Leaving Usnet Groups, Bye

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 05 May 2005 18:46:57 GMT, "Dudley Henriques"
dhenriques@noware .net wrote:

I would assume since I have never posted initially to you, that you and I
have nothing in common. Whether I respond or don't respond is no biggie
I'm
sure for either one of us. I have simply chosen to respond this time.
Trust me, as soon as this exchange has ended, I will revert back to my
policy of not posting to anything you have to say on Usenet, and if we
ever
"meet" again on this group, it will be because you again did as you have
done here; which is to post to me. At that time I'll again make a decision
whether or not I wish to deal with you.
But you're right about one thing. Nothing in the way of useful information
will ever pass between us, so I agree that nothing is lost.
DH


Why do you always use 150 words when about 15 will accomplish the
task?

Bye! How's this?

On Thu, 05 May 2005 19:28:44 GMT, "Dudley Henriques"
dhenriques@noware .net wrote:


wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 05 May 2005 18:46:57 GMT, "Dudley Henriques"
dhenriques@noware .net wrote:

I would assume since I have never posted initially to you, that you and I
have nothing in common. Whether I respond or don't respond is no biggie
I'm
sure for either one of us. I have simply chosen to respond this time.
Trust me, as soon as this exchange has ended, I will revert back to my
policy of not posting to anything you have to say on Usenet, and if we
ever
"meet" again on this group, it will be because you again did as you have
done here; which is to post to me. At that time I'll again make a decision
whether or not I wish to deal with you.
But you're right about one thing. Nothing in the way of useful information
will ever pass between us, so I agree that nothing is lost.
DH


Why do you always use 150 words when about 15 will accomplish the
task?

Bye! How's this?



Better.

Dudley Henriques wrote:

Taken in context, the word
"spoonfeeding" as you have used it can indicate a deficiency on the part
of the receiver of the communication.

Or the medium. Try eating soup with a fork, for example.

- Andrew

Dudley Henriques wrote:


The first thing you learn in flying is NEVER to put much faith in general
analogies. They don't work for various reasons.
On Usenet, the old "ignore them" analogy usually ends up right back out
here on Usenet, being laid out by someone for someone else, as nothing
more than absolute proof that the analogy doesn't work in the first place.
:-)
No my friend....unfortunately it's man's basic flaws and individual
personalities that will determine how communication is carried out on
Usenet, not the old "ignore um" analogy.
But it sounds good anyway :-)))))

Dudley Henriques


Dudley,

When you use the word "analogy" do you mean, like, "rule of thumb" or
"method"?

Just asking.

--
Saville

Replicas of 15th-19th century nautical navigational instruments:

http://home.comcast.net/~saville/backstaffhome.html

Restoration of my 82 year old Herreshoff S-Boat sailboat:

http://home.comcast.net/~saville/SBOATrestore.htm

Steambending FAQ with photos:

http://home.comcast.net/~saville/Steambend.htm

"Andrew Gideon" wrote in message
online.com...
Dudley Henriques wrote:

Taken in context, the word
"spoonfeeding" as you have used it can indicate a deficiency on the part
of the receiver of the communication.

Or the medium. Try eating soup with a fork, for example.

- Andrew

True.

All the more the need for the simple approach like that ridiculous looking
little emoticon :-). So simple....so effective. No mistakes. Says it all
mood and tone wise all in a simple key hit! Occam's Razor at it's finest!
:-))
Dudley

"gregg" wrote in message
...
Dudley Henriques wrote:


The first thing you learn in flying is NEVER to put much faith in general
analogies. They don't work for various reasons.
On Usenet, the old "ignore them" analogy usually ends up right back out
here on Usenet, being laid out by someone for someone else, as nothing
more than absolute proof that the analogy doesn't work in the first
place.
:-)
No my friend....unfortunately it's man's basic flaws and individual
personalities that will determine how communication is carried out on
Usenet, not the old "ignore um" analogy.
But it sounds good anyway :-)))))

Dudley Henriques


Dudley,

When you use the word "analogy" do you mean, like, "rule of thumb" or
"method"?

Just asking.

--
Saville

Sorry. I can't imagine you "just asking" me anything, and I have no desire
or need to get into definitions with you. Make it whatever you like.

"Dave A." wrote

Snippage of a fine bit of wisdom

ignoring the knuckleheads "phone calls" is the first step to getting
something from usenet besides a headache.

