a storage facility and put his
prototype in it himself, and locked it with his own padlock, and he only
had the key. After the deadline he failed to meet, he came back and took
the prototype himself and boxed it up and shipped it to Italy.

So now, again you are full of holes, or something else..

[Poultry in Motion]

Dennis Fetters wrote:
> Poultry in Motion wrote:
>> Dennis Fetters wrote:
>>
>>> This is an open challenge, and request to Mr. Agusto Cicare, so will
>>> someone in touch please let him know;
>>
>>
>> Try Glenn Ryerson
>> http://www.3cats.com/helicopter/
>> He knows both you and Cicare well.
>
> Yes, indeed Mr. Ryerson knows him well, he was the first one to publish
> on his website the letter where Mr. Cicare admitted that the two designs
> were different.

Never seen that. Did see pictures of you and your pal Glenn together.
Even a picture of you seated in "Miss Nina", Glenn's CH-7 Angel. Yes, he
owned your competitor's helicopter, not one of yours. But he was an
enthusiastic supporter of them all, including Mimi-500s.

Then suddenly, all articles and pictures of Mini-500s, the entire
section, was pulled from the site. Replaced by a note that, due to
threats received, ( *UNMENTIONABLE* ) helicopters could no longer appear
on the site.



> Boob Boob again!
>
>> "I came back to the USA, and started with what I could do. First we
>> needed money, and I needed to find an investor to help us out. We also
>> wrote the contract for the deal we had agreed to and sent it to him to
>> sign. Now the 1990 Oshkosh was coming up fast, so I paid for the
>> prototype to be sent here so I could fly it in the show. This would help
>> bring an investor to the table and allow us to raise the money to pay
>> the $30,000 for the prototype and all the expenses for the development.
>> After the air show, we put the prototype into a storage building, and
>> Mr. Cicare had the only key. We never had access after that to the
>> prototype."
>> <http://groups.google.co.in/group/rec.aviation.rotorcraft/msg/e6653542c044a2ef>
>
>
> So what's your point? This is exactly what I said. You just backed up my
> side of the event?

Point ---> Cicare's CH-6 helicopter was the Mini-500 prototype.

>>> First, I was never alone 5 minutes with the Cicare prototype. Even
>>> then, I never seen the inside of anything. Now, if anyone thinks that
>>> I can take a tape measure and in moments sneaking around in the dark
>>> take down enough information from the Cicare prototype to turn around
>>> an built the Mini-500 within one year.......
>>
>>
>> You had lots of time. And you took Cicare's CH-6 away on a trailer
>> after the airshow. He retrieved it later.
>
> Yes, but I also took Cicare and his wife away from the airshow with it.
> His prototype was never

Not his prototype, yours. His helicopter was your Mini-500 prototype.

> left alone in our hands.

It was shipped here for YOU to fly at Oshkosh, you already said so! And
now you claim you were never alone 5 minutes with it, and never saw the
inside of it?

> So now, again you are full of holes, or something else.

I'm full of questions.

[Dennis Fetters]

Poultry in Motion wrote:
> Dennis Fetters wrote:
>> Yes, indeed Mr. Ryerson knows him well, he was the first one to
>> publish on his website the letter where Mr. Cicare admitted that the
>> two designs were different.
>
>
> Never seen that. Did see pictures of you and your pal Glenn together.
> Even a picture of you seated in "Miss Nina", Glenn's CH-7 Angel. Yes, he
> owned your competitor's helicopter, not one of yours. But he was an
> enthusiastic supporter of them all, including Mimi-500s.

Sorry you didn't pay more attention. I guess it you would have been more
informed of the real facts, you would not have showed everyone here on
the newsgroup how very little you know about everything you have talked
about related to me or the Mini-500. They all know now!

> Then suddenly, all articles and pictures of Mini-500s, the entire
> section, was pulled from the site. Replaced by a note that, due to
> threats received, ( *UNMENTIONABLE* ) helicopters could no longer appear
> on the site.

I don't run Glenns' website, he does, and I'm not privy to the reasons
why he does what he does.

>> So what's your point? This is exactly what I said. You just backed up
>> my side of the event?
>
>
> Point ---> Cicare's CH-6 helicopter was the Mini-500 prototype.

Answered on your other post;

"Oh that one, I guess you need to read!
That was what we were going to use as a prototype, but as I said Cicare
didn't do what he agreed, so even after I advertised we were going to
use his CH-6 as a prototype, that was when I assumed he was going to
live up to his part of the deal. He didn't, and I ended up having to
design the Mini-500 all by myself without the use of Cicares' help or
his CH-6, so the CH-6 never was used as the prototype after all. So the
first Mini-500 prototype turned out to be the first one I built.
Its that simple, and I wrote that before, as I said you just have to read."

> I'm full of questions.

As we are showing here, that's not all...

[Poultry in Motion]

Dennis Fetters wrote:
> Poultry in Motion wrote:
>> Dennis Fetters wrote:
>>> Yes, indeed Mr. Ryerson knows him well, he was the first one to
>>> publish on his website the letter where Mr. Cicare admitted that the
>>> two designs were different.
>>
>>
>> Never seen that. Did see pictures of you and your pal Glenn together.
>> Even a picture of you seated in "Miss Nina", Glenn's CH-7 Angel. Yes,
>> he owned your competitor's helicopter, not one of yours. But he was an
>> enthusiastic supporter of them all, including Mimi-500s.
>
> Sorry you didn't pay more attention. I guess it you would have been more
> informed of the real facts, you would not have showed everyone here on
> the newsgroup how very little you know about everything you have talked
> about related to me or the Mini-500. They all know now!
>
>> Then suddenly, all articles and pictures of Mini-500s, the entire
>> section, was pulled from the site. Replaced by a note that, due to
>> threats received, ( *UNMENTIONABLE* ) helicopters could no longer
>> appear on the site.
>
> I don't run Glenns' website, he does, and I'm not privy to the reasons
> why he does what he does.

Of course you are. You threatened him. He was your friend and defender,
but you dumped the friendship because he was too honest for you to deal
with. He spoke what was on his mind. He was direct in his criticism of
the Italians who built his CH-7, and that was after he'd been their
guest. Glenn got to know all the players personally, didn't he? You
needed to shut him up before he learned more about you.

>>> So what's your point? This is exactly what I said. You just backed up
>>> my side of the event?
>>
>>
>> Point ---> Cicare's CH-6 helicopter was the Mini-500 prototype.
>
> Answered on your other post;
>
> "Oh that one, I guess you need to read!
> That was what we were going to use as a prototype, but as I said Cicare
> didn't do what he agreed, so even after I advertised we were going to
> use his CH-6 as a prototype, that was when I assumed he was going to
> live up to his part of the deal. He didn't, and I ended up having to
> design the Mini-500 all by myself without the use of Cicares' help or
> his CH-6, so the CH-6 never was used as the prototype after all. So the
> first Mini-500 prototype turned out to be the first one I built.
> Its that simple, and I wrote that before, as I said you just have to read."
>
>> I'm full of questions.
>
> As we are showing here, that's not all...

Yes, insight too.

[in limbo]

On Mar 31, 12:15*am, Poultry in Motion > wrote:
> Dennis Fetters wrote:
> > Poultry in Motion wrote:
> >> Dennis Fetters wrote:
> >>> Yes, indeed Mr. Ryerson knows him well, he was the first one to
> >>> publish on his website the letter where Mr. Cicare admitted that the
> >>> two designs were different.
>
> >> Never seen that. Did see pictures of you and your pal Glenn together.
> >> Even a picture of you seated in "Miss Nina", Glenn's CH-7 Angel. Yes,
> >> he owned your competitor's helicopter, not one of yours. But he was an
> >> enthusiastic supporter of them all, including Mimi-500s.
>
> > Sorry you didn't pay more attention. I guess it you would have been more
> > informed of the real facts, you would not have showed everyone here on
> > the newsgroup how very little you know about everything you have talked
> > about related to me or the Mini-500. They all know now!
>
> >> Then suddenly, all articles and pictures of Mini-500s, the entire
> >> section, was pulled from the site. Replaced by a note that, due to
> >> threats received, ( *UNMENTIONABLE* ) helicopters could no longer
> >> appear on the site.
>
> > I don't run Glenns' website, he does, and I'm not privy to the reasons
> > why he does what he does.
>
> Of course you are. You threatened him. He was your friend and defender,
> but you dumped the friendship because he was too honest for you to deal
> with. He spoke what was on his mind. He was direct in his criticism of
> the Italians who built his CH-7, and that was after he'd been their
> guest. Glenn got to know all the players personally, didn't he? You
> needed to shut him up before he learned more about you.
>
>
>
>
>
> >>> So what's your point? This is exactly what I said. You just backed up
> >>> my side of the event?
>
> >> Point ---> Cicare's CH-6 helicopter was the Mini-500 prototype.
>
> > Answered on your other post;
>
> > "Oh that one, I guess you need to read!
> > That was what we were going to use as a prototype, but as I said Cicare
> > didn't do what he agreed, so even after I advertised we were going to
> > use his CH-6 as a prototype, that was when I assumed he was going to
> > live up to his part of the deal. He didn't, and I ended up having to
> > design the Mini-500 all by myself without the use of Cicares' help or
> > his CH-6, so the CH-6 never was used as the prototype after all. So the
> > first Mini-500 prototype turned out to be the first one I built.
> > Its that simple, and I wrote that before, as I said you just have to read."
>
> >> I'm full of questions.
>
> > As we are showing here, that's not all...
>
> Yes, insight too.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Ask him who else he threatened in rotaryforum.com He was warned about
threatening people there a few times by the mods.

[Poultry in Motion]

in limbo wrote:
> On Mar 31, 12:15 am, Poultry in Motion > wrote:
>> Dennis Fetters wrote:
>>> Poultry in Motion wrote:
>>>> Dennis Fetters wrote:
>>>>> Yes, indeed Mr. Ryerson knows him well, he was the first one to
>>>>> publish on his website the letter where Mr. Cicare admitted that the
>>>>> two designs were different.
>>>> Never seen that. Did see pictures of you and your pal Glenn together.
>>>> Even a picture of you seated in "Miss Nina", Glenn's CH-7 Angel. Yes,
>>>> he owned your competitor's helicopter, not one of yours. But he was an
>>>> enthusiastic supporter of them all, including Mimi-500s.
>>> Sorry you didn't pay more attention. I guess it you would have been more
>>> informed of the real facts, you would not have showed everyone here on
>>> the newsgroup how very little you know about everything you have talked
>>> about related to me or the Mini-500. They all know now!
>>>> Then suddenly, all articles and pictures of Mini-500s, the entire
>>>> section, was pulled from the site. Replaced by a note that, due to
>>>> threats received, ( *UNMENTIONABLE* ) helicopters could no longer
>>>> appear on the site.
>>> I don't run Glenns' website, he does, and I'm not privy to the reasons
>>> why he does what he does.
>> Of course you are. You threatened him. He was your friend and defender,
>> but you dumped the friendship because he was too honest for you to deal
>> with. He spoke what was on his mind. He was direct in his criticism of
>> the Italians who built his CH-7, and that was after he'd been their
>> guest. Glenn got to know all the players personally, didn't he? You
>> needed to shut him up before he learned more about you.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>> So what's your point? This is exactly what I said. You just backed up
>>>>> my side of the event?
>>>> Point ---> Cicare's CH-6 helicopter was the Mini-500 prototype.
>>> Answered on your other post;
>>> "Oh that one, I guess you need to read!
>>> That was what we were going to use as a prototype, but as I said Cicare
>>> didn't do what he agreed, so even after I advertised we were going to
>>> use his CH-6 as a prototype, that was when I assumed he was going to
>>> live up to his part of the deal. He didn't, and I ended up having to
>>> design the Mini-500 all by myself without the use of Cicares' help or
>>> his CH-6, so the CH-6 never was used as the prototype after all. So the
>>> first Mini-500 prototype turned out to be the first one I built.
>>> Its that simple, and I wrote that before, as I said you just have to read."
>>>> I'm full of questions.
>>> As we are showing here, that's not all...
>> Yes, insight too.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> Ask him who else he threatened in rotaryforum.com He was warned about
> threatening people there a few times by the mods.

