In . com " writes:

From: Paul W. Schleck on Wed, Sep 20 2006 3:14 pm


In "Herb" writes:

The sociopaths have run rrap, starting when Roger
showed up. If you take anything serious here, you need
to change your way of thinking. Roger changes things.
Wherever he shows up on the net, the parade of societal
misfits is not far behind him. If you want a near perfect
model of how to deal with the fruits & nuts here, you have
no furter to look than Dave Heil. Anyone who is a regular
reader here knows the depraved filth that Roger has hurled
at Dave Heil & his xyl. Watch how Dave responds, that is
when he choses to respond to Roger. Better yet, if you can't
stand the heat, get out of the kitchen and turn off rrap.
No one should let the crap here get to you, especially
vanilla comments like "who cares." You must have an
awful thin skin Paul.

Paul does. :-) On the other hand, he has stated that
he "enjoys" what goes on in here. shrug

You're really torturing my words into a misquote here. What I said to
you in private E-mail (circa-2004) was something to the effect of the
newsgroups are more enjoyable when there is a fair and respectful
exchange of ideas. So, could I "enjoy" this forum? Yes, but not in its
present state.

My exact message is archived off to backups. I can find it and post it
here if you want, otherwise feel free to post your copy of my E-mail.

One can also (if they have a strong stomach) read the
filthy blitherings of the USMC Imposter Steven James
Robeson towards just about anyone in here over several
years.

I'm not Steve Robeson. I'm happy to clarify that for you.

Since when is politely stating an obvious, face-value, and factual
rebuttal considered having an "awful thin skin?" I had an opinion on
the subject, intended mostly as an amplification of N2EY's comments, and
chose to express it. Addressing my comments to a wider audience, not
just the trolls, seemed appropriate.

That is remarkable naivete!

Mere words will not - repeat NOT - affect these trolls
and anony-mousies one bit. As long as they can (clearly)
get away with it, they will. QED for several years in
here. You should KNOW that by now.

As I noted in my previous followup, I was speaking to a wider audience,
some of whom expressed their agreement with me in further followups.

If words are useless in this forum, why do you continue to contribute
many, many such words?

I take the subjects of amateur radio and amateur radio policy seriously.
The fact that others do not should not be viewed as a poor reflection on
me.

It's a plain and simple fact that this newsgroup has long
since fallen in a sewer of filthy sayings by trolls, mis-
fits, anonymous cowards, and -horrors- identifiable
amateur radio callsign-holding "men!"

Not that you would ever stereotype, or overgeneralize the actions of a
few (and it truly is a very few) to a much larger population.

Furthermore, no one should have to remain silent just to meet some
arbitrary standard of newsgroup righteousness.

"Arbitrary standard of righteousness?!?"

Filth, hate, anger are "righteous?!?"

The newsgroup has turned into a Din of Inequity. We know it.
Everyone seems to know it. But Paul Schleck doesn't seem
to know that.

I was referring to Herb's admonishment that if I can't follow some sort
of strict protocol like that allegedly practiced by Dave Heil, then I
should just remain silent. I found his "standards of newsgroup
righteousness" to be arbitrary, and said so. Since Dave Heil has now
followed up to state that he agrees with me, this further suggests that
Herb was talking through his hat.

Under what other circumstances do you feel that I have failed to grasp
that we have problem users, trolls, etc., on this newsgroup? Please be
specific.

I know Dave Heil. I respect Dave Heil. I don't need to be a clone of
Dave Heil to express an opinion in this forum.

Tsk. A paraphrase of a Senator who lost an election is a
poor choice of words...

Actually, I believe both the late Senator and I were borrowing from the
rich heritage of the English language, including using iambic pacing and
short declarative sentences to build to a climactic finish, a technique
dating at least back to Shakespeare (e.g., "Friends! Romans!
Countrymen!" etc.).

Nevertheless, if you feel that I owe some credit to the Senator for my
wording above, I don't think it's fair to conclude that he was
unsuccessful, and thus not worth paraphrasing, because he ran in an
election that was substantially not his to lose (Hint: It was arguably
more the responsibility of the individual at the *top* of the ticket.)
Many would credit his statement as underscoring a specific perceived
weakness in the opposing ticket, one that arguably was successfully
exploited in his party's 1992 victory.

In addition to serving 4 terms as Senator, including re-election to the
office at the same time his running-mate for the *other* election lost,
his nomination to be Secretary of the Treasury was voted out of the
confirmation committee by acclimation (and standing applause). After
his death, following a long life and career, no one seems to have
anything bad to say about him. Except, apparently, you.

Nor does he need to be a clone of me.

Now THAT is ripe for discussion! [but, I digress...]


Paul, face the cold, hard, cruel facts. This newsgroup has
lost its purpose and meaning. Years ago. It's time to face
the facts that it needs to be dissolved. Or perhaps to be
shut down for an indefinite period.

For such a meaningless forum, where words have no effect, you have an
awful lot of words, and time to create those words. I've asked this
before, and will do so again now. What is the end-goal of your
continuing participation here?

Please be assured that there are ongoing plans to develop a better
(read: "Moderated") forum for amateur radio policy here on Usenet. As
I've gone on record in this newsgroup previously, watch for an
announcement sometime this fall.




--
Paul W. Schleck, K3FU

http://www.novia.net/~pschleck/
Finger for PGP Public Key