VFR Flight Following -- What's going on here?

Peter Duniho wrote:



"Newps" is an anagram of "Spewn", which is one possible misspelling of
"Spoon", the battle cry of The Tick, a much-loved cartoon superhero
character.

Must say I've never heard of that cartoon.

"Newps" wrote in message
news


It truly is. A couple of years ago I was getting flight following
from Approach around Butte (or was it Billings?). I was tempted to
ask the controller if he was Newps, but I didn't even know how to
pronounce it (Noops?). :-))

We don't do Butte. I'm in Billings. Ask for the guy with the slow 182,
they'll know who I am.

I have to fly to Roundup next Saturday (the 2nd), and that'll put me right
over Billings when I start my descent. Maybe I can "give you a shout".


--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

"Newps" wrote in message
news


Peter Duniho wrote:

"Newps" wrote in message
...

PS, your name is?

An enigma.


It's no enigma. We all know you're The Tick using a secret identity.
The
misspelled anagram of "Spoon!" is a dead giveaway.

You'll have to help me here.

I think Peter has been playing with a coke spoon.

Matt Barrow wrote:




I have to fly to Roundup next Saturday (the 2nd), and that'll put me right
over Billings when I start my descent. Maybe I can "give you a shout".

I'll be gone. We are flying back to the Twin Cities next Thursday the
30th. RPX has the second cheapest gas in the area, the cheapest is at
Laurel, 6S8, 12 SW of BIL. They're getting $2.79. You must know
somebody in Roundup, otherwise there's no reason to go there. Say hi to
Jake, he's the airport manager, he used to work for my mechanic in
Columbus(6S3)until recently.

"Newps" wrote in message
...


Matt Barrow wrote:




I have to fly to Roundup next Saturday (the 2nd), and that'll put me
right
over Billings when I start my descent. Maybe I can "give you a shout".

I'll be gone.

Bummer!

We are flying back to the Twin Cities next Thursday the
30th. RPX has the second cheapest gas in the area, the cheapest is at
Laurel, 6S8, 12 SW of BIL. They're getting $2.79.

That'll help!!

You must know
somebody in Roundup, otherwise there's no reason to go there.

Yup...my best bud, now retired up there to a log home on 100 acres near
Delphia.

He invited son and me to go bust some Prairie Dogs, and do some fishing for
the holiday weekend. Then, a massive BBQ and lots of beer.

Say hi to
Jake, he's the airport manager, he used to work for my mechanic in
Columbus(6S3)until recently.

Will he know who you are?


Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 15:58:57 -0700, "Peter Duniho"
wrote in
::

In any case, not that it matters, but IMHO it's poor form to "out" someone
(on the Internet or elsewhere) when they've made a choice to keep certain
information privileged. That goes double when you haven't actually verified
the information you're "revealing".

We all have opinions. In my opinion, folks who choose to hide their
identity on Usenet are foolish cowards. They're foolish, because they
think their identity can't be discovered. Most anonymous Usenet
posters attempt to hide their true identity so they cannot be held
accountable for their words, or the time and/or place of their posts,
etc. Other than whistle-blowing, I can see no valid reason for
upstanding citizen to hide her identity on Usenet. Imagine all the
(additional) unfounded drivel that would be published if authors
identities were masked in newspapers.

There is a long history about the emergence of Usenet anonymity dating
from the early '80s. As I recall, it was generally frowned upon.

Larry Dighera wrote:

On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 15:58:57 -0700, "Peter Duniho"
wrote in
::


In any case, not that it matters, but IMHO it's poor form to "out" someone
(on the Internet or elsewhere) when they've made a choice to keep certain
information privileged. That goes double when you haven't actually verified
the information you're "revealing".


We all have opinions. In my opinion, folks who choose to hide their
identity on Usenet are foolish cowards. They're foolish, because they
think their identity can't be discovered. Most anonymous Usenet
posters attempt to hide their true identity so they cannot be held
accountable for their words, or the time and/or place of their posts,
etc. Other than whistle-blowing, I can see no valid reason for
upstanding citizen to hide her identity on Usenet. Imagine all the
(additional) unfounded drivel that would be published if authors
identities were masked in newspapers.

There is a long history about the emergence of Usenet anonymity dating
from the early '80s. As I recall, it was generally frowned upon.

I don't like receiving phone and fax calls because someone decided that
I might want to buy their product. Or maybe they just don't like my
position on a point and want to unload on me. Or, maybe it's a 13 year
old that thinks it's fun to send stuff to people.

More likely, someone is scanning post with a "bot" and automatically
adding it to a distribution list.

On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 08:33:43 -0400, Stubby
wrote in
::


I don't like receiving phone and fax calls because someone decided that
I might want to buy their product.

Agreed. Marketers are continually stooping to new lows. If you don't
recognize the callers' ID, don't answer the telephone. It's illegal
to send unsolicited fax transmissions in this country; report them to
the FCC.

Have you added your phone numbers to national Do Not Call Registry
yet? Here's a link: www.donotcall.gov . This is the result of
citizens taking action against unsolicited annoyance, not complacently
attempting to mask their contact information.

Or maybe they just don't like my position on a point and want to unload
on me.

Are you unprepared to support your positions?

Or, maybe it's a 13 year old that thinks it's fun to send stuff to people.

Report her to the USPS for investigation.

More likely, someone is scanning post with a "bot" and automatically
adding it to a distribution list.

Enable your anti-spam filtering software, and never under any
circumstance reply to unsolicited e-mail advertisements.

In my opinion, none of your arguments support antonymous Usenet
posting.


--

The true Axis Of Evil in America is our genius at marketing
coupled with the stupidity of our people. -- Bill Maher

Larry wrote:

We all have opinions. In my opinion, folks who choose to hide their
identity on Usenet are foolish cowards.

Whatever you need to think, Larry, to give that self-image of yours a
boost. )

--
Peter

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...
[...]
There is a long history about the emergence of Usenet anonymity dating
from the early '80s. As I recall, it was generally frowned upon.

For better or worse, there is a lot of behavior on Usenet that was generally
frowned upon historically, but which is now accepted practice.

As far as this specific issue goes: how do I know that you are actually a
real person named "Larry Dighera"? How do you know that I am actually a
real person named "Peter Duniho"? Even if you learn that there is a real
person named "Peter Duniho", and that he happens to be a pilot, you have no
idea that the person writing this post and that person are one and the same,
without going to a WHOLE lot of extra effort (much more effort than I'm
guessing you'd be willing to do).

IMHO, the main person anonymity hurts is the person being anonymous.
Without a real name, there's less credibility.

But in reality, we are all about as anonymous as each other. That is, we
don't really know each other, and without some extra effort, we have no way
of knowing that even a displayed full name properly identifies the poster.
At the same time, even those who try to remain completely anonymous
generally aren't doing so, unless they go through a true anonymizing service
(none of the regular "anonymous" posters here appear to be doing that, nor
those of us using full names).

As far as the credibility goes, past performance in the newsgroup is a MUCH
stronger reference than using a real name or not. It's much more important
that a person use a consistent name, as opposed to a real name.

I agree that using assumed or partial names is foolish, and perhaps it is
even a sign of cowardice. But each person has their own reasons, and I
think it's poor policy for other individuals to ignore those reasons,
however foolish or cowardly they might be, without good cause (ie there's
some very important reason the identity of the person needs to be known).

Usenet is inherently anonymous. That is one of its problems and one of its
graces. I see no good reason to harass (and I use that word carelessly)
those who choose to extend that anonymity a little bit by choosing to not
use a full name to post.

Pete