Dennis, who else???

Fetters once threatened (and sued) a Mini-500 customer, Joe Rinke,
because Rinke began solving the Mini's problems. Rinke's activities
would have upset the RHCI business model, which relied on keeping
customers tightly controlled and dependent on Fetters alone for all
support. They were permitted to have helicopters only as good as Fetters
was willing, or able, to make them. No outside development, no outside
parts allowed. Fetters told them what to buy, and told them when it
would be mandatory.

[Dennis Fetters]

in limbo wrote:

> Ask him who else he threatened in rotaryforum.com He was warned about
> threatening people there a few times by the mods.

Why don't you ask me?

Someone on our forum was being an a-hole and mouthy to me. You know,
basically just like you brain-dead a-holes' do.

I didn't threaten him. I promised him that when I seen him I was going
to give him a good old fashion, and well deserved punch in the nose. You
know, like someone deserves when they are antagonizing someone. But, I
did it on the forum where everyone could see my intentions, and not
sneaking behind everyone with private emails. If I believe in something
I don't hide the fact that I do.

Since then, that person has calmed down and got off my back, and we have
been having very pleasant and constructive conversations on the forum,
and I read what he has to say in his posts with great interest.

[Mike Ash]

In article >,
Dennis Fetters > wrote:

> I didn't threaten him. I promised him that when I seen him I was going
> to give him a good old fashion, and well deserved punch in the nose. You
> know, like someone deserves when they are antagonizing someone. But, I
> did it on the forum where everyone could see my intentions, and not
> sneaking behind everyone with private emails. If I believe in something
> I don't hide the fact that I do.

I have basically no interest in the subject matter covered in this
thread, but this paragraph makes absolutely no sense. Saying that you
will carry out a harmful action against someone, such as punching them
in the nose, is the very DEFINITION of a threat.

--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon

[Maxwell[_2_]]

"Dennis Fetters" > wrote in message
...
> in limbo wrote:
>
>> Ask him who else he threatened in rotaryforum.com He was warned about
>> threatening people there a few times by the mods.
>
> Why don't you ask me?
>
> Someone on our forum was being an a-hole and mouthy to me. You know,
> basically just like you brain-dead a-holes' do.
>
> I didn't threaten him. I promised him that when I seen him I was going to
> give him a good old fashion, and well deserved punch in the nose. You
> know, like someone deserves when they are antagonizing someone. But, I did
> it on the forum where everyone could see my intentions, and not sneaking
> behind everyone with private emails. If I believe in something I don't
> hide the fact that I do.
>
> Since then, that person has calmed down and got off my back, and we have
> been having very pleasant and constructive conversations on the forum, and
> I read what he has to say in his posts with great interest.

Geez guys, get a room.

You're clearly the only ones that give a **** about this tiny bit of world
history, why can't you just email each other.

[Dan[_12_]]

Dennis Fetters wrote:
<snip>
> I didn't threaten him. I promised him that when I seen him I was going
> to give him a good old fashion, and well deserved punch in the nose. You
> know, like someone deserves when they are antagonizing someone.

Now that is childish.

I'm no lawyer, but isn't conveying a threat on line a federal felony?

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[Dennis Fetters]

Maxwell wrote:
> "Dennis Fetters" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>in limbo wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Ask him who else he threatened in rotaryforum.com He was warned about
>>>threatening people there a few times by the mods.
>>
>>Why don't you ask me?
>>
>>Someone on our forum was being an a-hole and mouthy to me. You know,
>>basically just like you brain-dead a-holes' do.
>>
>>I didn't threaten him. I promised him that when I seen him I was going to
>>give him a good old fashion, and well deserved punch in the nose. You
>>know, like someone deserves when they are antagonizing someone. But, I did
>>it on the forum where everyone could see my intentions, and not sneaking
>>behind everyone with private emails. If I believe in something I don't
>>hide the fact that I do.
>>
>>Since then, that person has calmed down and got off my back, and we have
>>been having very pleasant and constructive conversations on the forum, and
>>I read what he has to say in his posts with great interest.
>
>
> Geez guys, get a room.
>
> You're clearly the only ones that give a **** about this tiny bit of world
> history, why can't you just email each other.

Speeeest! Maxwell..... Just in case you don't realize it, I'm not the
one asking the questions.... I'm just the one answering the questions.

It you don't like the questions being asked, then discuss that with the
ones asking the questions.

What? You guys around here so busy with this dyeing newsgroups that your
lacking band-width?????? LOL!

[Dennis Fetters]

Poultry in Motion wrote:
>> I don't run Glenns' website, he does, and I'm not privy to the reasons
>> why he does what he does.
>
>
> Of course you are. You threatened him. He was your friend and defender,
> but you dumped the friendship because he was too honest for you to deal
> with. He spoke what was on his mind. He was direct in his criticism of
> the Italians who built his CH-7, and that was after he'd been their
> guest. Glenn got to know all the players personally, didn't he? You
> needed to shut him up before he learned more about you.

You should write BS fiction stories.

Ok, if you don't get off this newsgroup I'm going to threaten you.

Lets see how good that really works. LOL!

>>> I'm full of questions.

>> As we are showing here, that's not all...

> Yes, insight too.

Keep guessing.... Insight has the four letter we're all looking for, so
your getting warm.

Keep the questions coming!

[Dennis Fetters]

Poultry in Motion wrote:
>> Ask him who else he threatened in rotaryforum.com He was warned about
>> threatening people there a few times by the mods.
>
>
> Dennis, who else???
>
> Fetters once threatened (and sued) a Mini-500 customer, Joe Rinke,
> because Rinke began solving the Mini's problems. Rinke's activities
> would have upset the RHCI business model, which relied on keeping
> customers tightly controlled and dependent on Fetters alone for all
> support. They were permitted to have helicopters only as good as Fetters
> was willing, or able, to make them. No outside development, no outside
> parts allowed. Fetters told them what to buy, and told them when it
> would be mandatory.

Well, here is the real reasons I sued that little man for lying and
breach of contract. Besides, where is Joe Rinke today? Where is the
little savior? He went bust all the way around without a single working
prototype finished. What a bigmouth looser he turned out to be. I posted
this years ago;

