Nate, Sorry, my comments are related to the original post, not yours which I had forgotten I was quoting. Beyond that, I will wait for approval before further comment. My reference was to the following: "This list is not for discussing FCC rules, proper operating practices, or brand loyalty (Motorola vs. GE). It is here for providing quality technical information." which I take to include prohibitions on comments on license class. Tom
-- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Nate Duehr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> > >> Sorry had to rant there -- hopefully that's on-topic enough for RB... > >> about repeaters, but not really about building them... unless you > >> consider that they're often the place where the local ham community > >> gets "built" these days... > > > On Jul 26, 2008, at 7:36 PM, Tom wrote: > > > Dear Repeater-Builder administrators: > > I've got a few things to say along the lines of this post. They are > > not only off topic, they are clearly discouraged in the intro. page of > > the site: HOWEVER, I believe they now need to be said. In spite of > > this, I will respectfully defer to your judgement on this. Should I > > respond on this thread, begin a new thread or refrain from comment > > altogether? > > Tom > > The intro page of what site? http://www.repeater-builder.com/rbtip/ > -- says nothing about this. > > Sorry Tom. I guess you missed that last paragraph of the post. I > guess you think I'm out to cause you harm in some way that a delete > key won't remedy? Don't be mad. It's e-mail for goodness sakes. > > Serious question: > > Do you filter mailing lists into folders so you can read them at your > leisure, or do you have them cluttering your inbox? I'm not asking to > be a smart-ass, I'm asking because I think a LOT of hams out there > sign up for mailing lists and have them coming into the Inbox with > little knowledge of the tools available to them to filter and handle > mail of different priorities at different times, and it often "sets > them off" when a topic is slightly questionable. > > This hurts community building on lists, in that certainly no harm was > meant by my posting -- but if you were expecting only dead-on repeater > building 100% of the time from a list with a lot of people who enjoy > each other's "online company"... having the side-conversations hit > your Inbox might drive you crazy -- and then our thread turns into a > "problem" for the list owners. Seen it happen thousands of times. > > Other questions that come to mind, trying to be cognizant of who's > here and what they expect from mailing lists... how long have you been > a list member, and what's your callsign? The former is a question to > see if you're familiar with how mailing lists have worked for years > and years, or if you're reacting out of "newbie shock". > > The latter is because I don't really enjoy (and many people here > don't) communicating on civilized lists with anonymous folks, and > since you complained about me -- it'd be nicer to know who you are > than not. But whatever... it's the Internet. People hide behind > keyboards, that's normal... and maybe you're here in the commercial > repeater "audience" for the list and not a ham. That's cool too. Me, > I'm just a ham... as are most of the active members of this > particular "online community" here at RB, I think. > > Apologies to the list for asking here, but I don't get into this type > of thing off-list with someone I don't know -- have had that go really > badly including one wacko in the UK who decided he was offended by me > asking him questions who took the effort to try to hunt down my BOSS > at my real job, and tell him what a bad person I was. My boss laughed > his butt off at that one, said he'd had a similar experience with an > Internet wacko, and nothing came of it -- but when dealing with those > upset with me on mailing lists nowadays, I keep the questions and > discussion in public view. > > Everyone, please just let Tom respond and don't create a huge thread > out of this one for Kevin and Scott to have to police, though -- please. > > Sorry my message caused such a reaction from you Tom. It wasn't meant > to. I was just explaining why I made the comment about the "class" > caption on the photo, is all. Too many people out there who want to > keep that silliness going. Not me. > > -- > Nate Duehr, WY0X > [EMAIL PROTECTED] >
