Text 34259, 143 rader
Skriven 2006-07-22 17:26:21 av Roy Witt (1:1/22)
  Kommentar till text 34241 av Jeff Smith (1:14/0)
Ärende: Where where you when the Towers came down?
==================================================
22 Jul 06 14:11, Jeff Smith wrote to Roy Witt:

 RW>> Ahh, so why didn't you ever complain about Phil using
 RW>> 'Steeplejack'...

 JS>      For the same reason I probably wouldn't complain if you posted a
 JS> message using the nic 'Needledick'. <g>

But I would object to using that alias. It's befitting Ward Doosche.
Although it may not fit in the From: header, NeedleDickTheBugFucker would
fit him better.

 JS> I would presume that the nic was being used as an alias for you and
 JS> that you were not try to deceive people into thinking that another
 JS> real person posted the message.

You mean using Ward Dossche as an alias isn't an amusing alias? I think
it's the funniest alias anyone could use...too bad Ward is already using
it though.

 JS>>>>>  For me at least we shouldn't have to question who a message is
 JS>>>>> actually from or if a particular message is real.
 RW>>>> How many of those in the nodelist do you actually know
 RW>>>> personally?
 JS>>>      Does it matter? When I see your name in the From: field I
 JS>>> shouldn't have to wonder if you actually wrote the message. The
 JS>>> name in the From: field should be the name of the person that
 JS>>> actually wrote the message.

 RW>> If I log onto a bbs and use an alias such as Ben Johnson, how would
 RW>> you know that Ben Johnson or Roy Witt wrote it? The point is, you
 RW>> don't know for certain who you're talking with unless you actually
 RW>> have met that person. Even then, as it was proven at a R10 sysop
 RW>> meeting, everyone there thought they met Roy Witt in person, but in
 RW>> actuality, they met someone else who claimed to be me. They didn't
 RW>> even ask for an ID, they just assumed that the person they were
 RW>> introduced to was me.

 JS>         Yes, there is a certain amount of trust involved here Roy.
 JS> You could create any number of accounts on a BBS, website, Etc and
 JS> people wouldn't know for sure who was the actual author of a message.

Sounds like a great plan.

 JS> They would have to place a certain amount of trust in you that you
 JS> will not pretend to be another real person when posting a message.

But I'm already doing that.

 JS>         That is the key issue here IMHO. Posting a message using an
 JS> alias versus posting a message using the name of another real person.
 JS> Yes, there is probably another real Jeff Smith out there <g> as well
 JS> as another Roy Witt. But I doubt that you will find too many Roy
 JS> Witt's or Ward Dossche's in this echo other than the two originals.

Well, not today maybe...in the near future there could be dozens of them.

 JS> My earlier point was that when I see a message in this or other echo
 JS> with a particular person's name in the From: field. I will assume and
 JS> also trust that I am not being deceived into thinking that the
 JS> author's name that is displayed IS the true author.

I'd check the origin-line for a node number first...you never know what
can happen. Although I've also seen forged node numbers in origin lines
too...even the seenbys can fool you.

 JS>>>>> Heck, I am not even crazy about the use of nics and aliases
 JS>>>>> that a number of people use.

 RW>>>> But it's not up to you or anyone else to say otherwise. In fact,
 RW>>>> most echo rules state that if your message header is an alias,
 RW>>>> signing the message at the end if mandatory.

 JS>>>     I realize that and agree with you. That is just my personal
 JS>>> opinion in matters that I can control. BBS, echos, Etc. Others
 JS>>> are free to think otherwise if they so choose. In fact, back in
 JS>>> the good 'ole CB days I didn't much care for using a handle then
 JS>>> either. My CB handle often times was just Jeff. <g> Yes... the
 JS>>> good old kilowatt days with a Moonraker on the roof. Boy did I
 JS>>> annoy a neighbor or two now and then.

 RW>> Been there, done that...Have you ever heard of a Gizmotchee antenna?
 RW>> Speaking in terms of a beam like the moonraker, looking down the
 RW>> business end, they looked like this;  |
 RW>>                             / \
 RW>> They were verticaly and horizontally polarized and switchable at
 RW>> will. I made a 4 elemement that I used for years and my partner, to
 RW>> out do me, made a pair of them and stacked them together.  |___|
 RW>> They were awsume!
 RW>>                                                /     \

 JS>         The name rings a small bell. A moonraker was about as big a
 JS> beam as I could manage, space wise.

They were awfully big and as I look back, only covered one band...hardly
suitable for real radio use.

 JS> Another smaller antenna that I had good luck with was a PDL-II. The
 JS> signal rejection was suprizingly high 32db for it's size (Boom
 JS> 4'10'') and the gain was about 12db as I recall.

I'm familiar with one that looks a three element beam on that same 120
degree layout, but all of the radials were verticle and you could switch
directions electronically. One radial became the driven element and the
other two became two reflecting radials.

 RW>> And if that was all there was to it, you'd be right. You'd have to
 RW>> go back a ways to review the history between Dossche and me. He's
 RW>> been out to remove me from Fidonet for years. I'm probably the only
 RW>> one who remains in Fidonet who's a constant pain in his ass. He's
 RW>> not worthy of being here, but he's a *C, so, as you know and have
 RW>> just witnessed, *Cs can play with the nodelist...If I had been in
 RW>> Z2, I would have been removed from the nodelist years ago, just like
 RW>> he did with so many who disagreed with him there.

 JS>      And I will not try to speak up on the subject in any great depth
 JS> do to my lack of background knowledge. Although I do remember the
 JS> ongoing interaction or entertainment that you both have provided over
 JS> the years. At least from the late 80's when I joined the Fido ranks
 JS> as a node.

You preceeded me by a couple of years, but I wasn't a fido sysop until
1995.

 JS>>> Heck, there are at least a couple people who I think have me in
 JS>>> their filter. I am managing to survive under that added pressure.
 JS>>> Guess I exceed their stress limits. If that's what works for
 JS>>> them, who am I to complain.

 RW>> See, if Ward had just kept his mouth shut about filters, he wouldn't
 RW>> be so embarrassed by anything anyone says about him. I figure he's
 RW>> just a whiner who's com-upance is forthcoming. Rather than get rid
 RW>> of me, he's now got his worst nightmare to look forward to.

 JS>     See... Another mission in life for you both. That being to keep
 JS> each others fire well stoked. <g>

:o)


Roy
--- Twit(t) Filter v2.1 (C) 2000
 * Origin: Hacienda de Rio de Guadalupe * South * Texas, USA * (1:1/22)