> Revolution Helicopter Report: Joe Rinke’s False Statements.
> Greetings Newsgroup participants,
> Joe Rinke has made several false statements concerning Revolution Helicopter
> corp. to this Newsgroup, and in the information presently on his webpage for
> Rinke Aerospace.
>
> I feel it necessary to post the facts and prove his statements are false with
> the evidence presented here in this report I compiled. What these people are
> saying is being done to benefit themselves and they’re own cause through
> slandering RHCI, and telling you, the public, lies.
>
> I’m not here to badmouth or discredit anyone. I will simply let the evidence
> speak for it’s self. I will not lower myself to the level that my detractors
> have gone. I have no need to use profanity and name calling to defend myself.
> I am a professional, and feel that I have always portrayed myself as one to
> this news group. Any of the evidence I present can be checked and verified
> with little effort. All of the quotes in this post are copied out of the
> newsgroups, or I had permission to post.
>
> Some of the Mini-500 detractors are trying to make Joe Rinke look like the
> saver of the Mini-500, and this is far from the truth.
>
>>> Joe Rinke wrote:
>> And if it's quality you're worried about, PLEASE DON'T BE!!! Our
>> manufacturing capabilities are housed in a 21,225 sq. ft. facility with
>> state-of-the-art machinery that currently manufacturers aircraft parts for,
>> among others, Allison Engine, General Dynamics, General Electric, Numatics,
>> Pratt & Whitney Aircraft, Rockwell International, Teledyne Ryan Aeronautical,
>> Textron-Lycoming, United Technologies, Williams International, as well as a
>> host of automotive companies and others.
>
> In reality, there is no such thing as a Rinke Aerospace as he is portraying
> it to be. Joe Rinke makes a living with an excavating business. Tinkering
> with his Mini-500 is a part time hobby. The facilities he mentions is a place
> where he has some machine work done. He doesn’t own these places as he leads
> you to believe. He does a little business with them, but to say “our” is not
> correct.
>
> Further more, when you take a look at his Webpage, he tries to lead us all to
> believe that the building shown in the picture is Rinke Aerospace. I attached
> the picture at the bottom of this report, and you can clearly see that the
> sign “Rinke Aerospace” is pasted onto the picture by computer.
> Two other people that are guilty of deceiving this Newsgroup are Chuck Van
> Thomme and Ed Randolph. They posted statements to these newsgroups that were
> designed to mislead us all, for the benefit of Joe Rinke and to fool you into
> feeling at ease to send him money, as if he was an established business in the
> aerospace field.
>
>>> Ed Randolph wrote:
>> I made a trip to Joe's shop = looks impressive but awfully noisy( hard on this
>> old mans ears as I didn't on headset or earmuffs).
>>> Chuck Van Thomme wrote:
>> I was at their shop and they had 3 machines in already for conversions. Their
>> tool shop is unbelievable, estimated 10.5 million dollars worth of tool and
>> machines.It put Revolutions shop to shame.”
>>> Chuck Van Thomme wrote:
>> HI RALPH I'm glad you took the time to go too Rinke's shop. NOW you know
>> what I'm talking about. When you see other gear boxes setting around that THAT
>> shop builds for the military YOU know its FIRST CLASS..”
>>> Chuck Van Thomme wrote:
>> Ralph, If DF should ever go out of business,Rinke Aerospace can manufacture
>> ANY part of that helicopter and do a very high quality job at it. I believe
>> you were one of the guys that visited his shop, did'nt you?? I may be
>> wrong,but I thought you did. In the past there have been dozens of people that
>> have flown out to see his shop,and without a doubt ,I think everyone was
>> impressed.
>
> In a post made by Ralph Raser, he told the truth about Joe Rinke’s aerospace
> company. He went there and saw it, and said the word “ available”, which makes
> all the difference in the world.
>
>>> Ralph Raser wrote:
>> That's correct. Joe has a nice shop available to him.
>
> It has been said that Joe Rinke is a liar by others in this Newsgroup. I can’t
> disagree after having to deal with him, and when reading some of the ludicrous
> claims he makes.
>
>>> Joe Rinke wrote:
>> And regarding the amendment, obviously I know about this since, I was in court
>> that day with Dennis, when the Judge demanded that modifications be allowed to
>> the Mini since it is proven "unairworthy" in its original state! There is now
>> a precedent set in the Courts, requiring that since I am allowed to modify my
>> aircraft and fly it, in its modified state, that others be allowed to do so
>> too. Case law having been set, DF had no choice but to allow others to modify
>> their Minis. It's humorous, though, that after all this time and effort, DF
>> comes out and tries to look like it was his idea and that he's a "nice guy" by
>> allowing individuals to modify their Minis...funny!”
>
> That entire statement was a lie. Joe Rinke takes credit for having forced
> RHCI into giving our builders an amendment to allow them to modify they’re
> Mini-500s. I sent this email to Mr. Dave Martin, editor of KitPlanes
> magazine, and asked him to tell the world where I got the idea for the
> contract modification. I made this amendment available so as to defuse Joe
> Rinke’s attempts to scare people into a class action lawsuit. Now, proof of
> the first part of his lie:
>
>>> Dave Martin wrote:
>> 26 Oct 1998
>> Dennis:
>> You have asked me to confirm that after the Dallas meeting on the Mini-500, I
>> suggested that you provide your customers relief from the threat of lawsuits
>> if they made modifications to their Revolution helicopter kits. The Dallas
>> meeting made clear that people were delighted with their Mini-500s except for
>> the technical problems they had experienced--and the restriction in their
>> sales contracts that precluded changes including those related to safety. I
>> noted that you and I had known each other a long time, that I don't normally
>> give business advice, but that I thought your company was at risk unless you
>> improved relations with your customers in this area.
>> Soon after our phone conversation, you confirmed that you were adopting the
>> idea and would be contacting your customers relating to changes to their
>> Mini-500s.
>> The idea was mine, and I was pleased with your positive response to it. You
>> have my permission to make this known.
>> Dave Martin, editor, KITPLANES
>
> Next part of his lie: Joe Rinke stated that “the Judge demanded that
> modifications be allowed to the Mini since it is proven "unairworthy" in its
> original state.” As a matter of fact, this is the only thing the Judge said:
> IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
> WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
> WESTERN DIVISION
> REVOLUTION HELICOPTER CORP. )
> INC., )
> )
> Plaintiff )
> )
> v. ) No. 98-0060-CV-W-9
> )
> JOSEPH P. RINKE, et al., )
> )
> Defendants. )
> ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION
> FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER
> On January 16, 1998, and February 27, 1998, hearings were held before this
> court on the plaintiff’s request for a temporary restraining order against
> defendant.
> For the reasons stated at the February 27, 1998, hearing, and pursuant to
> Dataphase Systems, Inc. v. C.L. Systems, Inc., 640 F.2d 109 (8th Cir. 1981),
> the balance of equities so favors the plaintiff that justice requires the
> court to intervene to preserve the status quo until plaintiff’s request for
> preliminary and permanent relief can be decided.
> Accordingly, it is ORDERED that:
> 1) defendants Joseph Rinke and Rinke Aerospace Corporation are restrained
> until further order of this court from modifying any Mini-500 aircraft owned
> by them or anyone else;
> 2) defendants Joseph Rinke and Rinke Aerospace Corporation are restrained
> until further order of this court from flying or otherwise operating any
> modified Mini-500 aircraft owned by them or anyone else;
> 3) defendants are restrained until further order of this court from soliciting
> business from Mini-500 aircraft owners for the purpose of selling kits for the
> modification of any Mini-500 aircraft;
> 4) defendants are restrained until further order of this court from exhibiting
> or displaying any modified Mini-500 aircraft;
> 5) defendants are restrained until further order of this court from
> advertising any modification to a Mini-500 aircraft or attempting to induce
> any owner of a Mini-500 aircraft to modify the aircraft;
> 6) plaintiff shall post with the Clerk of the Court a cash bond or a bond
> with a surety approved by this court in the amount of $50,000 conditioned as
> required by Rule 65, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; and
> 7) on or before March 6, 1998, the parties shall file a Proposed Scheduling
> Order suggesting a deadline for the close of pretrial discovery, the filing
> of dispositive motions, a proposed time for a hearing on preliminary and
> permanent injunctive relief and an estimate of the court time needed for this
> hearing.
> Signature, D. Brook Bartlett
> United States District Judge
> Kansas City, Missouri
> March 3, 1998.
>
> Let’s read that again;
> “the balance of equities so favors the plaintiff that justice
> requires the court to intervene to preserve the status quo
> until plaintiff’s request for preliminary and permanent relief
> can be decided.”
>
> As a matter of fact, this case never went to court. It was turned over to a
> “Mediator” to try and bring both parties to an agreement so that it wouldn’t
> need to go to court. The Mediator has no power to make any decisions or
> judgments of any kind. What Joe Rinke said about the judge ordering RHCI to
> make contract amendments, or Case law being set was a whopping lie. The
> entire event that Joe Rinke described above never happened........... funny,
> all right.
> RHCI made Joe Rinke sign an agreement to satisfy our relief. We did so in a
> way that would still allow him to fly his mini-500, but not to market his
> unproved and untested components that he was trying to sell to unwary
> Mini-500 owners, that thought he really had an Aerospace business.
> These people have said that I’m “sue-happy”. In reality, I am not at all. You
> have seen these detractors slam RHCI, the Mini-500 and myself on many
> occasions, even to the point of telling obvious lies and the year long
> fueling of a Mini- 500 hate campaign. Yet, with all of this, I have not sued
> any of them for these attacks. They admit they enjoy what they do, and seek
> the largest audience possible in their attempts to damage us. They will
> praise anyone that supports their cause, and condemn anyone sympathetic to
> the point that drives them away. They even support Flygyros!! ;
>
>>> Charles Greene wrote:
>> I doubt that those of us who go on & on about the Mini 500 want to go through
>> this. Besides, we want to have a large audience, influence public opinion,
>> boost our egos.
>>> Ed Randoff wrote:
>> Esteban, Keep right on posting to this news group. This is America = Freedom
>> of speech for all . They know where the on /off switch is on their computer.
>> Ed #005”
>
>
> We have proven with this evidence that Joe Rinke has lied and deceived this
> Newsgroup on a number of occasions, and is presently misrepresenting his
> business status and abilities. Both Joe Rinke and Fred Stewart said that I
> stole ideas and designs from Rinke Aerospace. I will soon give evidence in a
> new report that these statements are also false.
> I hope that this report will give people the insight of what has really been
> happening here. Thank you for your attention, and please remember to come to
> the official Mini-500 builders meeting here at Revolution Helicopter Corp.,
> February 6 and 7, 1999
> Most sincerely,
> Dennis Fetters
> President
> Revolution Helicopter Corp.

[in limbo]

On Mar 31, 12:15*am, Poultry in Motion > wrote:
> Dennis Fetters wrote:
> > Poultry in Motion wrote:
> >> Dennis Fetters wrote:
> >>> Yes, indeed Mr. Ryerson knows him well, he was the first one to
> >>> publish on his website the letter where Mr. Cicare admitted that the
> >>> two designs were different.
>
> >> Never seen that. Did see pictures of you and your pal Glenn together.
> >> Even a picture of you seated in "Miss Nina", Glenn's CH-7 Angel. Yes,
> >> he owned your competitor's helicopter, not one of yours. But he was an
> >> enthusiastic supporter of them all, including Mimi-500s.
>
> > Sorry you didn't pay more attention. I guess it you would have been more
> > informed of the real facts, you would not have showed everyone here on
> > the newsgroup how very little you know about everything you have talked
> > about related to me or the Mini-500. They all know now!
>
> >> Then suddenly, all articles and pictures of Mini-500s, the entire
> >> section, was pulled from the site. Replaced by a note that, due to
> >> threats received, ( *UNMENTIONABLE* ) helicopters could no longer
> >> appear on the site.
>
> > I don't run Glenns' website, he does, and I'm not privy to the reasons
> > why he does what he does.
>
> Of course you are. You threatened him. He was your friend and defender,
> but you dumped the friendship because he was too honest for you to deal
> with. He spoke what was on his mind. He was direct in his criticism of
> the Italians who built his CH-7, and that was after he'd been their
> guest. Glenn got to know all the players personally, didn't he? You
> needed to shut him up before he learned more about you.
>
>
>
>
>
> >>> So what's your point? This is exactly what I said. You just backed up
> >>> my side of the event?
>
> >> Point ---> Cicare's CH-6 helicopter was the Mini-500 prototype.
>
> > Answered on your other post;
>
> > "Oh that one, I guess you need to read!
> > That was what we were going to use as a prototype, but as I said Cicare
> > didn't do what he agreed, so even after I advertised we were going to
> > use his CH-6 as a prototype, that was when I assumed he was going to
> > live up to his part of the deal. He didn't, and I ended up having to
> > design the Mini-500 all by myself without the use of Cicares' help or
> > his CH-6, so the CH-6 never was used as the prototype after all. So the
> > first Mini-500 prototype turned out to be the first one I built.
> > Its that simple, and I wrote that before, as I said you just have to read."
>
> >> I'm full of questions.
>
> > As we are showing here, that's not all...
>
> Yes, insight too.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

To see what Glen has to say about Dennis just look at this vid.
UTubeGlennAR is Mr. Glenn Ryerson. He has removed his harsher
comments of Dennis F.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UvHd97648mE

[Dennis Fetters]

Mike Ash wrote:

> In article >,
> Dennis Fetters > wrote:
>
>
>>I didn't threaten him. I promised him that when I seen him I was going
>>to give him a good old fashion, and well deserved punch in the nose. You
>>know, like someone deserves when they are antagonizing someone. But, I
>>did it on the forum where everyone could see my intentions, and not
>>sneaking behind everyone with private emails. If I believe in something
>>I don't hide the fact that I do.
>
>
> I have basically no interest in the subject matter covered in this
> thread, but this paragraph makes absolutely no sense. Saying that you
> will carry out a harmful action against someone, such as punching them
> in the nose, is the very DEFINITION of a threat.

I'm just terrible to be the first and only one to ever do that, I know.

I'm sure the people I did punch in the nose felt I was terrible too, but
they did at least regret opening their big-mouth and apologized afterwards.

People have to be held responsible for their actions when they slam
someone over the internet, and if you cause trouble with someone, don't
be surprised when someday that trouble is repaid, sometimes painfully.

I'm a brut, I know it, and I'm sorry. Children, even big ones, seem to
respect and remember the consequence of a good-old fashion whoop'en.

