Last Chance -- Free Beer in Iowa on Sunday!

On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 05:28:11 GMT, john smith wrote:

Martin Hotze wrote:
I am in search for such _cheap_ good webcams (like Axis) with ethernet. But
the are average going $300 to $400 ... can you point me to a good seller?

Look at www.apple.com and follow the links to the iSight camera and
software. I am wondering if this would serve the purpose?


Nope. Not a cam to connect to a computer for chatting or other stuff. A
standalone camera with Ethernet interface, optional 802.11b, built-in
server. Just like the Axis cam or some others.

#m

--
http://www.usawatch.org/ http://www.alternet.org/

24 "Deceptions" In 704 words: Bush's 2003 SOTU
http://www.buzzflash.com/contributor...7/22_sotu.html

On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 09:22:45 -0400, "G.R. Patterson III"
wrote in Message-Id:
:

Larry Dighera wrote:

I don't want to be a "wet blanket," .....

Then why are you being one?


The second clause of the sentence you quoted should have given you a
clue:

"I don't want to be a "wet blanket," but *publicly* providing
liquor to pilots seems foolish to me."

For further enlightenment, I direct your attention to: Message-ID:


--

Irrational beliefs ultimately lead to irrational acts.
-- Larry Dighera,

Larry Dighera wrote:

Perhaps I'm overlooking something, but *publicly* providing
intoxicating liquor to pilots en route to KOSH seem less than prudent
to me.


snip

~Dave

Actually,I was going to post a response to Larry, but realized the
scissors sound byte said it all

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:ODAUa.153788$H17.54419@sccrnsc02...

Congratulations, Larry! You've earned a position as the very first (and
thus far, only) person in my "killfile"!

*plonk*
--


Ditto Jay

Being only a 6 or 7 month lurker in this NG, I wasn't exactly sure how to
setup a killfile. But Larry's incredible negativity and reluctance to join
even the fringe area of the "still living" forces me to learn. Oh, Wait a
second. Does it mean because I now have learned a new skill that Larry's
comments have *some* value? ?? ah... no (

While I'm at it, maybe most of Martin Holtze's stuff would be happier there
too.

OK Larry and Martin, FLAME AWAY! Sorry I'll have to miss it.

GWK

Video Guy gkasten at brick dot net wrote:
second. Does it mean because I now have learned a new skill that Larry's
comments have *some* value? ?? ah... no (

No, because you wouldn't have had to learn the skill if it wasn't for him.

Just like you can't say that you've saved somebody's life if you push
him off the dock and then jump in and rescue him from drowning...

- awh

Larry Dighera wrote:

The second clause of the sentence you quoted should have given you a
clue:

Bull****. If you don't want to be something, don't be. If you decide to
actually *be* a wet blanket (as you were), then you MUST want to be one.

George Patterson
The optimist feels that we live in the best of all possible worlds. The
pessimist is afraid that he's correct.
James Branch Cavel

(Video Guy wrote)
snip
While I'm at it, maybe most of Martin Holtze's stuff would be happier
there
too.

OK Larry and Martin, FLAME AWAY! Sorry I'll have to miss it.

Trying not to get sent to the cornfield too...

While you're free to *plonk* anyone you want, I would like to plead Marty's
case. He's a little different, sure. He is often (mostly) political, I'll
give you that one.

He can also be like a "Terrier on a pant cuff" at times ...but darn it, he
grows on you after a while. Just a thought.

--
Montblack

(Martin Hotze wrote)
But: what shall I do for a living over there?

Hm, I might run a hotel, hm, aviation themed might not be that bad, ...
:-))

Psst ...Marty. Want to put Jay out of business?

Open Marty's Giant Beach Party "Wet-N-Wild" Waterpark Hotel and Internet
Cafe across the street from him. g

--
Montblack

Larry Dighera wrote in
:

On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 21:34:51 -0400, "G.R. Patterson III"
wrote in Message-Id:
:

Larry Dighera wrote:

The second clause of the sentence you quoted should have given you a
clue:

Bull****. If you don't want to be something, don't be. If you decide to
actually *be* a wet blanket (as you were), then you MUST want to be
one.

Ha Ha... You're logic makes me laugh.
The gravity of the issue outweighed the risk of rebuke. Perhaps it
all depends on your point of view.

