wrote:
Depends on what is meant by "balanced". Does it mean that there
must be a certain number from each license class, with the standards
lowered for some and raised for others to make sure that numerical
"balance" is achieved no matter what?

And remember that "balanced" also means balanced ages,
balanced sexes, balanced races, balanced IQs, balanced
educations, ...
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

"Cecil Moore" wrote:

And remember that "balanced" also means balanced ages,
balanced sexes, balanced races, balanced IQs, balanced
educations, ...

I asked a question in news.groups.proposals as to exactly what the
correlation was between someone's ham radio license class and their ability
to effectively moderate a USENET newsgroup.

Nobody came up with a suitable response, thus, I have to conclude there *IS*
no relationship between the two.

I'll still wait for a suitable answer, logically presented, at which time I
reserve the right to change my opinion.

From every posting I've seen, it appears to me that those who object the
loudest to the proposed moderation team are those who seem to have a
deep-seated bias/hatred of extra-class hams and the ARRL in general.

73
kh6hz

wrote:

...

N2EY:

So, you are looking for information ...

Well, Paul W. Schleck is a politician, he can say one thing and do
another, simple really, you see it all the time. The moderation groups
intention is to stop all board discussion on amateur radio and only
support the wishes and steerage of a relatively few hams--especially
those of a certain group of extra class license holders. They mean to
keep the old class system, established on morse, in effect.

You do not need to listen to the lies to know the truth I have stated
above, you only need to watch their actions ...

one-hundred-and-seventy-four-postings? Geesh, I must be getting old,
when I was younger I would have quadrupled that number by now--just
demonstrates the necessity for recruiting new blood in here!

By "balance", I mean the group of moderators should represent the true
"picture" of all amateurs. The moderators composed of all extras is a
DEAD GIVEAWAY it does not--that seems a simple enough concept to grasp,
to me.

Now on crude, vulgar, posts on sexual preference, and completely "off
base" posts--we agree. At least that pleases me to no end. NEVER ALLOW
THEM!

Seems we agree on "friendly" posts which might miss the topic by a point
or two, pose no one an attack and simply do no harm. This pleases me,
our agreement they SHOULD be tolerated.

However, you darn well know there are many extras who DO attempt to be
"Lord" over the "peasant" tech-holding-no-coders. That is a damn lie.
Posts which have gone here before more than support that. I am sure
anyone reading this has memories of those posts.

Seems we can also agree, the public airwaves are just that, public.
Methods and means need to found and implemented to place these back into
the hands of Joe Blow Public--where they belong ...

Now, as to Paul, he has consistantly shown real "political talents", he
simply promises all things to everyone. In the end you get a moderation
group of Paul and his henchmen--that is SLICK!!! And, I am sure the
techs are thrilled. I don't even think the generals appreciate that
much ... You know as well as I, Paul imagines his little robo-guard on
duty, armed with ip addys, newsserver ips and names, just ready to
killfile posts from those NOT supporting their ideas. Close your eyes,
you can see it to--called "human conspiracy." That bunch would allow
Len in to point out their faulty thinking about as willingly as I would
live with a rattlesnake! There is much truth in Lens' posting,
sometimes they are just a bit cryptic and it has to be "dug" for.
However, those he points 'em at are so blinded by their egos, they think
it is all BS--it ain't ...

We will see about posting some of those old posts I referred to here,
when I need them, you will see them ...

However, N2EY, you have at least "textually" made concessions I did not
expect! At first I am tempted to think I "had you all wrong." Then I
remember the "Standard Tactics of the Extras", which is "Say One Thing,
Do Another."

However, I hold out hope ...

Regards,
JS

Cecil Moore wrote:
wrote:
Depends on what is meant by "balanced". Does it mean that there
must be a certain number from each license class, with the standards
lowered for some and raised for others to make sure that numerical
"balance" is achieved no matter what?

And remember that "balanced" also means balanced ages,
balanced sexes, balanced races, balanced IQs, balanced
educations, ...
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Cecil:

Hmmm. That is weird, just had a vision of a group of people calling
themselves the EXTRA-KKK. Dressed in white robes. Showing up in the
middle of the night. Pulling down CB antennas with red neck chevey
trucks. Bustin' 'em up and rearranging them in the shape of a cross,
wrapping 'em in rags, dousing 'em in gas and torching 'em.

Darn, I hate visions like that ... guess I'd better lay off these
freshly ground coffee beans!

busting-a-gut
Warmest regards,
JS

John Smith I wrote:
wrote:

...

N2EY:

So, you are looking for information ...

Well, Paul W. Schleck is a politician, he can say one thing and do
another, simple really, you see it all the time. The moderation groups
intention is to stop all board discussion on amateur radio and only
support the wishes and steerage of a relatively few hams--especially
those of a certain group of extra class license holders. They mean to
keep the old class system, established on morse, in effect.

No, John, I'm afraid you have it wrong. That is not the intent at all.
I'd really appreciate it if you'd have something factual with which to
back up your conspiracy theories instead of just presenting wild
accusations.