[Dennis Fetters]

Dan wrote:

> Dennis Fetters wrote:
> <snip>
>
>> I didn't threaten him. I promised him that when I seen him I was going
>> to give him a good old fashion, and well deserved punch in the nose.
>> You know, like someone deserves when they are antagonizing someone.
>
>
> Now that is childish.
>
> I'm no lawyer, but isn't conveying a threat on line a federal felony?
>
> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

Go for it;

FBI Headquarters in Washington, D.C.
Call (202) 324-3000 or write to the following address:
Federal Bureau of Investigation
J. Edgar Hoover Building
935 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20535-0001

[Dan[_12_]]

Dennis Fetters wrote:
> Dan wrote:
>
>> Dennis Fetters wrote:
>> <snip>
>>
>>> I didn't threaten him. I promised him that when I seen him I was
>>> going to give him a good old fashion, and well deserved punch in the
>>> nose. You know, like someone deserves when they are antagonizing
>>> someone.
>>
>>
>> Now that is childish.
>>
>> I'm no lawyer, but isn't conveying a threat on line a federal felony?
>>
>> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
>
> Go for it;
>
> FBI Headquarters in Washington, D.C.
> Call (202) 324-3000 or write to the following address:
> Federal Bureau of Investigation
> J. Edgar Hoover Building
> 935 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
> Washington, D.C. 20535-0001

Just as a matter of curiosity does it make you feel like a man or
make what the other person said any less correct if you hit him? I'm not
saying the other guy was right or wrong in saying what he did, but
hitting him only proves you are unable to prove your point. As I said
before, it's childish and no different from any thug who shoots someone
for disrespecting him.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[Dennis Fetters]

Dan wrote:

> Just as a matter of curiosity does it make you feel like a man or make
> what the other person said any less correct if you hit him? I'm not
> saying the other guy was right or wrong in saying what he did, but
> hitting him only proves you are unable to prove your point. As I said
> before, it's childish and no different from any thug who shoots someone
> for disrespecting him.
>
> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

You know dan, it blows me away to see you acting like some righteous
person here. You got one of the biggest blow-hard mouths I've ever seen.
You have verbally victimized so many people here it can't be counted.

Go sell crazy somewhere else.

I've been punched in my nose before too, and deservedly so I might add.

Holy cow, you throwing rocks around?

[Dan[_12_]]

Dennis Fetters wrote:
> Mike Ash wrote:
>
>> In article >,
>> Dennis Fetters > wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I didn't threaten him. I promised him that when I seen him I was
>>> going to give him a good old fashion, and well deserved punch in the
>>> nose. You know, like someone deserves when they are antagonizing
>>> someone. But, I did it on the forum where everyone could see my
>>> intentions, and not sneaking behind everyone with private emails. If
>>> I believe in something I don't hide the fact that I do.
>>
>>
>> I have basically no interest in the subject matter covered in this
>> thread, but this paragraph makes absolutely no sense. Saying that you
>> will carry out a harmful action against someone, such as punching them
>> in the nose, is the very DEFINITION of a threat.
>
> I'm just terrible to be the first and only one to ever do that, I know.
>
> I'm sure the people I did punch in the nose felt I was terrible too, but
> they did at least regret opening their big-mouth and apologized afterwards.

Beating an apology out of someone tends to invalidate the apology,
doesn't it?

>
> People have to be held responsible for their actions when they slam
> someone over the internet, and if you cause trouble with someone, don't
> be surprised when someday that trouble is repaid, sometimes painfully.

Yes, people have to be held responsible for their actions. It's a
shame no one has held you responsible for yours and had you arrested for
battery. Perhaps you only like to beat on those who won't fight back. I
can only hope you wind up in jail or meet someone who will fight back.

>
> I'm a brut, I know it, and I'm sorry. Children, even big ones, seem to
> respect and remember the consequence of a good-old fashion whoop'en.

I'm not surprised you support child abuse. Maybe you will wind up in
a cell with a big man named Bubba who thinks you have a pretty mouth.

Fetters, I have take no side with you or against you over your
company's failure or your product. Your debate methods tend to convince
me you don't have the courage of your convictions sufficient to debate
point to point. I have seen you resort to verbal abuse and you admit to
physical abuse. These aren't the behaviours of a mature adult.

You seem to have made a lot of enemies. Your product may have been
the best ever produced, but the reason for your failures and enemies
will be easy to see next time you look in a mirror.

If I have offended you feel free to come punch me in the nose. All
you will have accomplished is to have assaulted a 100% disabled vet who
has no problem at all with pressing charges. There are men in the county
jail here who will be happy to see you.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[Dan[_12_]]

Dennis Fetters wrote:

<snip>

> You have verbally victimized so many people here it can't be counted.
>

You lie.

> I've been punched in my nose before too, and deservedly so I might add.

Didn't solve anything, did it?

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[cavelamb[_2_]]

Dennis Fetters wrote:
> Dan wrote:
>
>> Just as a matter of curiosity does it make you feel like a man or
>> make what the other person said any less correct if you hit him? I'm
>> not saying the other guy was right or wrong in saying what he did, but
>> hitting him only proves you are unable to prove your point. As I said
>> before, it's childish and no different from any thug who shoots
>> someone for disrespecting him.
>>
>> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
>
> You know dan, it blows me away to see you acting like some righteous
> person here. You got one of the biggest blow-hard mouths I've ever seen.
> You have verbally victimized so many people here it can't be counted.
>
> Go sell crazy somewhere else.
>
> I've been punched in my nose before too, and deservedly so I might add.
>
> Holy cow, you throwing rocks around?


Dan? Blowhard?

Well, as Bugs would say, "Whadda maroon"...

[Poultry in Motion]

Dennis Fetters copy/paste:
...

Yeah planemanman, man, I like this part

>> I am a professional, and feel that I have
>> always portrayed myself as one to this news group.

[Dennis Fetters]

OK, All the technical questions have been answered and the facts put
forth for those that wanted to know.

I looked over all the responses to my answers, and didn't find even one
single intelligent response that needed another answer. We are now down
to the few morons here that ran out of arguing with intelligent
responses or questions, and they are now fighting back with the only
real weapon they have ever had... meaningless insults flying out of
their big mouths.

Reminds me of a tribe of little pigmies frantically running around all
screaming at the top of their little lungs at the same time, and only
able to poke their spires at someone's ankles.

Most excitement these dying newsgroups have seen in years. I'm sure the
repercussions will last for even a day or so.

My work here is done. So long losers.

[Tim[_7_]]

"Dennis Fetters" > wrote in message
...
>
> Speeeest! Maxwell..... Just in case you don't realize it, I'm not the one
> asking the questions.... I'm just the one answering the questions.
>
> It you don't like the questions being asked, then discuss that with the
> ones asking the questions.
>
> What? You guys around here so busy with this dyeing newsgroups that your
> lacking band-width?????? LOL!

No, we just bore easily with hearing empty heads like your rattle.

The history of the Mini 500 has been written. Right or wrong, neither of you
are going to change it, and your arguments just discredit your respective
positions to anyone still reading.

Both of you really need to get over it, or take it up on email.

[cavelamb[_2_]]

Tim wrote:
> "Dennis Fetters" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Speeeest! Maxwell..... Just in case you don't realize it, I'm not the one
>> asking the questions.... I'm just the one answering the questions.
>>
>> It you don't like the questions being asked, then discuss that with the
>> ones asking the questions.
>>
>> What? You guys around here so busy with this dyeing newsgroups that your
>> lacking band-width?????? LOL!
>
> No, we just bore easily with hearing empty heads like your rattle.
>
> The history of the Mini 500 has been written. Right or wrong, neither of you
> are going to change it, and your arguments just discredit your respective
> positions to anyone still reading.
>
> Both of you really need to get over it, or take it up on email.
>
>
>

What's this "WE" stuff, Tim.

You have made exactly 4 posts (under this name)
and all 4 have ragged on somebody.

I doubt "WE" think of you as part of "US".

Richard

[Tim[_7_]]

"cavelamb" > wrote in message
...
> Tim wrote:
>> "Dennis Fetters" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Speeeest! Maxwell..... Just in case you don't realize it, I'm not the
>>> one asking the questions.... I'm just the one answering the questions.
>>>
>>> It you don't like the questions being asked, then discuss that with the
>>> ones asking the questions.
>>>
>>> What? You guys around here so busy with this dyeing newsgroups that your
>>> lacking band-width?????? LOL!
>>
>> No, we just bore easily with hearing empty heads like your rattle.
>>
>> The history of the Mini 500 has been written. Right or wrong, neither of
>> you are going to change it, and your arguments just discredit your
>> respective positions to anyone still reading.
>>
>> Both of you really need to get over it, or take it up on email.
>>
>>
>>
>
> What's this "WE" stuff, Tim.
>
> You have made exactly 4 posts (under this name)
> and all 4 have ragged on somebody.
>
> I doubt "WE" think of you as part of "US".
>
> Richard

So what the **** is it to you, mouth? Are you going to tell US, you're
enjoying this ****?

[jan olieslagers[_2_]]

Tim schreef:

> you're enjoying this ****?

No.
Ploink.

[Tim[_7_]]

"jan olieslagers" > wrote in message
...
> Tim schreef:
>
>> you're enjoying this ****?
>
> No.
> Ploink.

Yeah, that's the solution, dumb ass.

[Dan Camper]

On Tue, 31 Mar 2009 16:25:58 -0700, Dennis Fetters wrote:

> Why don't you ask me?

Because you're a ****ing tool, assclown.
--
http://tr.im/1f9p

[Dennis Fetters]

On Tue, 31 Mar 2009 21:15:19 -0500, Dan wrote:

> Dennis Fetters wrote:
>> Mike Ash wrote:
>>
>>> In article >,
>>> Dennis Fetters > wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> I didn't threaten him. I promised him that when I seen him I was
>>>> going to give him a good old fashion, and well deserved punch in the
>>>> nose. You know, like someone deserves when they are antagonizing
>>>> someone. But, I did it on the forum where everyone could see my
>>>> intentions, and not sneaking behind everyone with private emails. If
>>>> I believe in something I don't hide the fact that I do.
>>>
>>>
>>> I have basically no interest in the subject matter covered in this
>>> thread, but this paragraph makes absolutely no sense. Saying that you
>>> will carry out a harmful action against someone, such as punching them
>>> in the nose, is the very DEFINITION of a threat.
>>
>> I'm just terrible to be the first and only one to ever do that, I know.
>>
>> I'm sure the people I did punch in the nose felt I was terrible too, but
>> they did at least regret opening their big-mouth and apologized afterwards.
>
> Beating an apology out of someone tends to invalidate the apology,
> doesn't it?
>
>>
>> People have to be held responsible for their actions when they slam
>> someone over the internet, and if you cause trouble with someone, don't
>> be surprised when someday that trouble is repaid, sometimes painfully.
>
> Yes, people have to be held responsible for their actions. It's a
> shame no one has held you responsible for yours and had you arrested for
> battery. Perhaps you only like to beat on those who won't fight back. I
> can only hope you wind up in jail or meet someone who will fight back.
>
>>
>> I'm a brut, I know it, and I'm sorry. Children, even big ones, seem to
>> respect and remember the consequence of a good-old fashion whoop'en.
>
> I'm not surprised you support child abuse. Maybe you will wind up in
> a cell with a big man named Bubba who thinks you have a pretty mouth.
>
> Fetters, I have take no side with you or against you over your
> company's failure or your product. Your debate methods tend to convince
> me you don't have the courage of your convictions sufficient to debate
> point to point. I have seen you resort to verbal abuse and you admit to
> physical abuse. These aren't the behaviours of a mature adult.
>
> You seem to have made a lot of enemies. Your product may have been
> the best ever produced, but the reason for your failures and enemies
> will be easy to see next time you look in a mirror.
>
> If I have offended you feel free to come punch me in the nose. All
> you will have accomplished is to have assaulted a 100% disabled vet who
> has no problem at all with pressing charges. There are men in the county
> jail here who will be happy to see you.
>
> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

Better hope that I die before I find you. I have been known to kick the
ever loving **** out of asstards.

