I love Jim Campbell

Sydney Hoeltzli wrote:

pac plyer wrote:

I look at RAH just like a busy intercity freeway.

Pac, with respect, I think this analogy is flawed...

The function of a newsgroup is to exchange information.

I think both of you are wrong. (Actually I think both of you are right, but
saying so is not in the usenet tradition).

The function of the newsgroup is primarily entertainment. Most use it for
that. Occasionally someone needs an answer to a question, and usually it
gets answered quickly. Then either the thread drifts into something
completely unrelated but more engaging to the rabble (this thread, for
example), or folks start up a more entertaining thread with nothing to do
with anything important (see BWB's trolls).


***
Mike

pacplyer

I don't mind some one taking issue with me. On occasion they prove me
wrong and I have to change.

What torques me is the filthy language some use. It sounds like the
truckers on the Citizens Band in vehicles. I stopped listening and
took the radio out of my car because I didn't want my family to have
to listen to that crap and if I had a customer in my car it sure
didn't help me make any sale of my product/service.

So cut the 'crap' and lets have an interchange of ideas, good , bad or
indifferent.

Big John

Still working on my kill file to 'plonk' those I don't want to listen
to.



On 5 Aug 2003 02:36:56 -0700, (pac plyer) wrote:

Big John wrote:

Pacplyer

I have 'plonked' BWB but all of 'you' keep including his filth in your
posts back to him. Have you ever used the insert "----clip----"? I'm
sure he knows what he wrote so you telling him back in your reply is
redundant.
Big John,

Pac sez:

Your points are valid John and I apologize to all for my cargo dog
language, and for reposting the same by responding to same. But
Usenet is the wild, wild west of the internet and it may just happen
again. Sorry in advance when I, or others cuss up a storm about
something we feel passionate about. :-\

All,

I look at RAH just like a busy intercity freeway. People who are
anonymous in their automobiles do things they never would consider
doing to others face to face in a social setting. They flip the bird
when they get cut off, and then, they swerve with no blinkers in front
of a slow vehicle in the fast lane to get even. Again, that's not
how these people act when they get out of their automobiles. That's
not how they act to those they know, or have just met at the store. I
don't attack them at the filling station to get even. No harm, no
foul.

RAH is identical in almost every way except one: No structure, other
than the regular's sharp reprisals exist to put a wild driver into
question. When a Charlatan gets exposed, he usually fires a parting
shot and leaves. Or when a person has no depth of character, or
nothing memorable to say he usually seeks an anonymous cloak and
nit-picks the others about being off-topic, uncivil, or turns into a
spellchecker. :-( That's life on the freeway: you have great drivers
and then you have Helen Keller. Granted, in this analogy, BWB is
nothing less than the terminator in a runaway Peterbuilt. If we can
just re-program his prime directive, we would have one hell of a
writer on our hands again. Be patient. It's either that or we'll
just have to kill him. ;-) (mass injections of Muzzleloader come to
mind. But save some for me, I have yet to sample this fine sounding
cure-all.)

Now for my pet peeve about all of you: I do not accept the
on-topic/off-topic outlook many of you have for RAH. It is not a
place in cyberspace confined only to the demands of newbies that want
free homebuilding information. RAH is our home, and I consider all of
you my friends. I've been reading you for years and I feel as if I
know all of you. Yes even that "Alpha Hotel" I had to flame the other
day! :-# As long as RAH remains 100% unmoderated, I will enjoy it
and hang out here. :-)

Back to net-rage. On the real road, the state maintains a hugely
expensive police force to stop this behavior, but it doesn't put a
dent in the road rage problem. All it does is fill up donut shops
with cops who, understandably, don't want to deal with it.

We have a lot of road rage at RAH. With total freedom of expression
in play, and a large population of people driving around with fake
license plates, feathers are going to get ruffled. But tolerating a
bunch of Netcops in our presence is not the answer.