You do not need to listen to the lies to know the truth I have stated
above, you only need to watch their actions ...

You haven't stated any truths, John. You've only presented some
crackpot view.

one-hundred-and-seventy-four-postings? Geesh, I must be getting old,
when I was younger I would have quadrupled that number by now--just
demonstrates the necessity for recruiting new blood in here!

By "balance", I mean the group of moderators should represent the true
"picture" of all amateurs.

Who says that should be the case? The posters will present a view of
amateur radio. Do you think the newsgroup to which you are posting does
that?

The moderators composed of all extras is a
DEAD GIVEAWAY it does not--that seems a simple enough concept to grasp,
to me.

For an anonymous fellow who likes to condescend, I don't see your
statement as logically sound. Your concept is simple to grasp if you
throw common sense and logic out the window.

Now on crude, vulgar, posts on sexual preference, and completely "off
base" posts--we agree. At least that pleases me to no end. NEVER ALLOW
THEM!

I'm glad to see that there are points on which we can agree.

Seems we agree on "friendly" posts which might miss the topic by a point
or two, pose no one an attack and simply do no harm. This pleases me,
our agreement they SHOULD be tolerated.

They could be tolerated with a note to the poster that his post is
really off-topic.

However, you darn well know there are many extras who DO attempt to be
"Lord" over the "peasant" tech-holding-no-coders. That is a damn lie.

Your statement? I think we've seen a similar number of lower class
ticket holders who feel that they know all there is to know. We even
have a one fellow with no license who tries to lord it over all radio
amateurs.

Posts which have gone here before more than support that. I am sure
anyone reading this has memories of those posts.

Seems we can also agree, the public airwaves are just that, public.

Usenet isn't the public airwaves, "John".

Methods and means need to found and implemented to place these back into
the hands of Joe Blow Public--where they belong ...

That isn't the way it works, "John". We have the FCC to regulate access
to the airwaves. You can't set up and operate an FM broadcast station
just because you want to. You can't get on the amateur bands just
because you want to.

Now, as to Paul, he has consistantly shown real "political talents", he
simply promises all things to everyone.

He's never promised me a thing.

In the end you get a moderation
group of Paul and his henchmen--that is SLICK!!!

Your use of the word "henchmen" is slick. Your unsubstantiated
accusations are slick.

And, I am sure the
techs are thrilled.

Are they?


I don't even think the generals appreciate that
much ...

Just for grins, which license class do you hold, "John"?

You know as well as I, Paul imagines his little robo-guard on
duty, armed with ip addys, newsserver ips and names, just ready to
killfile posts from those NOT supporting their ideas. Close your eyes,
you can see it to--called "human conspiracy." That bunch would allow
Len in to point out their faulty thinking about as willingly as I would
live with a rattlesnake!

That has to be the wildest conspiratorial nonsense I've seen in this
group for quite some time.

There is much truth in Lens' posting,
sometimes they are just a bit cryptic and it has to be "dug" for.

....and sometimes there is nothing at the bottom of the hole after all
that digging.

However, those he points 'em at are so blinded by their egos, they think
it is all BS--it ain't ...

You don't know any of us, "John". Len is a sidewalk superintendent to
amateur radio. He sits on the sidelines and shouts, "that's no way to
do that!"

We will see about posting some of those old posts I referred to here,
when I need them, you will see them ...

Great.

However, N2EY, you have at least "textually" made concessions I did not
expect! At first I am tempted to think I "had you all wrong."

You probably did have Jim all wrong. As I pointed out, you don't know
any of us.

Then I
remember the "Standard Tactics of the Extras", which is "Say One Thing,
Do Another."

I had some hope for you, "John". You've just slid back into the mire.

However, I hold out hope ...

What is it that you're hoping, "John?" Are you hoping that the
moderated newsgroup doesn't come into existence?

Regards,
JS

Dave K8MN

Dave Heil wrote:
...

Dave:

That is EXACTLY it, I have nothing wrong, you are becoming redundant in
your denials ...

JS

Dave Heil wrote:

...

Put simply, I have my own ideas, and I have stated most of them, not
all, but most ...

Others may differ, we will see, we will see ...

JS

John Smith I wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:
...

Dave:

That is EXACTLY it, I have nothing wrong, you are becoming redundant in
your denials ...

You have plenty wrong, "John". You haven't nothing to back up your
accusations. You're empty.

Dave K8MN

John Smith I wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:

...

Put simply, I have my own ideas, and I have stated most of them, not
all, but most ...

Bad ideas are bad ideas. Good ideas have some basis in fact. You've
not provided anything factual at all.

Others may differ, we will see, we will see ...

Others *do* differ. What is it that you think we'll see? What is your
goal--to attempt to prevent the creation of the moderated group?

Tell me, will you be posting as yourself in the new group or will you
still be anonymous?

JS

Dave K8MN

Dave Heil wrote:

...

Dave:

All I can figure is you are blind and deaf--that is the only man which
would still deny what lies in plain sight.

Else, you are holding your hands over your ears and have your eyes shut ...

Regards,
JS