[Dennis Fetters]

On Wed, 1 Apr 2009 12:28:08 -0500, Tim wrote:

> "Dennis Fetters" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> Speeeest! Maxwell..... Just in case you don't realize it, I'm not the one
>> asking the questions.... I'm just the one answering the questions.
>>
>> It you don't like the questions being asked, then discuss that with the
>> ones asking the questions.
>>
>> What? You guys around here so busy with this dyeing newsgroups that your
>> lacking band-width?????? LOL!
>
> No, we just bore easily with hearing empty heads like your rattle.
>
> The history of the Mini 500 has been written. Right or wrong, neither of you
> are going to change it, and your arguments just discredit your respective
> positions to anyone still reading.
>
> Both of you really need to get over it, or take it up on email.

Go **** yourself. Mr. NetKopp, the day I do what you tell me is the day
you spit your teeth out of your mouth.

[Dennis Fetters]

On Tue, 31 Mar 2009 18:10:55 -0700 (PDT), in limbo wrote:

> On Mar 31, 12:15*am, Poultry in Motion > wrote:
>> Dennis Fetters wrote:
>>> Poultry in Motion wrote:
>>>> Dennis Fetters wrote:
>>>>> Yes, indeed Mr. Ryerson knows him well, he was the first one to
>>>>> publish on his website the letter where Mr. Cicare admitted that the
>>>>> two designs were different.
>>
>>>> Never seen that. Did see pictures of you and your pal Glenn together.
>>>> Even a picture of you seated in "Miss Nina", Glenn's CH-7 Angel. Yes,
>>>> he owned your competitor's helicopter, not one of yours. But he was an
>>>> enthusiastic supporter of them all, including Mimi-500s.
>>
>>> Sorry you didn't pay more attention. I guess it you would have been more
>>> informed of the real facts, you would not have showed everyone here on
>>> the newsgroup how very little you know about everything you have talked
>>> about related to me or the Mini-500. They all know now!
>>
>>>> Then suddenly, all articles and pictures of Mini-500s, the entire
>>>> section, was pulled from the site. Replaced by a note that, due to
>>>> threats received, ( *UNMENTIONABLE* ) helicopters could no longer
>>>> appear on the site.
>>
>>> I don't run Glenns' website, he does, and I'm not privy to the reasons
>>> why he does what he does.
>>
>> Of course you are. You threatened him. He was your friend and defender,
>> but you dumped the friendship because he was too honest for you to deal
>> with. He spoke what was on his mind. He was direct in his criticism of
>> the Italians who built his CH-7, and that was after he'd been their
>> guest. Glenn got to know all the players personally, didn't he? You
>> needed to shut him up before he learned more about you.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>> So what's your point? This is exactly what I said. You just backed up
>>>>> my side of the event?
>>
>>>> Point ---> Cicare's CH-6 helicopter was the Mini-500 prototype.
>>
>>> Answered on your other post;
>>
>>> "Oh that one, I guess you need to read!
>>> That was what we were going to use as a prototype, but as I said Cicare
>>> didn't do what he agreed, so even after I advertised we were going to
>>> use his CH-6 as a prototype, that was when I assumed he was going to
>>> live up to his part of the deal. He didn't, and I ended up having to
>>> design the Mini-500 all by myself without the use of Cicares' help or
>>> his CH-6, so the CH-6 never was used as the prototype after all. So the
>>> first Mini-500 prototype turned out to be the first one I built.
>>> Its that simple, and I wrote that before, as I said you just have to read."
>>
>>>> I'm full of questions.
>>
>>> As we are showing here, that's not all...
>>
>> Yes, insight too.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> To see what Glen has to say about Dennis just look at this vid.
> UTubeGlennAR is Mr. Glenn Ryerson. He has removed his harsher
> comments of Dennis F.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UvHd97648mE

That's because he knows that I am capable of the worst nightmares on his
putrid body.

With all seriousness, I just want you to know that anybody who does
something like that to me would be in line for retribution with extreme
prejudice and without the slightest hesitation. I don't stop until I get
what I want when I'm motivated to be on the trail of anybody who stalks
me.

You see- I have, in reserve, my own tactics for getting back at people,
and many connections with people who will do things for me (and I for
them.)

[Dan[_12_]]

Dennis Fetters wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Mar 2009 21:15:19 -0500, Dan wrote:
>
>> Dennis Fetters wrote:
>>> Mike Ash wrote:
>>>
>>>> In article >,
>>>> Dennis Fetters > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I didn't threaten him. I promised him that when I seen him I was
>>>>> going to give him a good old fashion, and well deserved punch in the
>>>>> nose. You know, like someone deserves when they are antagonizing
>>>>> someone. But, I did it on the forum where everyone could see my
>>>>> intentions, and not sneaking behind everyone with private emails. If
>>>>> I believe in something I don't hide the fact that I do.
>>>>
>>>> I have basically no interest in the subject matter covered in this
>>>> thread, but this paragraph makes absolutely no sense. Saying that you
>>>> will carry out a harmful action against someone, such as punching them
>>>> in the nose, is the very DEFINITION of a threat.
>>> I'm just terrible to be the first and only one to ever do that, I know.
>>>
>>> I'm sure the people I did punch in the nose felt I was terrible too, but
>>> they did at least regret opening their big-mouth and apologized afterwards.
>> Beating an apology out of someone tends to invalidate the apology,
>> doesn't it?
>>
>>> People have to be held responsible for their actions when they slam
>>> someone over the internet, and if you cause trouble with someone, don't
>>> be surprised when someday that trouble is repaid, sometimes painfully.
>> Yes, people have to be held responsible for their actions. It's a
>> shame no one has held you responsible for yours and had you arrested for
>> battery. Perhaps you only like to beat on those who won't fight back. I
>> can only hope you wind up in jail or meet someone who will fight back.
>>
>>> I'm a brut, I know it, and I'm sorry. Children, even big ones, seem to
>>> respect and remember the consequence of a good-old fashion whoop'en.
>> I'm not surprised you support child abuse. Maybe you will wind up in
>> a cell with a big man named Bubba who thinks you have a pretty mouth.
>>
>> Fetters, I have take no side with you or against you over your
>> company's failure or your product. Your debate methods tend to convince
>> me you don't have the courage of your convictions sufficient to debate
>> point to point. I have seen you resort to verbal abuse and you admit to
>> physical abuse. These aren't the behaviours of a mature adult.
>>
>> You seem to have made a lot of enemies. Your product may have been
>> the best ever produced, but the reason for your failures and enemies
>> will be easy to see next time you look in a mirror.
>>
>> If I have offended you feel free to come punch me in the nose. All
>> you will have accomplished is to have assaulted a 100% disabled vet who
>> has no problem at all with pressing charges. There are men in the county
>> jail here who will be happy to see you.
>>
>> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
>
> Better hope that I die before I find you. I have been known to kick the
> ever loving **** out of asstards.



You know, anyone who makes unwarranted threats of violence is a
bully and I have never yet met a bully who wasn't an insecure coward. If
it makes you feel like a man to threaten me feel free. I won't lose any
sleep over it, I'm simply not impressed.

I'm not sure what I ever said to you to justify such childish
behaviour on your part. I have the feeling you need some kind of
professional help.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[Dan[_12_]]

Dennis Fetters wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Mar 2009 18:10:55 -0700 (PDT), in limbo wrote:
>
>> On Mar 31, 12:15 am, Poultry in Motion > wrote:
>>> Dennis Fetters wrote:
>>>> Poultry in Motion wrote:
>>>>> Dennis Fetters wrote:
>>>>>> Yes, indeed Mr. Ryerson knows him well, he was the first one to
>>>>>> publish on his website the letter where Mr. Cicare admitted that the
>>>>>> two designs were different.
>>>>> Never seen that. Did see pictures of you and your pal Glenn together.
>>>>> Even a picture of you seated in "Miss Nina", Glenn's CH-7 Angel. Yes,
>>>>> he owned your competitor's helicopter, not one of yours. But he was an
>>>>> enthusiastic supporter of them all, including Mimi-500s.
>>>> Sorry you didn't pay more attention. I guess it you would have been more
>>>> informed of the real facts, you would not have showed everyone here on
>>>> the newsgroup how very little you know about everything you have talked
>>>> about related to me or the Mini-500. They all know now!
>>>>> Then suddenly, all articles and pictures of Mini-500s, the entire
>>>>> section, was pulled from the site. Replaced by a note that, due to
>>>>> threats received, ( *UNMENTIONABLE* ) helicopters could no longer
>>>>> appear on the site.
>>>> I don't run Glenns' website, he does, and I'm not privy to the reasons
>>>> why he does what he does.
>>> Of course you are. You threatened him. He was your friend and defender,
>>> but you dumped the friendship because he was too honest for you to deal
>>> with. He spoke what was on his mind. He was direct in his criticism of
>>> the Italians who built his CH-7, and that was after he'd been their
>>> guest. Glenn got to know all the players personally, didn't he? You
>>> needed to shut him up before he learned more about you.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>> So what's your point? This is exactly what I said. You just backed up
>>>>>> my side of the event?
>>>>> Point ---> Cicare's CH-6 helicopter was the Mini-500 prototype.
>>>> Answered on your other post;
>>>> "Oh that one, I guess you need to read!
>>>> That was what we were going to use as a prototype, but as I said Cicare
>>>> didn't do what he agreed, so even after I advertised we were going to
>>>> use his CH-6 as a prototype, that was when I assumed he was going to
>>>> live up to his part of the deal. He didn't, and I ended up having to
>>>> design the Mini-500 all by myself without the use of Cicares' help or
>>>> his CH-6, so the CH-6 never was used as the prototype after all. So the
>>>> first Mini-500 prototype turned out to be the first one I built.
>>>> Its that simple, and I wrote that before, as I said you just have to read."
>>>>> I'm full of questions.
>>>> As we are showing here, that's not all...
>>> Yes, insight too.- Hide quoted text -
>>>
>>> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>>>
>>> - Show quoted text -
>> To see what Glen has to say about Dennis just look at this vid.
>> UTubeGlennAR is Mr. Glenn Ryerson. He has removed his harsher
>> comments of Dennis F.
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UvHd97648mE
>
> That's because he knows that I am capable of the worst nightmares on his
> putrid body.
>
> With all seriousness, I just want you to know that anybody who does
> something like that to me would be in line for retribution with extreme
> prejudice and without the slightest hesitation. I don't stop until I get
> what I want when I'm motivated to be on the trail of anybody who stalks
> me.
>
> You see- I have, in reserve, my own tactics for getting back at people,
> and many connections with people who will do things for me (and I for
> them.)

