Leaving Usnet Groups, Bye

On Thu, 05 May 2005 04:00:27 GMT, "Dudley Henriques"
dhenriques@noware .net wrote:


"Roger" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 02 May 2005 16:08:12 GMT, "Dudley Henriques"
dhenriques@noware .net wrote:

Actually, being retired, I really never give it a thought either way since
I
won't be flying again. It's apparently only a big deal for a few specific
morons on Usenet. My family, my friends, my professional associates past
and
present, and indeed even my country's government at the highest level seem
to be quite happy with things just the way they are.
Only on Usenet will one find the idiots an issue like this one will
attract.

Oh, they exist IRL as well, but they can't hide behind anonymous
signatures so they are less prone to expressing themselves. It's far
more hazardous there. :-)) So they tend to talk among themselves
where they might find some one who will listen.

Yep, true enough, but believe it or not, (maybe I'm some kind of exception),
but most of the people I've known professionally were straight shooters.
Of course a lot of the people I've known in aviation worked daily in it's
most dangerous environment. When you work in this arena, you have a tendency

As most know from my sig I'm also a Ham (Amateur Radio Operator). I
built my own tower and still do some tower climbing at my age. Early
on in life I was a farmer, but gave that up a bit after turning 21 as
I figured there had to be a better way to make a living, or at least
more to my liking without getting

As to that 97' tower in the back yard, I still do my own maintenance
and make at least half a dozen trips to the top for no other reason
than to take a panoramic photo of the entire area. It drives the
color balance on the digital cameras nuts. But, at any rate I go up
and stand on the tower top plate to shoot the photos.
(Yes, I do use safety equipment). I had one on the web but at 68 megs
it didn't get a lot of viewing, but now that there are a lot more high
speed connections I may just put a new one up.

(Joyce put her foot down and I no longer climb for others or for hire.
I don't even carry insurance any more so no one would hire me anyway.)

I've also done a lot of photography and shot the Michigan Professional
Road Rally two years running. I spent nearly an hour strapped onto a
heli shooting down two trackers with a pilot who was also a crop
duster. I have some shots where I couldn't zoom back far enough to
get anything other than the driver's face in the windshield.

Joyce sat in the middle, changing film for me. When the pilot found
that neither of us were bothered by the motion, nor scared, he let "er
all hang out. :-)) That was the most fun I ever had flying (when I
wasn't the pilot)

to learn early on what's important and what isn't important in life. The

Which is my point with all of the above. All would be considered
risky (yes they do contain varying amounts of risk) and the unknowing,
general public and press would probably call it a number of things I
wouldn't. All are environments where a mistake can lead to some very
unpleasant consequences.

All involve trust. You can't have trust when there is back stabbing
and nit picking going on. Then again, how many of the general public
would climb a 100' radio tower to shoot photos of a sunset, or get on
the skid of a helicopter to shoot photos of race cars on a sand trail
in the woods. BTW, It took a week for some of the welts to go away
from the tree branches. I did get swatted a few times.

When we were waiting to the Heli a TV crew was getting ready to go
out. That they really didn't want to go was quite evident. Joyce
mentioned that they'd be able to get much better shots if they took
the door off. The cameraman said that if she found someone crazy
enough to do that he'd let him use the camera. She said, "Ask the
little, ball headed guy over there", but they flew and shot with the
door on.

I should put some of the shots up on my page. It was a three day
event and I shot from both the air and ground.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

back stabbing and nit picking found at almost every level of the outside
professional work place for the most part doesn't exist with these people.
For the most part, it's a no nonsense, performance based world, and bull
**** walks there faster than any place else I've been to in my life.
Sort of the opposite of Usenet I guess :-))
Dudley

Andrew, check your settings. I believe that you are posting in HTML,
instead of the preferred plan text.
--
Jim in NC

On 05 May 2005 17:13:52 GMT, Blanche wrote:

They just didn't believe me when I tried to explain what would happen
when they started selling computers at the grocery store...

I plonked cefeye/whatever a long time ago.

At least twice :-))

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

On Thu, 05 May 2005 04:41:22 GMT, "Dudley Henriques"
dhenriques@noware .net wrote:


"Roger" wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 05 May 2005 02:19:24 GMT, "Dudley Henriques"
dhenriques@noware .net wrote:

The thing on the newsgroups is you can be any one. Only after
developing a posting history do any of us gain or lose credibility.

This is both true and false in my experience with Usenet. A posting history
involving qualified and obviously experienced posters produces credibility
only with those on the group who know and appreciate sound knowledge and
information. With these people over time, posting is executed in an arena of
mutual respect for both sides of an issue.

Unfortunately, there exists on Usenet, an element that never actually enters
into the credibility equation because credibility isn't their main interest
when it comes to a specific poster. This element exists in an emotional
world where feelings govern actions.
You can have all the credibility in the world with the knowledgeable posters
on a group and you will simply never have credibility with this second
element.

It may be that way for some, but "I think" which of course means I
don't know for sure, that it's that credibility that makes a sizeable
element jealous and it becomes their goal to destroy that credibility
while hiding behind an anomyous name.