Instead of dictating or trying to change all of your behavior...
Maybe, if for example: I developed a little thicker skin when someone
said I was full of Methane, I could just accept him/her for what
she/he is: a ****ing moron... whoops: withdrawn! (hey, lawyers get
away with that!) strike that from the record; I meant: a different
mentally developed individual than myself. ;-)

Someone (perhaps a colleague,) once alluded that, my posts "didn't
ring true." If I'd of have a thicker skin, maybe I wouldn't have felt
compelled to flame his sorry ass to the ground... but boy, I must
confess, he deserved it and it sure felt Gooooood! I have since kinda
regretted it (But the ******* asked for it, right?) O.K, O.K. it was
wrong.

But Ladies and Gentlemen, RAH is GA, and GA IS inherently dangerous.
We just lost two pilots in experimentals in our area last month. If
you can't suffer a little criticism or overlook the faults of
professional pilots and builders with experience, then you don't
belong in the sky.

pacplyer - out

On 5 Aug 2003 11:07:57 -0700, (pac plyer) wrote:

(Corky Scott) wrote:

pac plyer, just because you can do what many do doesn't mean you
should. If everyone ignored the rules of the road we'd have anarchy
and no one would be safe unless driving an armored car. And only then
until everyone else got one too. reasonable stuff snipped
Corky Scott

Pac sez:

Actually Corky, that's really not true. "Everyone" in many third
world countries does ignore all the rules of the road. They ride in
the same kind of cars that you and I do, and because speeds are so
gridlocked due to ignoring stoplights and roadsigns, the fatality
rate, while attmittedly worse than the U.S. is acceptable to them.

Hmmm, "acceptable to them." Did you ask them? Just because they
suffer a higher fatality rate than the U. S., with (I'm guessing)
fewer cars doesn't mean they think it's acceptable. It may be a fact
of life but that doesn't mean they think it's ok.

Anyway, I still suggest that the best response to an unacceptable
comment is silence.

Corky Scott

On Tue, 05 Aug 2003 09:19:36 -0500, Big John
wrote:

Bob

BWB never touched a Nuc weapon. They had programs that screened out
kooks like him.

Big John
Point of the sword


Big John,

I knew Bill as far back as those days. We were in a lab in Las Vegas
at the time, and also flew a lot together. I too doubt that Bill ever
"touched" a nuke. Why in the **** would he want to do that? He was
not a 'kook', and was not 'screened out'. Like me, he had an AEC "Q"
clearance. Maybe he still does. This is a Top Seceret clearance, and
his badge showed that he had access to a lot more areas than mine.
Thought you might be interested.

Regards,

O-ring Seals

On Tue, 05 Aug 2003 20:47:39 GMT, (O-ring
Seals) wrote:

On Tue, 05 Aug 2003 09:19:36 -0500, Big John
wrote:

Bob

BWB never touched a Nuc weapon. They had programs that screened out
kooks like him.

Big John
Point of the sword


Big John,

I knew Bill as far back as those days. We were in a lab in Las Vegas
at the time, and also flew a lot together. I too doubt that Bill ever
"touched" a nuke. Why in the **** would he want to do that? He was
not a 'kook', and was not 'screened out'. Like me, he had an AEC "Q"
clearance. Maybe he still does. This is a Top Seceret clearance, and
his badge showed that he had access to a lot more areas than mine.
Thought you might be interested.

Regards,

O-ring Seals
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Like I stated earlier, Big John...

BWB is not quite that simple a case.
You have just flunked BWB 101.


Barnyard BOb -

Sydney Hoeltzli wrote
The function of a newsgroup is to exchange information.

Pac sez: (note, too tired to use a spell checker on this one.)