You have been watching too many movies.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[Tim[_7_]]

"Dennis Fetters" > wrote in message
...

Gee Dennis, why does you IP address keep changing?

[Tim[_7_]]

"Dennis Fetters" > wrote in message
...


Gee Dennis, why does you IP address keep changing?

[Jim Logajan]

Dan > wrote:
> Dennis Fetters wrote:
>> On Tue, 31 Mar 2009 18:10:55 -0700 (PDT), in limbo wrote:
>>
>>> On Mar 31, 12:15 am, Poultry in Motion > wrote:
>>>> Dennis Fetters wrote:
>>>>> Poultry in Motion wrote:
>>>>>> Dennis Fetters wrote:
>>>>>>> Yes, indeed Mr. Ryerson knows him well, he was the first one to
>>>>>>> publish on his website the letter where Mr. Cicare admitted that
>>>>>>> the two designs were different.
>>>>>> Never seen that. Did see pictures of you and your pal Glenn
>>>>>> together. Even a picture of you seated in "Miss Nina", Glenn's
>>>>>> CH-7 Angel. Yes, he owned your competitor's helicopter, not one
>>>>>> of yours. But he was an enthusiastic supporter of them all,
>>>>>> including Mimi-500s.
>>>>> Sorry you didn't pay more attention. I guess it you would have
>>>>> been more informed of the real facts, you would not have showed
>>>>> everyone here on the newsgroup how very little you know about
>>>>> everything you have talked about related to me or the Mini-500.
>>>>> They all know now!
>>>>>> Then suddenly, all articles and pictures of Mini-500s, the entire
>>>>>> section, was pulled from the site. Replaced by a note that, due
>>>>>> to threats received, ( *UNMENTIONABLE* ) helicopters could no
>>>>>> longer appear on the site.
>>>>> I don't run Glenns' website, he does, and I'm not privy to the
>>>>> reasons why he does what he does.
>>>> Of course you are. You threatened him. He was your friend and
>>>> defender, but you dumped the friendship because he was too honest
>>>> for you to deal with. He spoke what was on his mind. He was direct
>>>> in his criticism of the Italians who built his CH-7, and that was
>>>> after he'd been their guest. Glenn got to know all the players
>>>> personally, didn't he? You needed to shut him up before he learned
>>>> more about you.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> So what's your point? This is exactly what I said. You just
>>>>>>> backed up my side of the event?
>>>>>> Point ---> Cicare's CH-6 helicopter was the Mini-500 prototype.
>>>>> Answered on your other post;
>>>>> "Oh that one, I guess you need to read!
>>>>> That was what we were going to use as a prototype, but as I said
>>>>> Cicare didn't do what he agreed, so even after I advertised we
>>>>> were going to use his CH-6 as a prototype, that was when I assumed
>>>>> he was going to live up to his part of the deal. He didn't, and I
>>>>> ended up having to design the Mini-500 all by myself without the
>>>>> use of Cicares' help or his CH-6, so the CH-6 never was used as
>>>>> the prototype after all. So the first Mini-500 prototype turned
>>>>> out to be the first one I built. Its that simple, and I wrote that
>>>>> before, as I said you just have to read."
>>>>>> I'm full of questions.
>>>>> As we are showing here, that's not all...
>>>> Yes, insight too.- Hide quoted text -
>>>>
>>>> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>>>>
>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>> To see what Glen has to say about Dennis just look at this vid.
>>> UTubeGlennAR is Mr. Glenn Ryerson. He has removed his harsher
>>> comments of Dennis F.
>>>
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UvHd97648mE
>>
>> That's because he knows that I am capable of the worst nightmares on
>> his putrid body.
>>
>> With all seriousness, I just want you to know that anybody who does
>> something like that to me would be in line for retribution with
>> extreme prejudice and without the slightest hesitation. I don't stop
>> until I get what I want when I'm motivated to be on the trail of
>> anybody who stalks me.
>>
>> You see- I have, in reserve, my own tactics for getting back at
>> people, and many connections with people who will do things for me
>> (and I for them.)
>
> You have been watching too many movies.
>
> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

The post you replied to appears to have been forged. It didn't come from
the service provider or machine Dennis Fetters had been posting from.

[Jim Logajan]

Dan > wrote:
> You know, anyone who makes unwarranted threats of violence is [...]

.... probably being posted by someone trying a "Joe Job." The post you are
replying to is a forgery. Unlike Fetters posts, which come via prodigy.net
and contain a valid NNT-Posting-Host IP address somewhere near Irvine
California, the forged posts are (currently) coming by way of cnntp.org
with posting host 85dbfa94.read.cnntp.org. Not sure the host name is hex
for a valid IP address.

[Jim Logajan]

"Tim" <#__#@__.-> wrote:
> "Dennis Fetters" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>
> Gee Dennis, why does you IP address keep changing?

He also appears to have undergone a severe personality change. And a
geographic shift. One would almost think another person was posting under
his name, but we all know that no one would stoop to that and that has
never before happened on these newsgroups.

[Tim[_7_]]

"Jim Logajan" > wrote in message
.. .
> "Tim" <#__#@__.-> wrote:
>> "Dennis Fetters" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>>
>> Gee Dennis, why does you IP address keep changing?
>
> He also appears to have undergone a severe personality change. And a
> geographic shift. One would almost think another person was posting under
> his name, but we all know that no one would stoop to that and that has
> never before happened on these newsgroups.

Yeah, the personality change is what tipped it for me, and was just trying
to save everyone a little grief.

[Dennis Fetters]

Dennis Fetters wrote:

> Better hope that I die before I find you. I have been known to kick the
> ever loving **** out of asstards.

Gentleman, and I do use the word loosely,

There is another person pretending to be me on your newsgroups.

It's a shame people will lower themselves to this level, but this is
typical of what I have had to deal with and defined against, and the
same people that spread false statements against my machines and myself,
people with no ethics. These are the same type people many of you were
naive enough to believe.

But, I've seen many of you people do some mighty low stuff too, so I'm
sure none of you are surprised.

[Dennis Fetters]

Dennis Fetters wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Mar 2009 18:10:55 -0700 (PDT), in limbo wrote:
>
>
>>On Mar 31, 12:15 am, Poultry in Motion > wrote:
>>
>>>Dennis Fetters wrote:

> That's because he knows that I am capable of the worst nightmares on his
> putrid body.
>
> With all seriousness, I just want you to know that anybody who does
> something like that to me would be in line for retribution with extreme
> prejudice and without the slightest hesitation. I don't stop until I get
> what I want when I'm motivated to be on the trail of anybody who stalks
> me.
>
> You see- I have, in reserve, my own tactics for getting back at people,
> and many connections with people who will do things for me (and I for
> them.)

Actually, this impostor is not half-bad.

I do like some of what he says. I would love to be able to say that I
would like to see some people around here with their head on the sharp
end of a post, but I would never say that in public.

[Dennis Fetters]

On Wed, 01 Apr 2009 16:33:18 -0700, Dennis Fetters wrote:

> Dennis Fetters wrote:
>> On Tue, 31 Mar 2009 18:10:55 -0700 (PDT), in limbo wrote:
>>
>>>On Mar 31, 12:15 am, Poultry in Motion > wrote:
>>>
>>>>Dennis Fetters wrote:
>
>> That's because he knows that I am capable of the worst nightmares on his
>> putrid body.
>>
>> With all seriousness, I just want you to know that anybody who does
>> something like that to me would be in line for retribution with extreme
>> prejudice and without the slightest hesitation. I don't stop until I get
>> what I want when I'm motivated to be on the trail of anybody who stalks
>> me.
>>
>> You see- I have, in reserve, my own tactics for getting back at people,
>> and many connections with people who will do things for me (and I for
>> them.)
>
> Actually, this impostor is not half-bad.
>
> I do like some of what he says. I would love to be able to say that I
> would like to see some people around here with their head on the sharp
> end of a post, but I would never say that in public.

Ill take that back. I've said it and I will stand by it.

[Dennis Fetters]

On Tue, 31 Mar 2009 23:55:34 -0700, Poultry in Motion wrote:

> Dennis Fetters copy/paste:
> ...
>
> Yeah planemanman, man, I like this part
>
>>> I am a professional, and feel that I have
>>> always portrayed myself as one to this news group.

You really don't know what you are talking about. We didn't develop the
PEP for more power. But, for the problem the PEP cured, id did make more
power available, but that didn't mean you had to use it, nor did it hurt
if you did. Here is what I posted about the PEP before;

"Cold seizures in a Mini-500 have only happened when the pilot starts
the engine cold, and immediately lift into a climbing departure, and
then the engine will seize within 100 feet or so and not restart until
later after the piston cooled enough to allow it to do so. It plainly
states in the Pilots Operating Handbook to allow the engine temperature
to be sufficient enough to prevent this. If they allow it to happen,
it's Pilot error and was completely avoidable.

Some people at Rotax that were not familiar with helicopters and the
special demands misdiagnosed a Mini-500 engine seizure as a cold
seizure. In fact, the real problem was the exhaust system. By adding the
PEP system, we discovered that it reduced the exhaust back pressure. The
normal Rotax exhaust system was creating to much back pressure for
helicopter use, which made the need for summer and winter jet changing.
With the PEP, we only needed to jet it once, and there were no more
issues of people seizing the engine for simply forgetting to change from
summer to winter jetting. The point is, you need the PEP system. Before
the PEP exhaust system became mandatory for the Mini-500, the major
problem of seizing the Rotax could have completely been avoided.
Although most all the seizures were due to customers not changing the
jets, needles and needle jets to convert the engine to helicopter use,
it was the Rotax exhaust system that was causing the engine to be too
sensitive to the need of proper jetting. We discovered that the normal
jets that come with the engine for propeller use would not work for
helicopter use. It was explained why the jets needed to be converted
many times, but it is unbelievable how many owners refused to change the
jetting, which would definitely seize the engine. It got to the point
where we opened the Rotax box and removed the jetting, so that the
owners would have to apply the proper jetting. After doing that, the
engine seizures were reduced to only people refusing to change from
winter to summer jetting. The mandatory PEP did salve this, and there
were no more seizures after it was installed, except for people that
refused to follow the mandatory AD to add the PEP and its proper
jetting, or flew on the old pipe. It is untrue to say that the Mini-500
has suffered from cold seizures, except for the few cases where the
pilot simply ignored operational procedures.