What is it in life that really matters to you? Is it flying? Is the
risk of further restriction worth a beer in public? Those airmen who
would answer 'yes' put ALL of us at risk.

I guess it's about values, and responsibility, and exploitation, and
_responsible_ freedom of expression, and ... Personally, I'd prefer
to see the image of airmen elevated in the public eye in these
troubling times, not publicly portrayed as frat-boys unleashed. This
_public_ tailhookesque marketing campaign is the wrong image of
airmen, at the wrong time, and I said so.

It was the "en route" aspect of this article that I found just a
little too over-the-top:

Subject: Oshkosh Bound? Free Beer in Iowa!
Message-ID: UTyQa.59032$Ph3.6151@sccrnsc04
NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.217.229.103
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2003 14:13:08 GMT

Yes, for those pilots who are hot, tired, thirsty, and en route to
Oshkosh on Sunday, July 27th, Mary and I are holding our First
Annual Fly-In Pool Party at the Alexis Park Inn & Suites in Iowa
City, IA.!

Plug in "IOW" on your GPS, and high-tail it on in -- your flight
into OSH on Monday will be that much shorter (we're just 80
minutes from OSH in our Pathfinder), you'll arrived more refreshed
-- and, besides, where the heck ELSE are you gonna get free beer
en route to the Big Show, anyway?
--

Stopping EN ROUTE and having a beer mandates a pilot ground himself
for a subsequent 1/3rd of a day. I saw no offer of free lodging to
facilitate that mandatory 8 hours period. Thus, it would appear from
an objective point of view, that pilots were being lured into
violating regulations.

Perhaps Mr. Honeck could accomplish his marketing objectives via
e-mail, instead of this public forum.



On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 22:05:57 GMT, John Theune
wrote in Message-Id: :

Larry:
I suggest you re-read the post in question.

At your suggestion, I have.

It clearly states that the party is on Sunday and your flight on MONDAY
will be much shorter.

Implicit in your statement is the notion that pilots en route to OSH
will be attending the party on the day BEFORE they depart for their
final OSH destination. And that therefore they will have a night's
rest before taking to the skies.

Because the two dates are in two separate paragraphs, I would hardly
characterize that implication as "clearly' stated. Further, I would
not expect the non-flying public reading that article to readily
perceive that implication.

I don't see where Jay has a responsabilty to provide free lodging to anyone
if they chose to break the rules.

If Mr. Honeck freely provides the means for pilots to violate federal
regulations, and publicly advertises that fact to *en route* airmen,
his culpability in the event of a mishap by one of his departing
guests would likely be tried in a court of law, IMO.

If you want a beer, then don't plan on flying further that day.

Right. No question.

But what of the *en route,* party-attendee pilot who finds himself
without a convenient place to wait out the required 8 hour period?
Will he truly find himself "more refreshed" as promised by Mr. Honeck
in that article? What are his options?

He can:

1. Rent a room from Mr. Honeck for 8 hours at the _daily_
rate _if_ there is a vacancy.

2. He can rent a room someplace else for 8 hours at full
rate _if_ there is a vacancy, and in addition incur round
trip transportation charges.

3. He can walk the streets, or otherwise kill time, for 8
hours, then depart for OSH in less than optimal physical
condition.

3. He can depart for OSH at his convenience, and disregard
the regulations.

4. ...

So while the options he faces don't preclude him from operating his
aircraft within the regulations, the choice is likely to be costly,
perhaps more costly than anticipated.

What sort of host puts his guests in such a situation? I say it's a
host who places his own interests above those of fellow airmen enticed
by his ill conceived marketing scheme.

Your analysis of the issue is appreciated. Thank you for taking the
time to point out the facts you mentioned. Indeed, I was unaware of
them.

But a _publicly_ advertised tailhookesque marketing campaign is still
a damaging image of airmen, at the wrong time.


--

Irrational beliefs ultimately lead to irrational acts.
-- Larry Dighera,

Larry Dighera wrote in
:


Larry Dighera wrote in
m:

On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 21:34:51 -0400, "G.R. Patterson III"
wrote in Message-Id:
:

Larry Dighera wrote:

The second clause of the sentence you quoted should have given you
a clue:

Bull****. If you don't want to be something, don't be. If you decide
to actually *be* a wet blanket (as you were), then you MUST want to
be
one.