Good post Sydney. No Snowbird, I agree with Mike (just what is a
Nafod anyway?) :-) and Bob Reid on this one. The current function of
a newsgroup is really multi-faceted: its entertainment and
socializing, interupted by galactically stupid questions from mere
mortals that have nothing better to do than interupt our fine
conversations... he, he. ;-) But seriously, newbies simply need to
phrase things in the form of a respectful question, some old fart with
massive background in exactly that area may be lurking and will
accomplish that sharing of info function you mentioned. If no one
answers, keep trying or call EAA.

snip good stuff
As such,
it functions more like a small town or a local community than a
"busy intercity freeway". People need to get to know whose advice
is generally sound and what other people's personal tics are.
Some meet IRL and break bread together. The topics of conversations
may vary, and a certain amount of off-topic stuff is inevitable,
but some kind of social compact is necessary for the group
to be able to serve its intended function. You allude to this
yourself. snip

Can't argue with that. There's a lot of on-ramps and off-ramps and
you can access any part of it your heart desires.


Suppose they happened to have gobs of experience flying and building,
well, what good does it do anyone if instead of sharing it, they
spend all their time and energy picking fights and being disruptive?
Other experienced people are unable to share their experience or get
disgusted by the atmosphere and leave. snip

You and Bill have issues to be sure. Time to realize that RAH is not
real. Why any day now Google's going to get a brass-tacks DBA manager
who going to start eyeballing all that "unused" RAH storage space.
And you know what? Those old posts are going to just go up in smoke,
just like some of the old pre-Deja news stuff did. Why don't you two
just bury the hatchet?

My point is, and perhaps I mistake you, you seem to be on the
one hand pointing out that there's no mechanism to edit content
other than the "social compact" as it were -- individual choice
to either post a "sharp reprisal" or to refuse to associate
with an individual by killfiling them, and the sum of such
individual choices. snip

What's important to specify is that the "regulars" at least in this
group, have, and in some cases continue to cheat death on a regular
basis, in many cases for years on end. They have a greater breadth of
background, say than someone who buys a helo for cash and assumes that
the FAA is capable of watching over this highly questionable
experimental offering. For one of the regulating regulars like BWB to
point out "you're going to be a long time dead if you fly that thing"
is ten times more valuable to a homebuilder then a hundred flowery
writeups in the "Zoom Tunes Review" that are later reversed.

snip
And you're right.

But, on the other hand, you seem to be criticizing Dan and
"Big John" for pretty much doing as you say -- making a "sharp
reprisal" against some stuff they don't like. If it's a "free
newsgroup" where anything goes, aren't you playing "Netcop"
yourself by critiquing them?
snip snip

Yeah, I just don't feel language or style is worthy of a witch hunt.
Now if someone claims their new helo is flawless, and others know
otherwise, that's different and disservant of sharp reprisal.

Syd, I know you got burned pretty bad by the terminator and his new
model. Third degree burns and all. Sorry. But thats not going to
kill you. IMHO most of you need to be more like a duck: let that old
water roll right down your back. From where I sit, the profanity
issue is just not high on the list of what's wrong with aviation in
America. John is a gentleman, and to him it's outrageous. The same
is true with Dan (my appol. Dan if your reading this.) Bill, however,
is a pirate in real life and on the net. To me, the diversity of the
group is what makes it rich.

Bill made some great posts Once Upon a Time. Like, more than
4 years ago. It seems pretty clear to me he's no longer willing
or able to do so. Just how much "reckless driving" does your
community tolerate from someone who used to be a contributing
citizen? Do you believe in fairy tales?

Well, in the Philippines, we all drink and drive and race all the
time, and no pilot has ever really gotten hurt. RAH is a frontier.
So, my answer is, do what I did for six years in the frontier: prop a
beer up on the dashboard, and if you spill the damn thing, pull over,
shut it down and catch a jeepney. BWB's been running you guys off the
road and spilling beer on the dashboard for some time. When he gets
this drinking and driving thing out of his system, like I did, I wager
he will return to the old radioactive personality he used to be. In
the mean time it really wouldn't hurt if you appologized to him for
being such a know-it-all all the time. (costs nothing, even if its not
true.) ;-)

Best regards from Captain Know-it-All himself,

pacplyer - over and out

(Corky Scott) wrote:
snip

Hmmm, "acceptable to them." Did you ask them? Just because they
suffer a higher fatality rate than the U. S., with (I'm guessing)
fewer cars doesn't mean they think it's acceptable. It may be a fact
of life but that doesn't mean they think it's ok.

