New Prohibited Area

Matt Whiting wrote:
Anto=F1io wrote:

Northwest flyers might want to look at this AOPA article that announces
the establishment of new Prohibited area over the Bangor sub base in
Washington state. Currently it's a TFR...

http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsite.../050525wa.html

What do you all think of this?

Antonio


It makes me a much bigger supporter of the committee's recommendation to
close a lot more military bases. If they don't exist, they can't have a
prohibited area. What a stupid decision...

Give them a chance. They can come up with even more stupidity given
time.
Wait ubtil they shut down all US airspace to GA
Matt

You idiots that don't top post or quote hundreds of lines of text understand
that you are simply wasting bandwidth, don't you?

Jim


"george" wrote in message
oups.com...


Matt Whiting wrote:
Antoñio wrote:
Matt

In article ,
"RST Engineering" wrote:

You idiots that don't top post or quote hundreds of lines of text understand
that you are simply wasting bandwidth, don't you?

People are now idiots if they don't top post?

--
Bob Noel
no one likes an educated mule

("Bob Noel" wrote)
You idiots that don't top post or quote hundreds of lines of text
understand that you are simply wasting bandwidth, don't you?

People are now idiots if they don't top post?


I thought there was a two post moratorium around here before one invokes the
"i" word. g


Montblack

Bob Noel wrote:
In article ,
"RST Engineering" wrote:

You idiots that don't top post or quote hundreds of lines of text understand
that you are simply wasting bandwidth, don't you?

People are now idiots if they don't top post?

It would appear that RST Engineering has problems.
Although I can see why with a 64k modem and a 386 he is unimpressed

RST Engineering wrote:

You idiots that don't top post or quote hundreds of lines of text understand
that you are simply wasting bandwidth, don't you?

Jim


"george" wrote in message
oups.com...


Matt Whiting wrote:

Antoñio wrote:
Matt

The post I replied to, including my reply, was a grand total of 20 lines
long. I don't even need to scroll my screen to read it all. What is
your problem, Jim?

Matt

RST Engineering wrote:

You idiots that don't top post or quote hundreds of lines of text understand
that you are simply wasting bandwidth, don't you?

Who is the idiot?

http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/usenet/brox.html

http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html

On Sat, 28 May 2005 15:10:51 GMT, Matt Whiting
wrote in ::

RST Engineering wrote:

You idiots that don't top post or quote hundreds of lines of text understand
that you are simply wasting bandwidth, don't you?

Who is the idiot?

http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/usenet/brox.html

http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html


Hey, Mr. Wier is too lazy to roll the wheel on his mouse. Why should
he give a damn if top posting makes followup articles impossible to
follow? Chronology is only important to authors who have
consideration for their readers. :-)

("RST Engineering" wrote)
You idiots that don't top post or quote hundreds of lines of text
understand that you are simply wasting bandwidth, don't you?


I LIKE TOP POSTING as well, because that's where my screen sends me for each
post - to the top. Small quotes above the new post are OK, so long as I can
see part of the fresh post on my screen without having to scroll for it.

However ....people seem to prefer bottom posting, so I bottom post - don't
like it, but I do it. It is my suspicion that top posting fans are the
silent majority :-)

I hope we can all agree that people need to TRIM THEIR POSTS!!!
(It's to the point that if it happens - great!! If not - oh well)

Isn't June National Top Posting Month at rec.aviation?
If not, it should be. It's only 1 month out of 12 ....for now. g


Montblack

In article ,
"Montblack" wrote:

I hope we can all agree that people need to TRIM THEIR POSTS!!!

shack

--
Bob Noel
no one likes an educated mule