Ha Ha... You're logic makes me laugh.
The gravity of the issue outweighed the risk of rebuke. Perhaps it
all depends on your point of view.

What is it in life that really matters to you? Is it flying? Is
the risk of further restriction worth a beer in public? Those
airmen who would answer 'yes' put ALL of us at risk.

I guess it's about values, and responsibility, and exploitation, and
_responsible_ freedom of expression, and ... Personally, I'd prefer
to see the image of airmen elevated in the public eye in these
troubling times, not publicly portrayed as frat-boys unleashed.
This _public_ tailhookesque marketing campaign is the wrong image of
airmen, at the wrong time, and I said so.

It was the "en route" aspect of this article that I found just a
little too over-the-top:

Subject: Oshkosh Bound? Free Beer in Iowa!
Message-ID: UTyQa.59032$Ph3.6151@sccrnsc04
NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.217.229.103
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2003 14:13:08 GMT

Yes, for those pilots who are hot, tired, thirsty, and en route
to Oshkosh on Sunday, July 27th, Mary and I are holding our
First Annual Fly-In Pool Party at the Alexis Park Inn & Suites
in Iowa City, IA.!

Plug in "IOW" on your GPS, and high-tail it on in -- your flight
into OSH on Monday will be that much shorter (we're just 80
minutes from OSH in our Pathfinder), you'll arrived more
refreshed -- and, besides, where the heck ELSE are you gonna get
free beer en route to the Big Show, anyway?
--

Stopping EN ROUTE and having a beer mandates a pilot ground himself
for a subsequent 1/3rd of a day. I saw no offer of free lodging to
facilitate that mandatory 8 hours period. Thus, it would appear
from an objective point of view, that pilots were being lured into
violating regulations.

Perhaps Mr. Honeck could accomplish his marketing objectives via
e-mail, instead of this public forum.



On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 22:05:57 GMT, John Theune
wrote in Message-Id: :

Larry:
I suggest you re-read the post in question.

At your suggestion, I have.

It clearly states that the party is on Sunday and your flight on
MONDAY will be much shorter.

Implicit in your statement is the notion that pilots en route to OSH
will be attending the party on the day BEFORE they depart for their
final OSH destination. And that therefore they will have a night's
rest before taking to the skies.

Because the two dates are in two separate paragraphs, I would hardly
characterize that implication as "clearly' stated. Further, I would
not expect the non-flying public reading that article to readily
perceive that implication.

I don't see where Jay has a responsabilty to provide free lodging to
anyone if they chose to break the rules.

If Mr. Honeck freely provides the means for pilots to violate federal
regulations, and publicly advertises that fact to *en route* airmen,
his culpability in the event of a mishap by one of his departing
guests would likely be tried in a court of law, IMO.

If you want a beer, then don't plan on flying further that day.

Right. No question.

But what of the *en route,* party-attendee pilot who finds himself
without a convenient place to wait out the required 8 hour period?
Will he truly find himself "more refreshed" as promised by Mr. Honeck
in that article? What are his options?

He can:

1. Rent a room from Mr. Honeck for 8 hours at the _daily_
rate _if_ there is a vacancy.

2. He can rent a room someplace else for 8 hours at full
rate _if_ there is a vacancy, and in addition incur round
trip transportation charges.

3. He can walk the streets, or otherwise kill time, for 8
hours, then depart for OSH in less than optimal physical
condition.

3. He can depart for OSH at his convenience, and disregard
the regulations.

4. ...

So while the options he faces don't preclude him from operating his
aircraft within the regulations, the choice is likely to be costly,
perhaps more costly than anticipated.

What sort of host puts his guests in such a situation? I say it's a
host who places his own interests above those of fellow airmen enticed
by his ill conceived marketing scheme.

Your analysis of the issue is appreciated. Thank you for taking the
time to point out the facts you mentioned. Indeed, I was unaware of
them.

But a _publicly_ advertised tailhookesque marketing campaign is still
a damaging image of airmen, at the wrong time.



Larry;
Your stock just went up in my eyes. I disagree with your opinion on this
matter, but not with your method of expressing your thoughts.

John