Pac sez:

Yes I did on many many occations. Lived there six years. In fact I
married one of them. I was trying for about three years to convince
them how bad things were compared to the U.S.(no seat belts, no
guardrails, bridges collapsing, ferries sinking with all aboard,
high-speed head-ons, unmarked trenches accross the road in the
dark..etc) But due to overpopulation, it started dawning on me that
human life has very little value there. I would point out the carnage
(sp?) and they would just smile and say, "its the Philippines sir, God
will protect us." So, I just gave up. Incidentally, they have ten
times the number of cars there we do per highway mile. Trust me, you
had to see it to believe it.



Anyway, I still suggest that the best response to an unacceptable
comment is silence.

Corky Scott

Yes, I do believe you are right Corky. I have enjoyed your measured
restraint and knowledge for many years.

Best Regards,

pacplyer

Like me, he had an AEC "Q"
clearance. Maybe he still does. This is a Top Seceret clearance

Tot to put too fine a point on this, but Q was AEC and Top Secret was DOD and
nary the twain would meet.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

On Mon, 04 Aug 2003 14:16:09 -0500, Big John
wrote:

pac plyer

----clip----

If you are tired of reading a
particular poster's style... then killfile .. filter him out.

----clip----

pacplyer! - out!

Pacplyer

I have 'plonked' BWB but all of 'you' keep including his filth in your
posts back to him. Have you ever used the insert "----clip----"? I'm
sure he knows what he wrote so you telling him back in your reply is
redundant.

Depending on your news reader, just mark the thread to be ignored.
That is a real handy feature of agent.

For some reason I turned on "read all messages" instead of just the
unread ones. (I think it was to find the beginning of some thread),
but anyways... I discovered threads still running that I had marked
"ignore" over 6 months ago. LOL


I have been looking for a program that will eliminate any quote of a
individual after I 'plonk' him but haven't found one yet.

I just plonk the thread. Usually once it reaches the point where I
want to get rid of a poster I am about ready to get rid of the thread
as well.

Due to the variations of news readers and the way posters quote, or
use quotes it'd be almost impossible to program a filter to remove the
quoted text from just a specific poster when it is included.

snip


snip
If you want 'filth' on the News Group, then I can forward some of the
porno spam I get every day in my mail box, so you will have something
to read when BWB isn't posting. Let me know.

I have my e-mail set to display as text only so I never see any of
those any more. Just about 15 adds for Viagra and another 15 or so
that I know what I'd find if I did turn on HTML. :-))
Oh, and the 5 or 10, or 20 get rich quick schemes and the 4 or 5 South
African scams and variations there of. Oh, and another 10 for a
process that's supposed to help those who feel nature has left them at
a disadvantage. :-))

Actually most of that stuff gets filtered to a [junk mail] folder
where I just check it for false positives about once a week, which is
about as often as I check the return address I use for posting.
Sooo...if any one e-mails me direct off the newsgroups, I will answer,
but it may take a while. So, I still only see about 5 or 6 spam a day
unless I go count the ones that are automatically filtered out.

I used the one address since 96 and never had more than 5 or 6 spam
per day on average. Then about two months ago the flood gates opened
and it went to 60. Now it's back down to about 30 and slowly getting
less since I disabled HTML. Prior to two months ago, I could never
figure out why people were complaining about so much spam.

Roger Halstead (K8RI EN73 & ARRL Life Member)
www.rogerhalstead.com
N833R World's oldest Debonair? (S# CD-2)


Have a nice day and fly safe.

Big John

snip

You do not have to rise to the bait, you can ignor. In fact, the
worst possible punishment for bad net behavior is to completely ignor
the comments of obvious trolls.


I remember how well that worked in one particular instance.

Roger

Corky Scott

Roger Halstead (K8RI EN73 & ARRL Life Member)
www.rogerhalstead.com
N833R World's oldest Debonair? (S# CD-2)