The CH-7 Angel did not go to the trouble of fabricating their own
exhaust, but since it was basically a factory built flying aircraft,
they would install the proper jets and needles themselves, and test
flies the aircraft. Also the Angel was so expensive, that the only
customers that could afford them were already accomplished helicopter
pilots with more skills, and flying a factory built aircraft already set
up properly after construction, compared to the Mini-500 owners where
76% of them were not helicopter pilots, and/or had less than 50 hours in
helicopters when building and flying their Mini-500."


> Same Rotax engine, but necessary styling dictated that the engine be
> enclosed. Famous for seizing.

You REALLY don't know what you are talking about. Here is what I posted
about the Mini-500 Cooling System:

"The Mini-500 uses a fan powered directly off the engine, not the rotor
drive system, so in that way it will not rob power during an
autorotation. The cooling system absorbs only 1.7hp at hover to cool the
engine. The Mini-500 cooling system is one of the most efficient in any
other helicopter that I know of. In fact, on an 80F day it will hover
indefinitely and the water temperature will never exceed 160F. If you
load the aircraft down with enough weight where it will not lift off,
and hold full power, you can do so indefinitely and the water
temperature will never exceed 180F. On an 110F day with a tank of fuel
and a 200 pound pilot, the Mini-500 can hover indefinitely, and the
water temperature will never exceed 180F. In fact, during any of these
events, or during the entire flight of the Mini-500, you can remove the
pressure cap and the coolant will never boil out.

These are all proven facts and demonstrated countless times at air shows
around the world. The Mini-500 has never had a cooling problem of its
582 engine, even being fully enclosed, and runs cooler than other kit
helicopters, even though they are lighter, due to our superior cooling
systems design and ability to use the air off the cooling fan to blow
the air over the exhaust system to remove hot air from the engine
compartment. It is untrue to say the Mini-500 has a cooling problem."


> Frame cracked under heavy vibes, so factory solution was to weld more
> metal onto frame.

Again, here is what I said about the frame crack, as if a helicopter
never had a frame crack before:

"We conducted a complete resonance frequency test of the Mini-500. Each
assembly was checked for its frequency where it would naturally want to
oscillate, and this information was recorder. Afterwards, we could do a
complete spectrum analyses on any Mini-500, and look for peeks of
unacceptable vibrations. By knowing the RPM and natural frequency of
each component, we could determine problems before failure. It just so
happens that the mast assembly would resonate around 312 RPMÿs, so we
issued a warning to owners not to dwell at that RPM and move on up to
90% RPM for the secondary warm-up period. The next RPM where the mast
assembly wanted to resonate was well above the operational 104% RPM, so
there were never any concerns.

(All diagrams deleted)

The Mini-500 was suffering from frame cracking that was occurring behind
the transmission. Please take a look at the first drawing, and you will
see that location marked with a green X.

What we finally discovered was that there were two different forces at
work causing the problem;

First, was the two-per-rev that was being produced in forward flight in
a motion that tended to rock the rotor system, mast and transmission
unit back and forward, as seen in the first drawing at letter ´A¡. This
action was occurring about 1100 times a minute and was transmitted down
the mast following the blue line, and then horizontally out to the two
arrows pointing up and down on each side of the transmission, which
indicates the direction of force translated on the frame in those areas.
This is not normally a problem, but in the case of the Mini-500, I
designed the frame improperly where this load was focused on the green X
in the first drawing, where the load was being translated into the
center of a tube. Notice that there is a bracket on that tube tying it
into another tube, but this just transmitted the loads to be expelled at
letter ´C¡ in the center of another unsupported tube.

Second, we discovered that with each firing of an engine piston, the
drive belt was pulling down on the transmission large sprocket, as seen
in the first drawing with red lines and letter ¡B¡. This was hammering
at around 13200 a minute, and that force too was transmitted through the
transmission, and then through the frame and unloading on the area
marked by the green X.

That is way the frame was cracking. Now it needs to be fixed, but the
problem is that there are over 300 Mini-500 shipped that all need a fix.
We were shipping 5 to 6 complete Mini-500 kits a week. Designing and
building a new frame to send to everyone was out of the question,
because I could only build one frame a day, and that was just enough to
keep up with production.

Sure, I could have taken a month and duplicated my welding fixtures and
doubled my welding staff, and built two frames and day. But then owners
would have to wait up to a year and a half before we could send out over
300 frames. No, I needed to come up with something that didn't cost the
customer $4800 and took over a year to receive, and whatever it was it
had to work and solve all problems at one time.

That is when I came up with a system that would take the loads from the
two-per-rev, capture the force where it was generated, and distribute
those loads into the hard point in the frame that was all supported
through triangulation. This can be seen on the second drawing following
the blue lines. Notice that the blue line that represent the direction
of force across the tube where the green x was is no longer there. I was
successful to take all strain away from the problem area entirely. The
engine pulsing vibration was also handled the same way, along with an
added rubber isolation system on the transmission and up inside the mast
support, and with a new idler arm that was spring loaded.

By coming up with this fix, it not only solved all the problems, but
improved overall balancing of the rotor system, and the fix could be
manufactured fast and affordable. Although this was a major problem that
took some time to identify the cause, dream up the best solution,
prototype and test and finally produce and ship, before or after, no
Mini-500 had crashed due to a cracked frame."

Ok, so there was the problem, and that was my solution. Why do you still
bellyache about an old problems that was solved? Its not the first time
a helicopter had a design flaw that needed fixed. So all the Mini-500
owners and I got over it, why was it your problem, and why are you
complaining about it?

Keep those questions coming!! Its great you are helping me get the real
facts out there!

[Jules]

How do I know for a fact he is an imposter????




Dennis Fetters wrote:
> Dennis Fetters wrote:

> Actually, this impostor is not half-bad.

[Jim Logajan]

Jules > wrote:
> How do I know for a fact he is an imposter????

Simply disregard the entire thread and that conundrum vanishes. Unless you
think there is money in figuring it all out, in which case have at it....

[Poultry in Motion]

Jules wrote:
> How do I know for a fact he is an imposter????

You can't.

Names and emails mean nothing.
Jim caught the wrong IP Address in the message headers, which means
highly likely an impostor. Or it could have been posted to a private
forum that mirrors newsgroups, with the forum's administrator
substituting his own gibberish into IP address fields. IP Addresses
don't have to be included at all in message headers.

The only thing that really means anything is when messages have the SAME
IP Address. Bingo, they originated from the same source.

>
>
>
>
> Dennis Fetters wrote:
>> Dennis Fetters wrote:
>
>> Actually, this impostor is not half-bad.

[Gezellig]

On Wed, 01 Apr 2009 19:50:59 -0700, Poultry in Motion wrote:

> Jules wrote:
>> How do I know for a fact he is an imposter????
>
> You can't.
>
> Names and emails mean nothing.
> Jim caught the wrong IP Address in the message headers, which means
> highly likely an impostor. Or it could have been posted to a private
> forum that mirrors newsgroups, with the forum's administrator
> substituting his own gibberish into IP address fields. IP Addresses
> don't have to be included at all in message headers.
>
> The only thing that really means anything is when messages have the SAME
> IP Address. Bingo, they originated from the same source.

As long as source = ISP.

[Barnyard BOb]

On Wed, 1 Apr 2009 16:56:40 -0400, Dennis Fetters
> wrote:

>That's because he knows that I am capable of the worst nightmares on his
>putrid body.
>
>With all seriousness, I just want you to know that anybody who does
>something like that to me would be in line for retribution with extreme
>prejudice and without the slightest hesitation. I don't stop until I get
>what I want when I'm motivated to be on the trail of anybody who stalks
>me.
>
>You see- I have, in reserve, my own tactics for getting back at people,
>and many connections with people who will do things for me (and I for
>them.)

REALLY?

The day you closed up Revolution Helicopters forever in Excelsior
Springs, MO I still managed to make it through the only door that your
people didn't lock during what should have been normal business hours.

I had your gal at the front desk go back to your office and request
that you come out and speak with me.....

Guess what happened, Dennis?
NOTHING.
You wouldn't do it.

I'm not saying you're a coward, but it sure doesn't square with the
brag and bluster you wrote above. :-)


- Barnyard BOb -

The more people I meet,
the more I like my dog and
George Carlin humor.

[Tim[_7_]]

"Barnyard BOb" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 1 Apr 2009 16:56:40 -0400, Dennis Fetters
> > wrote:
>
>>That's because he knows that I am capable of the worst nightmares on his
>>putrid body.
>>
>>With all seriousness, I just want you to know that anybody who does
>>something like that to me would be in line for retribution with extreme
>>prejudice and without the slightest hesitation. I don't stop until I get
>>what I want when I'm motivated to be on the trail of anybody who stalks
>>me.
>>
>>You see- I have, in reserve, my own tactics for getting back at people,
>>and many connections with people who will do things for me (and I for
>>them.)
>
> REALLY?
>
> The day you closed up Revolution Helicopters forever in Excelsior
> Springs, MO I still managed to make it through the only door that your
> people didn't lock during what should have been normal business hours.
>
> I had your gal at the front desk go back to your office and request
> that you come out and speak with me.....
>
> Guess what happened, Dennis?
> NOTHING.
> You wouldn't do it.
>
> I'm not saying you're a coward, but it sure doesn't square with the
> brag and bluster you wrote above. :-)
>
>
> - Barnyard BOb -


I think you are replying to a forged post.

[Dennis Fetters]

Barnyard BOb wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Apr 2009 16:56:40 -0400, Dennis Fetters
> > wrote:
>
>
>>That's because he knows that I am capable of the worst nightmares on his
>>putrid body.
>>
>>With all seriousness, I just want you to know that anybody who does
>>something like that to me would be in line for retribution with extreme
>>prejudice and without the slightest hesitation. I don't stop until I get
>>what I want when I'm motivated to be on the trail of anybody who stalks
>>me.
>>
>>You see- I have, in reserve, my own tactics for getting back at people,
>>and many connections with people who will do things for me (and I for
>>them.)
>
>
> REALLY?
>
> The day you closed up Revolution Helicopters forever in Excelsior
> Springs, MO I still managed to make it through the only door that your
> people didn't lock during what should have been normal business hours.
>
> I had your gal at the front desk go back to your office and request
> that you come out and speak with me.....
>
> Guess what happened, Dennis?
> NOTHING.
> You wouldn't do it.
>
> I'm not saying you're a coward, but it sure doesn't square with the
> brag and bluster you wrote above. :-)

You are answering an impostor, fool.

As you can imagine I was probably a little busy at the time and couldn't
waste it with you... Looks like I was right, and glad I didn't.

[in limbo]

On Apr 1, 5:48*pm, Jim Logajan > wrote:
> "Tim" <#__#@__.-> wrote:
> > "Dennis Fetters" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> > Gee Dennis, why does you IP address keep changing?
>
> He also appears to have undergone a severe personality change.

Really? I hadn't noticed that. Seems like the same old DF to me only
with a little more guts because he can now claim that it wasn't him.
Planemanman, only now with stealth IP.

