My Response to Mark's "Truce" Call


an old friend wrote:
> Stve have covered in google the post sent out today thabefore reading
> your apology I think since my usenet zone stacks them up nd dishes them
> out slowly I may have missed a couple, my apologies for that but you
> should be able to deal with them as I have

That didn't mean a thing, Mark. I have no idea of what you are
trying to say. I am not sure what "Google" post you are refering to.
Your offer of an apology duly noted, but I SINCERELY have no idea what
you're talking about.

> there are 2 truce but threads with exaand acact example

I get the idea that you want to call a truce. OK...

> one no thvague threats

No what threats?

> 2 you must adress my wife gf as female wether you belive it or not

I have no intention of addressing your "wife" as anything, Mark.
First of all, we have no evidence that you're even married. Indeed, in
just the last 24 hours YOU have even left us very noticible "evidence"
that this person is not even married to you having called her your
"girlfriend". That's YOUR terminology since I never called "her" that.

If for any reason you feel compelled to discuss your "partner",
may I suggest the term "significant other" [abbreviated 's/o']..?!?!
That covers most bases, is socially and legally recognized and is
universally accepted as the genderless, politically correct terminology
for one's intimate partner regardless of marital status.

> You break this this truce at and I will respond withan even greater
> effort I trust even you realize that

You mean that you can screw up RRAP with even more trash,
profanites, and other acts of silliness than what has recently
transpired? Say it isn't so!

Hot flash, Mark...RRAP is not my "property", and in "trashing" it
like you just did, you only further damage YOUR own reputation and
tick-off everyone else. I just sit back and laugh.

If you want to "cool it off", then you do so because it's the
right thing to do. No other reason.

> I will also mention I am not responible for BB frank lenn etc you may
> try to offer terms for my particaption in such threads, I promises to
> consider your requests

Again, I am not even remotely sure what you're trying to say here.

And I don't set "terms" for your "particaption" in ANY thread. If
you have something you think's constructive to offer, say it.

> I may choose to warn about what I see as truce violations on your part
> or i may simply declare jihad as I see fit

Declare whatever you care to declare, Mark. It's no skin off my
nose. You will either choose to act responsibly and maturely, or you
won't.

I might point out that you are more likely to being even more
negative attention to yourself by suggesting such things as
"declar(ing) jihad"...You set yourself up as the bad guy regardless of
your "righteousness".

> i do ask the coutesy that you try to keep your posting volume down for
> the next 36 hr as I have blown the google limits on 2 acount doing this

You didn't need to "blow" anything. One post with a responsible
subject line was all that was needed.

> just as coutesy not a demand

Good call on your part. I'll take it under advisement.

Now here's some points for YOU to take under consideration or
advisement:

(1) Not every statement that YOU don't agree with or find
inconsistent with your views is a "lie". When you immeidately respond
with some version of a word indicating you believe the person is being
mistruthful, YOU set the tone for all follow-on exchanges.

BTW: Remember the first posts we ever exchanged? YOU asked what
right did the FCC have making certain rules, suggesting that only
Congress could do those things. I responded that Congress extended
it's powers for regulatory control of the airwaves to the FCC in the
Communications Act of 1934. This is a fact. Your very next response
was to call me a "lier". The fight was on from then on.

(2) Copious profanity is the sign of a weak mind. Use it s you
will, but then don't get P/O'ed for always being called on it.

(3) There is no massive conspiracy or covert program in or out of
Amateur Radio to deny you of any rights or privileges.

(4) That you may have some physical or neurological impediment
that makes it more difficult for you to do the same things that others
find "easy" does not rate you a "free pass". There are far too many
"disabled" people out there who have done exactly what you claim to be
"impossible" for you to continue any suggestion of insurmountable
effort.

(5) If you ask for someone's help in some matter, accept the
information as it's offered. If you have some specific need or need
your question answered at a specific level, then specify those needs or
levels. If you don't understand the information provided, just say so
and folks will be glad to help you.

So...Let's see how you do for the 36 hours you asked for. I'm
game.

73

Steve, K4YZ

.

Relevant Pages

  • truce disencagement complete I believe
    ... Stve have covered in google the post sent out today thabefore reading ... your apology I think since my usenet zone stacks them up nd dishes them ... You break this this truce at and I will respond withan even greater ... just as coutesy not a demand ...
    (rec.radio.amateur.policy)
  • CRIT: The Spammers F.A.Q.
    ... I composed this in a fit of deja deja vu. ... wouldn't bother with posting it in response to outright spam, ... But mostly rude. ... they probably haven't seen your apology yet. ...
    (rec.arts.sf.composition)
  • Re: Firewall log analysis
    ... your first response to the OP was ... What you fail to understand is that I won't have a hard time finding it, ... >>pointed at google and told to piss off and look there. ... Show me where I asaid I was offended at your comments towards ZoneAlarm. ...
    (comp.security.firewalls)
  • Re: Google Click-Fraud Crackdown
    ... An anonymous reader writes "Wired reports that Google is making some ... advertising model to deal with click fraud: ... response to click fraud: Change the rules of the game so that click ...
    (alt.internet.search-engines)
  • Re: It has a gas range in the kitchen!!
    ... My response was to point out that the author's pronouncement that economic problems really weren't so bad based solely on what she sees was myopic at best, and that people in her own region and nationwide are getting tossed out not necessarily because they are at fault. ... No matter what Sheldon thinks is real or make believe, our circumstances are not about landlord-tenant relationship. ... I didn't not remember reading your apology, but as you have nothing to apologize for I might have seen it but it didn't register. ... whaah whaah whaah! ...
    (rec.food.cooking)