Hello fellow hams of rec.radio.*!

Please forgive the intrusion, just a quick heads up that the 2nd version of
the proposal to create a moderated UK amateur radio group has been
published.

Please point your newsreader at uk.net.news.config and join the debate. If
you are in favour of the group please post to the RFD thread saying as
much, neutral voters in uk.* like to see as much support as possible for a
proposal before they cast a YES vote.

The existing group, uk.radio.amateur, has been a beacon of trouble for many
years, as I'm sure most of you are aware. Indeed, most of you will have
witnessed spillover from that group to yours many times over the years,
with a couple of rra.* groups currently going through it now. It is hoped
that by introducing a moderated forum to uk.* for the hams to gather in
civilly that the heat will, over time, turn down and spillover will reduce.


Thanks for reading!

--
Stephen Thomas Cole // Sent from my iPhone

"Stephen Thomas Cole" wrote in message
...

The existing group, uk.radio.amateur, has been a beacon of trouble for
many
years, as I'm sure most of you are aware.

Untrue. It all started two years ago when you joined, sought advice which
was
freely given but you ignored, after which you started to pick on every real
radio
amateur in turn abd subject him to the most appalling offensive insults,
seemingly
to draw attention to yourself. May I remind you that you were visited by the
police
because you repeatedly accused me of sexual relations with sheep, after
which
you have made me the subject of a vituperative vendetta because I picked up
that you had been diagnosed as a narcissistic sociopath.

Others may care to look at the large number of ad hominem threads that STC
has fired
off at me in uk.radio.amateur in only the last 7 days as proof that he is
the creator of the
cess pit to which he alludes.

Indeed, most of you will have
witnessed spillover from that group to yours many times over the years,
with a couple of rra.* groups currently going through it now.

Actually, you are spilling over into four of them now.

It is hoped
that by introducing a moderated forum to uk.* for the hams to gather in
civilly that the heat will, over time, turn down and spillover will
reduce.

There is no spillover as you put it, to discuss antennae matters in rraa or
homebrew
activities in rrah. I suspect that you refer to it as spillover because you
lack any
form of technical interest or acumen, evidenced by your jumping in with glee
into the spillover in order to contribute your own special brand of
infantile
behaviour, but never at any time making a technical contribution.

As to reducing the heat, it has been pointed out to you many times over that
if you
alone were to stop posting in ura, then peace would return,

On Thu, 30 Oct 2014 08:23:48 +0000, gareth wrote:


As to reducing the heat, it has been pointed out to you many times over
that if you alone were to stop posting in ura, then peace would return,

Oh, the irony.

On 30/10/14 07:00, Stephen Thomas Cole wrote:

Hello fellow hams of rec.radio.*!

Please forgive the intrusion, just a quick heads up that the 2nd version of
the proposal to create a moderated UK amateur radio group has been
published.

Please point your newsreader at uk.net.news.config and join the debate. If
you are in favour of the group please post to the RFD thread saying as
much, neutral voters in uk.* like to see as much support as possible for a
proposal before they cast a YES vote.

It would not be unreasonable to point out that Molly Mockford, a member
of the UK Usenet managing committee but speaking for herself, said this
during the discussion in uk.net.news.config:

"Canvassing in *irrelevant* forums would still be frowned upon; but you
cannot canvass unless there is a vote, and we are nowhere near that
stage yet. Re-posting a ballot form anywhere at all was strictly
forbidden, but these days nobody could possibly cast a vote using such a
re-posted ballot form as the system would not permit it. Alerting
people who have a clear and relevant interest to an ongoing discussion
is the natural and appropriate thing to do"

It is difficult to see from where the members of this group would find a
'clear and relevant interest'.

--
Spike

"The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in the insidious encroachment by
men of zeal, well meaning but without understanding" Louis D. Brandeis

On 10/30/2014 10:04 AM, Spike wrote:
On 30/10/14 07:00, Stephen Thomas Cole wrote:

Hello fellow hams of rec.radio.*!

Please forgive the intrusion, just a quick heads up that the 2nd
version of
the proposal to create a moderated UK amateur radio group has been
published.

Please point your newsreader at uk.net.news.config and join the
debate. If
you are in favour of the group please post to the RFD thread saying as
much, neutral voters in uk.* like to see as much support as possible
for a
proposal before they cast a YES vote.

It would not be unreasonable to point out that Molly Mockford, a member
of the UK Usenet managing committee but speaking for herself, said this
during the discussion in uk.net.news.config:

"Canvassing in *irrelevant* forums would still be frowned upon; but you
cannot canvass unless there is a vote, and we are nowhere near that
stage yet. Re-posting a ballot form anywhere at all was strictly
forbidden, but these days nobody could possibly cast a vote using such a
re-posted ballot form as the system would not permit it. Alerting
people who have a clear and relevant interest to an ongoing discussion
is the natural and appropriate thing to do"

It is difficult to see from where the members of this group would find a
'clear and relevant interest'.


There are a lot of us reading these newsgroups - and are interested in a
moderated group.