[Barnyard BOb]

On Thu, 2 Apr 2009 16:36:54 -0500, "Tim" <#__#@__.-> wrote:


>>>You see- I have, in reserve, my own tactics for getting back at people,
>>>and many connections with people who will do things for me (and I for
>>>them.)
>>
>> REALLY?
>>
>> The day you closed up Revolution Helicopters forever in Excelsior
>> Springs, MO I still managed to make it through the only door that your
>> people didn't lock during what should have been normal business hours.
>>
>> I had your gal at the front desk go back to your office and request
>> that you come out and speak with me.....
>>
>> Guess what happened, Dennis?
>> NOTHING.
>> You wouldn't do it.
>>
>> I'm not saying you're a coward, but it sure doesn't square with the
>> brag and bluster you wrote above. :-)
>>
>>
>> - Barnyard BOb -
>
>
>I think you are replying to a forged post.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-

Heh,heh.

If I was actually replying to an imposter,
it is ABSOLUTELY IRONIC IN THE EXTREME!!!

In dealing with the real life Dennis Fetters, IMHO....
one was dealing at every turn with an IMPOSTER or
poser. I never viewed Dennis to be anything but one.

I could believe nothing where the Mini-500 was concerned.
Not from sales, not from engineering, not from ANYTHING!

Why did he go out of business?
IMHO, it was because he WAS a real life imposter! :-)

Hahahahahahaa...
WHAT SWEET FARKING IRONY!


Thanks for the heads up, Tim.
Be well.

Barnyard BOb

[Dennis Fetters]

On Thu, 02 Apr 2009 16:00:55 -0500, Barnyard BOb wrote:

> On Wed, 1 Apr 2009 16:56:40 -0400, Dennis Fetters
> > wrote:
>
>>That's because he knows that I am capable of the worst nightmares on his
>>putrid body.
>>
>>With all seriousness, I just want you to know that anybody who does
>>something like that to me would be in line for retribution with extreme
>>prejudice and without the slightest hesitation. I don't stop until I get
>>what I want when I'm motivated to be on the trail of anybody who stalks
>>me.
>>
>>You see- I have, in reserve, my own tactics for getting back at people,
>>and many connections with people who will do things for me (and I for
>>them.)
>
> REALLY?
>
> The day you closed up Revolution Helicopters forever in Excelsior
> Springs, MO I still managed to make it through the only door that your
> people didn't lock during what should have been normal business hours.
>
> I had your gal at the front desk go back to your office and request
> that you come out and speak with me.....
>
> Guess what happened, Dennis?
> NOTHING.
> You wouldn't do it.
>
> I'm not saying you're a coward, but it sure doesn't square with the
> brag and bluster you wrote above. :-)
>
> - Barnyard BOb -
>
> The more people I meet,
> the more I like my dog and
> George Carlin humor.
A story for you.

I once had a crazy bitch, for NO REASON, try to run me off of the road
(in town) with her Cadillac. There wasn't the slightest doubt in my
mind that it was intentional, since she kept moving over into my lane
even though I was honking and yelling. When we stopped at the next
light, I kicked in her passenger door. She didn't even look at me while
I was doing it. Some idiots passing by thought they'd come to her aid,
but I whipped out my buck knife and backslapped it open. They moved on.
I was so ****ed that it took several pitchers of beer down at the local
tavern to calm me down.

Understand?

[Dennis Fetters]

On Thu, 2 Apr 2009 09:11:04 -0400, Gezellig wrote:

> On Wed, 01 Apr 2009 19:50:59 -0700, Poultry in Motion wrote:
>
>> Jules wrote:
>>> How do I know for a fact he is an imposter????
>>
>> You can't.
>>
>> Names and emails mean nothing.
>> Jim caught the wrong IP Address in the message headers, which means
>> highly likely an impostor. Or it could have been posted to a private
>> forum that mirrors newsgroups, with the forum's administrator
>> substituting his own gibberish into IP address fields. IP Addresses
>> don't have to be included at all in message headers.
>>
>> The only thing that really means anything is when messages have the SAME
>> IP Address. Bingo, they originated from the same source.
>
> As long as source = ISP.

Mr. Knowitall, then tell me from which ISP I am now posting? Where am I
located, Einstein?

[Gezellig]

On Fri, 3 Apr 2009 08:33:21 -0400, Dennis Fetters wrote:

> On Thu, 2 Apr 2009 09:11:04 -0400, Gezellig wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 01 Apr 2009 19:50:59 -0700, Poultry in Motion wrote:
>>
>>> Jules wrote:
>>>> How do I know for a fact he is an imposter????
>>>
>>> You can't.
>>>
>>> Names and emails mean nothing.
>>> Jim caught the wrong IP Address in the message headers, which means
>>> highly likely an impostor. Or it could have been posted to a private
>>> forum that mirrors newsgroups, with the forum's administrator
>>> substituting his own gibberish into IP address fields. IP Addresses
>>> don't have to be included at all in message headers.
>>>
>>> The only thing that really means anything is when messages have the SAME
>>> IP Address. Bingo, they originated from the same source.
>>
>> As long as source = ISP.
>
> Mr. Knowitall, then tell me from which ISP I am now posting? Where am I
> located, Einstein?

Here's what I know about you, not what you ask since what you ask is
impossible to know. You're Dan Camper, troll, of alt.kooks.xxx infamy,
where you posted as Oneidas The Mad Hatter and several other nyms. You
now post as hummingbird to alt.computer.freeware where you are as a
known drive-by homosexual. You also post there as No One, No Whan and
Thomas Stevens (on many newsgroups) including Kat on rec.music.beatles,
alt.music.led-zeppelin.

How am I doing? :0)

You have led little jelly beans which aren't to hard to follow wherever
you go, openly admitting to your sensationless trolling. Would you like
me to continue?

Not only are you a racist, you're anti-Semitic as seen by your constant
harassment of Jews in particular Kinky Friedman.

With a slight bit of doubt, I can report that you are actually Chris
Millbank of London (area) UK where you post frequently to
uk.politics.misc as acacari.

Not bad, huh?

I did get a chunk of help from CNNNT :0)

Any questions?

[in limbo]

On Apr 2, 5:36*pm, "Tim" <#__#@__.-> wrote:
> "Barnyard BOb" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Wed, 1 Apr 2009 16:56:40 -0400, Dennis Fetters
> > > wrote:
>
> >>That's because he knows that I am capable of the worst nightmares on his
> >>putrid body.
>
> >>With all seriousness, I just want you to know that anybody who does
> >>something like that to me would be in line for retribution with extreme
> >>prejudice and without the slightest hesitation. I don't stop until I get
> >>what I want when I'm motivated to be on the trail of anybody who stalks
> >>me.
>
> >>You see- I have, in reserve, my own tactics for getting back at people,
> >>and many connections with people who will do things for me (and I for
> >>them.)
>
> > REALLY?
>
> > The day you closed up Revolution Helicopters forever in Excelsior
> > Springs, MO I still managed to make it through the only door that your
> > people didn't lock during what should have been normal business hours.
>
> > I had your gal at the front desk go back to your office and request
> > that you come out and speak with me.....
>
> > Guess what happened, Dennis?
> > NOTHING.
> > You wouldn't do it.
>
> > I'm not saying you're a coward, but it sure doesn't square with the
> > brag and bluster you wrote above. *:-)
>
> > - Barnyard BOb -
>
> I think you are replying to a forged post.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

That doesn't change the fact of what Barnyard Bob posted does it?

[Dennis Fetters]

Dennis Fetters wrote:

> On Thu, 02 Apr 2009 16:00:55 -0500, Barnyard BOb wrote:
>
>
>>On Wed, 1 Apr 2009 16:56:40 -0400, Dennis Fetters
> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>That's because he knows that I am capable of the worst nightmares on his
>>>putrid body.
>>>
>>>With all seriousness, I just want you to know that anybody who does
>>>something like that to me would be in line for retribution with extreme
>>>prejudice and without the slightest hesitation. I don't stop until I get
>>>what I want when I'm motivated to be on the trail of anybody who stalks
>>>me.
>>>
>>>You see- I have, in reserve, my own tactics for getting back at people,
>>>and many connections with people who will do things for me (and I for
>>>them.)
>>
>>REALLY?
>>
>>The day you closed up Revolution Helicopters forever in Excelsior
>>Springs, MO I still managed to make it through the only door that your
>>people didn't lock during what should have been normal business hours.
>>
>>I had your gal at the front desk go back to your office and request
>>that you come out and speak with me.....
>>
>>Guess what happened, Dennis?
>>NOTHING.
>>You wouldn't do it.
>>
>>I'm not saying you're a coward, but it sure doesn't square with the
>>brag and bluster you wrote above. :-)
>>
>>- Barnyard BOb -
>>
>>The more people I meet,
>>the more I like my dog and
>>George Carlin humor.
>
> A story for you.
>
> I once had a crazy bitch, for NO REASON, try to run me off of the road
> (in town) with her Cadillac. There wasn't the slightest doubt in my
> mind that it was intentional, since she kept moving over into my lane
> even though I was honking and yelling. When we stopped at the next
> light, I kicked in her passenger door. She didn't even look at me while
> I was doing it. Some idiots passing by thought they'd come to her aid,
> but I whipped out my buck knife and backslapped it open. They moved on.
> I was so ****ed that it took several pitchers of beer down at the local
> tavern to calm me down.
>
> Understand?

This is the post of the impostor.

[Dennis Fetters]

Dennis Fetters wrote:

> On Thu, 2 Apr 2009 09:11:04 -0400, Gezellig wrote:
>
>
>>On Wed, 01 Apr 2009 19:50:59 -0700, Poultry in Motion wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Jules wrote:
>>>
>>>>How do I know for a fact he is an imposter????
>>>
>>>You can't.
>>>
>>>Names and emails mean nothing.
>>>Jim caught the wrong IP Address in the message headers, which means
>>>highly likely an impostor. Or it could have been posted to a private
>>>forum that mirrors newsgroups, with the forum's administrator
>>>substituting his own gibberish into IP address fields. IP Addresses
>>>don't have to be included at all in message headers.
>>>
>>>The only thing that really means anything is when messages have the SAME
>>>IP Address. Bingo, they originated from the same source.
>>
>>As long as source = ISP.
>
>
> Mr. Knowitall, then tell me from which ISP I am now posting? Where am I
> located, Einstein?

This is a post from the impostor.

[Barnyard BOb]

On Thu, 02 Apr 2009 16:05:51 -0700, Dennis Fetters
> wrote:

>
>You are answering an impostor, fool.

The posts I've just inspected show you using Prodigy & Netscape 7.2.

Your imposter shows up as cnntp.org

Are these correct?

If calling me a fool makes you feel like a bigger man....
You don't have much of a life, son!. :-)

I'm a Johnny come lately and got blind sided.
So enjoy your moment of juvenile pseudo superiority.

>As you can imagine I was probably a little busy at the time and couldn't
>waste it with you... Looks like I was right, and glad I didn't.

Dennis, I imagine nothing. That would be YOUR bag!!!!!

You looked white as a sheet and scared to death to me.
If that's your idea of ' busy' and the only story you got...
stick with it, buddy.

Barnyard BOb