So in the end, a typical Usenet experience for a credible poster will be a
mixture of intelligent discourse with the folks who know....and a constantly
deteriorating experience with the second element.

True, whether the second element is that way due to jealousy or lack
of knowledge, or ... lack of ethics.

Every poster will react differently to this Usenet experience. The bottom
line on how long a credible poster will hang in on Usenet won't be found in
that poster's experience with other credible posters. Invariably, it will
depend entirely on just how much effect the poster absorbs from that second
undesirable element. Everyone has a different tolerance level. Some quit
early. Some don't mind it at all. Some like me just lose respect slowly for
the Usenet concept and drift in and out as the mood hits them. For me, it's

I guess I probably fall into that as I may not read the groups for a
week of so and then I'm back to checking them while working on "other
stuff".

simply gone from useful and mutually respectful communication to what it is
now......not much of anything really....just a sparring match every now and
then with faceless people I don't know, and who surely don't know me!

I think Mike got at least part of it with people coming across as more
hostile on the news groups and even in e-mail as it is difficult to
write what you are thinking in such a manner that those reading it get
what your meant.

The English language is full of ambiguities and much of our
communications depends on inflection as well as proper use. Most of
us have a terrible time conveying some concepts in speech. To get the
same thing across properly in a typed message might take volumes.

Like many of us who tend to get a bit...well... wordy... (like
listening to an engineer explain something by starting with the
details) people lose interest, or lost track of where we were going by
the time we get to the point.

However I do think there is a large element that feels invulnerable by
remaining anomyous. An element that tends to be a bit
antiauthoritarian and can not stand to be challenged or shown to be
wrong. What are those rules in aviation. Antiauthoritarian,
invulnerable, ... ?

They basically get to act like little kids who didn't get their own
way and can throw a tantrum because they figure no one will find out
who they are.

There have been proposals made that may end up doing away with the
mail and news group anomizers. We may all have to post with valid
addresses some day even if those addresses need to be changed every
month or so. .



Dudley


Roger

What you have described here is a large part of each of our personalities,
and explains partially why you and I have been friends on Usenet for many
years.
Dudley

"Roger" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 05 May 2005 04:00:27 GMT, "Dudley Henriques"
dhenriques@noware .net wrote:


"Roger" wrote in message
. ..
On Mon, 02 May 2005 16:08:12 GMT, "Dudley Henriques"
dhenriques@noware .net wrote:

Actually, being retired, I really never give it a thought either way
since
I
won't be flying again. It's apparently only a big deal for a few
specific
morons on Usenet. My family, my friends, my professional associates past
and
present, and indeed even my country's government at the highest level
seem
to be quite happy with things just the way they are.
Only on Usenet will one find the idiots an issue like this one will
attract.

Oh, they exist IRL as well, but they can't hide behind anonymous
signatures so they are less prone to expressing themselves. It's far
more hazardous there. :-)) So they tend to talk among themselves
where they might find some one who will listen.

Yep, true enough, but believe it or not, (maybe I'm some kind of
exception),
but most of the people I've known professionally were straight shooters.
Of course a lot of the people I've known in aviation worked daily in it's
most dangerous environment. When you work in this arena, you have a
tendency

As most know from my sig I'm also a Ham (Amateur Radio Operator). I
built my own tower and still do some tower climbing at my age. Early
on in life I was a farmer, but gave that up a bit after turning 21 as
I figured there had to be a better way to make a living, or at least
more to my liking without getting

As to that 97' tower in the back yard, I still do my own maintenance
and make at least half a dozen trips to the top for no other reason
than to take a panoramic photo of the entire area. It drives the
color balance on the digital cameras nuts. But, at any rate I go up
and stand on the tower top plate to shoot the photos.
(Yes, I do use safety equipment). I had one on the web but at 68 megs
it didn't get a lot of viewing, but now that there are a lot more high
speed connections I may just put a new one up.

(Joyce put her foot down and I no longer climb for others or for hire.
I don't even carry insurance any more so no one would hire me anyway.)

I've also done a lot of photography and shot the Michigan Professional
Road Rally two years running. I spent nearly an hour strapped onto a
heli shooting down two trackers with a pilot who was also a crop
duster. I have some shots where I couldn't zoom back far enough to
get anything other than the driver's face in the windshield.

Joyce sat in the middle, changing film for me. When the pilot found
that neither of us were bothered by the motion, nor scared, he let "er
all hang out. :-)) That was the most fun I ever had flying (when I
wasn't the pilot)

to learn early on what's important and what isn't important in life. The

Which is my point with all of the above. All would be considered
risky (yes they do contain varying amounts of risk) and the unknowing,
general public and press would probably call it a number of things I
wouldn't. All are environments where a mistake can lead to some very
unpleasant consequences.

All involve trust. You can't have trust when there is back stabbing
and nit picking going on. Then again, how many of the general public
would climb a 100' radio tower to shoot photos of a sunset, or get on
the skid of a helicopter to shoot photos of race cars on a sand trail
in the woods. BTW, It took a week for some of the welts to go away
from the tree branches. I did get swatted a few times.

