| |
PA2AGA > TCPDIG 31.10.96 05:24l 196 Lines 8047 Bytes #-10837 (0) @ EU
BID : TCP_96_230A
Read: DG7DAH GUEST
Subj: TCP-Group Digest 96/230A
Path: DB0AAB<DB0AHO<DB0KFB<DB0CZ<DB0LX<DB0RBS<DB0SEL<DB0WTS<DB0GOS<DB0HAG<
DB0ACH<DB0NDK<DB0RWI<PI8JOP<PI8ZAA<PI8GCB<PI8MBQ<PI8VNW
Sent: 961030/1659Z @:PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU #:33073 [Hoek v Holland] FBB5.15c
From: PA2AGA@PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU
To : TCPDIG@EU
Received: from pa2aga by pi1hvh with SMTP
id AA19594 ; Wed, 30 Oct 96 16:40:37 UTC
Received: from pa2aga-1 by pa2aga (NET/Mac 2.3.62/7.1) with SMTP
id AA00007187 ; Wed, 30 Oct 96 17:23:16 MET
Received: from pa2aga-1 by pa2aga-1 (NET/Mac 2.3.62/7.5.5) with SMTP
id AA00008309 ; Wed, 30 Oct 96 17:11:54 MET
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 96 17:08:27 MET
Message-Id: <tcp_96_230A>
From: pa2aga
To: tcp_broadcast@pa2aga-1
Subject: TCP-Group Digest 96/230A
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
TCP-Group Digest Tue, 29 Oct 96 Volume 96 : Issue 230
Today's Topics:
Removal from TAPR lists...... (5 msgs)
ubject: Re: Unsatisfied Ham
Send Replies or notes for publication to: <TCP-Group@UCSD.Edu>.
Subscription requests to <TCP-Group-REQUEST@UCSD.Edu>.
Problems you can't solve otherwise to brian@ucsd.edu.
Archives of past issues of the TCP-Group Digest are available
(by FTP only) from ftp.UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives".
We trust that readers are intelligent enough to realize that all text
herein consists of personal comments and does not represent the official
policies or positions of any party. Your mileage may vary. So there.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 05:31:16 -0800
From: brian@nothing.UCSD.EDU (Brian Kantor)
Subject: Removal from TAPR lists......
I'm not terribly happy with the current course of TAPR either, but THIS
IS NOT THE PROPER FORUM FOR THAT DISCUSSION. Thank you.
- The other Brian
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 07:19:14 -0600 (CST)
From: n5pvl@texoma.net (Charles Brabham)
Subject: Removal from TAPR lists......
>Barry McLarnon VE3JF wrote:
>
>Excuse the off-topic thread, folks, but Brian has made some serious
>accusations which cannot go unanswered. I speak not only as an
>individual with a long history of involvement in packet radio, but also
>as a member of the board of directors of TAPR, the organization being
>maligned. Before you join the bandwagon to burn us at the stake,
>consider the following:
>
>Fact: To our knowledge, nobody associated with TAPR removed Brian from
>any TAPR mailing lists. We would probably be justified in doing so,
>since he previously announced he was withdrawing from all TAPR-sponsored
>lists - but the fact is, we took no such action. The listserver
>software has the capability of automatically unsubscribing someone if
>his mail bounces. This might have happened in this case, but it's more
>likely that someone forged the unsubscribe messages that took him off
>the lists. This is quite easy to do. The mailing list system operates
>on a principle of trust that the participants will behave reasonably.
>Sometimes that trust is abused. In any case, Brian leaped to an
>unwarranted conclusion that TAPR took him off the lists.
>
I seriously doubt if any of these unlikely excuses apply. The TAPR list
moderators have shown on several occasions that they have thier noses firmly
planted in Greg Jones's behind, and are capable of ANYTHING when Greg says
"jump".
The general rule which has surfaced over the last year ot two is that if
what you are saying goes against the TAPR (Greg Jones) "party line", you
will be moderated regardless of your behaviour. This is especially true just
before Ham-Com, the DCC, or any other large proceeding. At these times, Greg
and the TAPR moderators take special pains to insure that no "dissenting"
voices exist on the SIGS.
On the "flip side", it's been proven over and over again that if you follow
the "party line", you can act like a two-year-old and not be "moderated".
Look at Phillip Conza.. Look at Karl. Look at Gwynn Reedy.
Barry can pretend that TAPR's SIGS are run on a rational basis if he wants to,
but the facts, folks, are the facts.. The TAPR SIGs are a "country club",
and when people mention this fact, they have good reason to do so.
>snip<
>Fact: Although Brian claims to have been a supporter of TAPR in the
>past, membership records indicate that he has never been a member.
FACT: Membership is allegedly not a requirement, but that's what TAPR says,
so it's best to verify it yourself before you believe it. The TAPR folks are
fond of SAYING things which sound rational, then going on to BEHAVE however
they want to at any particular time. This is because they lack leadership.
>As
>for the statement that a veritable "who's who" of amateur radio agree
>that TAPR is not a viable organization... well, that's an easy claim to
>make without any substantiation. I invite these unnamed folks to
>contact me and explain what their problems are with TAPR.
Somehow, I can't see anyone being in a big hurry to contact Barry on this
matter. It's like going to the local jail's "drunk tank" to complain about
alcoholism. - The quality of the response you can expect is not worth the
effort.
No doubt, Barry will take the general lack of responses to his offer as
"proof" that no problem exists.
I'm sure that Barry would not want to lose his spot in the chorus of
admiration over the "emperor's new clothes", (TAPR's "leadership") so let's
not strain his ability to discriminate right and wrong too much by expecting
him to "come clean" on this issue.
73 DE Charles Brabham N5PVL
Packet Radio: N5PVL @ N5PVL.#NTX.TX.USA.NA
E-Mail : n5pvl@texoma.com
WWW : http://www.texoma.com/~n5pvl
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 07:18:48 -0500 (EST)
From: "Brian A. Lantz" <brian@lantz.com>
Subject: Removal from TAPR lists......
On Mon, 28 Oct 1996, Barry McLarnon VE3JF wrote:
> The list moderator
> lost his Internet access for several days and could not process the list
> mail. Brian's reply to his detractors was one of the messages caught in
> the queue during the outage, and he concluded that it had been
> "censored", and hit the roof.
Sorry, Barry, but this is just WRONG......
The moderator deliberately sent me a message saying that he deliberately
was NOT releasing my message. It was NOT lost, it was censored.
If you would like a copy of that message, Barry, I'll be glad to send it
to you. If you were told it was 'lost', you were lied to.
> Things escalated from there, to the point
> that the moderator decided not to release further messages on the
> subject. So, there were some unfortunate circumstances, and possibly
> some errors in judgement - like the rest of us, list moderators are only
> human - but, certainly no conspiracy.
But humans USUALLY apologize. TAPR, nor it's moderator, has not done this.
> Fact: Although Brian claims to have been a supporter of TAPR in the
> past, membership records indicate that he has never been a member.
Never claimed I was.......
-----------------------------------------------------------
Brian A. Lantz http://www.lantz.com brian@lantz.com
REAL PORTION of Microsoft Windows code:
while (memory_available) {
eat_major_portion_of_memory (no_real_reason);
if (feel_like_it)
make_user_THINK (this_is_an_OS);
gates_bank_balance++;
}
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 07:58:19 -0600
From: "Steve Sampson" <ssampson@oklahoma.net>
Subject: Removal from TAPR lists......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 be continued in digest: tcp_96_230B
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