Of course, you don't point out how much you are railing AGAINST the RFD
and are doing your best to quash it.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry, AI0K

==================

On 30/10/14 14:23, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 10/30/2014 10:04 AM, Spike wrote:

It would not be unreasonable to point out that Molly Mockford, a member
of the UK Usenet managing committee but speaking for herself, said this
during the discussion in uk.net.news.config:

"Canvassing in *irrelevant* forums would still be frowned upon; but you
cannot canvass unless there is a vote, and we are nowhere near that
stage yet. Re-posting a ballot form anywhere at all was strictly
forbidden, but these days nobody could possibly cast a vote using such a
re-posted ballot form as the system would not permit it. Alerting
people who have a clear and relevant interest to an ongoing discussion
is the natural and appropriate thing to do"

It is difficult to see from where the members of this group would find a
'clear and relevant interest'.

There are a lot of us reading these newsgroups - and are interested in a
moderated group.

You already have one, so why don't you go and use it? It's merely a
blogfest at the moment.

Of course, you don't point out how much you are railing AGAINST the RFD
and are doing your best to quash it.

I haven't seen any cogent arguments for it, and the lack of support has
doubtless led to this inappropriate thread being started,

--
Spike

"The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in the insidious encroachment by
men of zeal, well meaning but without understanding" Louis D. Brandeis

On 10/30/2014 11:03 AM, Spike wrote:
On 30/10/14 14:23, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 10/30/2014 10:04 AM, Spike wrote:

It would not be unreasonable to point out that Molly Mockford, a member
of the UK Usenet managing committee but speaking for herself, said this
during the discussion in uk.net.news.config:

"Canvassing in *irrelevant* forums would still be frowned upon; but you
cannot canvass unless there is a vote, and we are nowhere near that
stage yet. Re-posting a ballot form anywhere at all was strictly
forbidden, but these days nobody could possibly cast a vote using such a
re-posted ballot form as the system would not permit it. Alerting
people who have a clear and relevant interest to an ongoing discussion
is the natural and appropriate thing to do"

It is difficult to see from where the members of this group would find a
'clear and relevant interest'.

There are a lot of us reading these newsgroups - and are interested in a
moderated group.

You already have one, so why don't you go and use it? It's merely a
blogfest at the moment.

Of course, you don't point out how much you are railing AGAINST the RFD
and are doing your best to quash it.

I haven't seen any cogent arguments for it, and the lack of support has
doubtless led to this inappropriate thread being started,


No, you haven't seen what you think are any cogent arguments for it
because you just don't want the group. So, rather than let the hams
have the moderated group we want, you try to quash it.

And then you try to dissuade people in other groups from even discussing
it or calling attention to it, without telling people you're against it.
So much for any credibility you might have ever had.

As to other moderated newsgroups - completely immaterial to the RFD.
But that again is something you refuse to recognize.

Now please top polluting our newsgroups with your tripe.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry, AI0K

==================

On 30/10/2014 08:34, Clod's Conscience wrote:
On Thu, 30 Oct 2014 08:23:48 +0000, gareth wrote:


As to reducing the heat, it has been pointed out to you many times over
that if you alone were to stop posting in ura, then peace would return,

Oh, the irony.


It isn't irony, it is simply untrue.

The problems in uk.r.a date back to long before STC start posting, they
existed long before I start posting over a decade ago. They started in
the late 90s when Evans started posting. A look in the archive of uk.r.a
will confirm this.

Likewise, r.r.a.a was fine until he started stirring it up with his
nonsense, now it is heading the same way as uk.r.a

I see he is now trying to spread HIS mayhem to r.r.a.boatanchors

If he is ignored, then people in these groups can stop him. BUT they
must no respond to him. Just ignore his posts. Let him rant and he will
get bored and find another, non-amateur, group to torment.

"Brian Reay" wrote in message
...
The problems in uk.r.a date back to long before STC start posting, they
existed long before I start posting over a decade ago. They started in the
late 90s when Evans started posting. A look in the archive of uk.r.a will
confirm this.

Untrue. If such behaviour started at any time, it was with your own arrival
when you starting posting personal insults that some people were dog
turds on the beach.

There were no such offensive personal remarks before you arrived on
the scene.

Likewise, r.r.a.a was fine until he started stirring it up with his
nonsense, now it is heading the same way as uk.r.a

Just because you don't understand the technical issues that I was
raising does not make them nonsense. But, as to stirring it up, may
I refer you to the numerous ad hominem and out-of-the-blue
personal attacks that you made against me recently in rraa? I post only
technical
issues. It is down to others, such as yourself, to reduce the NG to a
cesspit.

I see he is now trying to spread HIS mayhem to r.r.a.boatanchors

What on earth are you smoking today?

If he is ignored, then people in these groups can stop him. BUT they must
no respond to him. Just ignore his posts. Let him rant and he will
get bored and find another, non-amateur, group to torment.

Regrettably the only ranting comes from you in this disgraceful and
unwarranted personal attack from you.

On 30/10/2014 17:06, gareth wrote:


Regrettably the only ranting comes from you in this disgraceful and
unwarranted personal attack from you.



Lies, lies and more lies from the biggest and most destructive internet
troll in the UK, Gareth Alun Evans.

--
Collecting Bitcoins for my Pension
Please send BTC to 1kZKQMvVPce11u7xG1KbArtrAenuxdZue
I thank you!