When we were waiting to the Heli a TV crew was getting ready to go
out. That they really didn't want to go was quite evident. Joyce
mentioned that they'd be able to get much better shots if they took
the door off. The cameraman said that if she found someone crazy
enough to do that he'd let him use the camera. She said, "Ask the
little, ball headed guy over there", but they flew and shot with the
door on.

I should put some of the shots up on my page. It was a three day
event and I shot from both the air and ground.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

back stabbing and nit picking found at almost every level of the outside
professional work place for the most part doesn't exist with these people.
For the most part, it's a no nonsense, performance based world, and bull
**** walks there faster than any place else I've been to in my life.
Sort of the opposite of Usenet I guess :-))
Dudley

"Morgans" wrote in message
...
So once again, lighten up. You'll live longer. And don't waste your
time and bandwidth on what you call "Henriques Usenet hints". I'm
sure to ignore them.

But thanks anyway, for the offer.

It is a real shame that dudley does not have a personality to go with his
experience on the subject of aviation. I had a few run-ins with him a few
years ago, starting from a comment that was in no way deserving of the
response he gave. Take it from me - ignore him when he goes off, or just
kill-file him. His approach will not change, and you are only an inferior
pimple on his ass to be eliminated, as far as he is concerned.
--
Jim in NC

Would it be too much to ask you to actually kill file me instead of just
talking about it? PLEASE!!!!!!!
DH

On Thu, 05 May 2005 14:51:27 -0400, Andrew Gideon
wrote:

Matt Whiting wrote:

I've been using usenet for 10+ years and have found that people tend to
come across as more hostile in writing than they really are in person.
This happens in email as well.**You*don't*have*the*inflection*and*other
nonverbal cues that you get in mano-y-mano conversation and it is easy
for things to escalate well beyond what anyone intended.

I've been USENETing since at least 84 (according to DejaGoogle), and I
agree. For a while, I resisted using those "emotocon" glyphs reasoning
that words should be sufficient in a written medium.


70% of face-to-face communication is non-verbal. We take that for
granted when we are on the internet. It tends to be hard to convery
the true spirit of a thought via text to a person that you have never
met before.



Jim

http://www.unconventional-wisdom.org

"Dudley Henriques" dhenriques@noware .net wrote in message
news



Sometimes I wonder, but there actually ARE some really intelligent people
on this group. One thing I've noticed though....most who fit the
description have real names. :-)
Dudley


Thanks, Dudley!

Highflyer
Highflight Aviation Services
Pinckneyville Airport ( PJY )

Remember, rec.aviation annual flyin at Pinckneyville is May 20, 21, and 22
this year. Let Mary know you are coming at so we don't run
out of steaks at the dinner. :-)

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 05 May 2005 16:06:19 GMT, "Dudley Henriques"
dhenriques@noware .net wrote:

Try giving it a rest. Break for lunch or something.

Dudley Henriques


C'mon, Dudster.

Lighten up. Don't take yourself so seriously.

Let me enlighten you on something my friend. I DO take myself QUITE
seriously and if you intend posting to me and desire intelligent and
meaningful dialog in return, I strongly suggest you try and refrain from
using a smart, superior, and condescending tone with me. I don't like it,
and it marks you as just one more Usenet "correction artist" to be
avoided.
Here's a Henriques Usenet hint for you. If you are NOT posting to me in
the
manner I've described above, USE A ****ING :-) and avoid the predictable
second post where you start telling someone who has taken what you have
said
to them in the EXACT context it was written; how they should be "taking
themselves"
Trust me, it will save a whole lot of this type of bull **** when dealing
with me.

Dudley Henriques



Hey, Your Dudship,

Now you are not only taking yourself too seriously, you have obviously
just confused me with someone who gives a good **** what you think
about anything.

And let me assure you that I do not expect anything intelligent and
meaningful in any of your responses. So don't feel you are
disappointing me in any way.

So once again, lighten up. You'll live longer. And don't waste your
time and bandwidth on what you call "Henriques Usenet hints". I'm
sure to ignore them.

But thanks anyway, for the offer.

Well, now we know EXACTLY what this characters advice is worth. Back to
John's monkeys! :-)

Highflyer

"Terri Schiavo's Feeding Tube" wrote in message
...
In article . net,
"Dudley Henriques" dhenriques@noware .net wrote:

Let me enlighten you on something my friend. I DO take myself QUITE
seriously and if you intend posting to me and desire intelligent and
meaningful dialog in return, I strongly suggest you try and refrain from
using a smart, superior, and condescending tone with me.

Like I said, a self-aggrandizing piece of ****. You are nothing! THANK
Dog you're OLD and will DIE fairly soon.

**** you and the horse you rode in on, DUHdley.

Some one out here hiding behind a most appropriate moniker seems to be the
kind of person who should have been strangled at birth. It is too bad they
were not taken care of correctly at that time.

Highflyer