Some of the best thoughts I have seen. Keep it up!
--
Jim in NC

So once again, lighten up. You'll live longer. And don't waste your
time and bandwidth on what you call "Henriques Usenet hints". I'm
sure to ignore them.

But thanks anyway, for the offer.

It is a real shame that dudley does not have a personality to go with his
experience on the subject of aviation. I had a few run-ins with him a few
years ago, starting from a comment that was in no way deserving of the
response he gave. Take it from me - ignore him when he goes off, or just
kill-file him. His approach will not change, and you are only an inferior
pimple on his ass to be eliminated, as far as he is concerned.
--
Jim in NC

On Thu, 05 May 2005 04:00:27 GMT, "Dudley Henriques"
dhenriques@noware .net wrote:


"Roger" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 02 May 2005 16:08:12 GMT, "Dudley Henriques"
dhenriques@noware .net wrote:

Actually, being retired, I really never give it a thought either way since
I
won't be flying again. It's apparently only a big deal for a few specific
morons on Usenet. My family, my friends, my professional associates past
and
present, and indeed even my country's government at the highest level seem
to be quite happy with things just the way they are.
Only on Usenet will one find the idiots an issue like this one will
attract.

Oh, they exist IRL as well, but they can't hide behind anonymous
signatures so they are less prone to expressing themselves. It's far
more hazardous there. :-)) So they tend to talk among themselves
where they might find some one who will listen.

Yep, true enough, but believe it or not, (maybe I'm some kind of exception),
but most of the people I've known professionally were straight shooters.
Of course a lot of the people I've known in aviation worked daily in it's
most dangerous environment. When you work in this arena, you have a tendency

As most know from my sig I'm also a Ham (Amateur Radio Operator). I
built my own tower and still do some tower climbing at my age. Early
on in life I was a farmer, but gave that up a bit after turning 21 as
I figured there had to be a better way to make a living, or at least
more to my liking without getting

As to that 97' tower in the back yard, I still do my own maintenance
and make at least half a dozen trips to the top for no other reason
than to take a panoramic photo of the entire area. It drives the
color balance on the digital cameras nuts. But, at any rate I go up
and stand on the tower top plate to shoot the photos.
(Yes, I do use safety equipment). I had one on the web but at 68 megs
it didn't get a lot of viewing, but now that there are a lot more high
speed connections I may just put a new one up.

(Joyce put her foot down and I no longer climb for others or for hire.
I don't even carry insurance any more so no one would hire me anyway.)

I've also done a lot of photography and shot the Michigan Professional
Road Rally two years running. I spent nearly an hour strapped onto a
heli shooting down two trackers with a pilot who was also a crop
duster. I have some shots where I couldn't zoom back far enough to
get anything other than the driver's face in the windshield.

Joyce sat in the middle, changing film for me. When the pilot found
that neither of us were bothered by the motion, nor scared, he let "er
all hang out. :-)) That was the most fun I ever had flying (when I
wasn't the pilot)

to learn early on what's important and what isn't important in life. The

Which is my point with all of the above. All would be considered
risky (yes they do contain varying amounts of risk) and the unknowing,
general public and press would probably call it a number of things I
wouldn't. All are environments where a mistake can lead to some very
unpleasant consequences.

All involve trust. You can't have trust when there is back stabbing
and nit picking going on. Then again, how many of the general public
would climb a 100' radio tower to shoot photos of a sunset, or get on
the skid of a helicopter to shoot photos of race cars on a sand trail
in the woods. BTW, It took a week for some of the welts to go away
from the tree branches. I did get swatted a few times.

When we were waiting to the Heli a TV crew was getting ready to go
out. That they really didn't want to go was quite evident. Joyce
mentioned that they'd be able to get much better shots if they took
the door off. The cameraman said that if she found someone crazy
enough to do that he'd let him use the camera. She said, "Ask the
little, ball headed guy over there", but they flew and shot with the
door on.

I should put some of the shots up on my page. It was a three day
event and I shot from both the air and ground.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

back stabbing and nit picking found at almost every level of the outside
professional work place for the most part doesn't exist with these people.
For the most part, it's a no nonsense, performance based world, and bull
**** walks there faster than any place else I've been to in my life.
Sort of the opposite of Usenet I guess :-))
Dudley

Andrew, check your settings. I believe that you are posting in HTML,
instead of the preferred plan text.
--
Jim in NC