Monday, April 03, 2006

Censorship in its purest form

I tuned in to the Pahrump Receiver last night to see if what I’d been told, that it had been shut down, was correct. It was dead.

Leave it to someone living in UT playing at being the ‘moral police’ to decide what is appropriate (or not) for ME, or anyone else, to listen to.

Has it occurred to YOU Bob, that others do not share your mind set? (Well, perhaps only Big Ben kd7bcw, who is actually carrying out a ‘vendetta’.) If the FCC didn't want these folks on air, their tickets would be yanked and they wouldn't be transmitting. This hasn't happened.

As it is, your s-meter tuners are basically useless anyway, by virtue (I include this word just for you) of being 'kicked' every hour, you demonstrate your need to CONTROL everyone and everything to YOUR ideas of what an online tuner should be. I personally seldom listen there, but I do know a whole bunch of folks that do. Who knows whom you might have shut out? Or the future business you might be influencing in a negative way?

Now, Bob, you're imposing your 'morals' on everyone else! Did God appoint you censure of the airwaves??? Somehow I think not.

Get off the fence. Either provide dedicated tuners, or not, but leave your moral values at your church, because they sure aren’t mine!


KI6GU said...

Bob blocked my IP address months ago for reasons known only to him. I have emailed him several times asking why he took this action. I have not asked him to restore access to the site. I simply want to understand the thought process that led him to take this action. I am beginning to understand why billy calls them the "morally superior" hams. Apparently they really do think they are better than many other people.


liveinthewire said...

The information is available from multiple sources, freely and for free. Calling this censorship is sensational and a misuse of the word. Editorial control and selection of content are NOT censorship. If you don't like the way a particular (free!) service operates, you are free to choose another. You have not justified your mean-spirited attack on the provider.

If your comments were more focused on the real agenda, and and not diluted by the spurious censorship claim, your argument would be more telling.

liveinthewire said...

ki6gu wrote: Apparently they really do think they are better than many other people.

If a panhandler approaches you with urine-soaked trousers and rotting teeth, do you invite him home? Probably not. Everyone chooses his associates, it's normal human behavior.

Sure, it's a bad feeling when someone shuns you. But the healthy, productive thing is ask yourself what was unappealing enough to cause that.

Rationalizing about the other person's faults and "moral superiority" is just a way of not having to think about what drove the other person away. You must do it for yourself; people are socially prevented from being honest about why they shun you.

Anonymous said...

Evvy, nobody owes you an online tuner.

And nobody's censoring anybody.

You can listen to anything you want.
All you need to do is buy a radio.

Then you won't have to whine endlessly about what other people do with THEIR equipment.

Craig Petersen said...

In this day of the Internet, a system administrator does not need a rational reason to block someone from site access. At my previous QTH I ran my own servers, (linux and Sun Solaris) it provided e-mail, HTTP, FTP, SFTP and Telnet services for all my users. This machine was constantly bombarded with buffer overflow attempts and other scripted attacks from zombied Windows boxes. My biggest problem was dealing with SPAM; at one point I was getting thousands of e-mails a day, all SPAM.

My solution was to block entire subnets, mostly from China, Korea and Russia. But this soon escalated into blocking ALL of AOL, Comcast, Verizon and various other domains because of the hordes of Windows based SPAM bots. I would regularly grep the access logs and find hundreds of HTTP buffer overflow attempts coming from places such as High Schools in China. The mail server logs grew to several megs in size with 'unknown user' errors as the SPAM bots tried randomly generated user accounts. Now I don't know the reasons Jim was blocked, weather it was fair or not is not my call. In my case it was to protect form scripted attacks, nothing more.

Now as for the reasons the streaming receivers were brought off line were entirely up to the system provider. If they choose to not stream the happenings of 3840 / 47 that's their call; they are the ones paying for the bandwidth and the hardware. If it were me, I probably wouldn't of brought it down, but that's just me.

Anonymous said...

What Bob did at S-meter was absolutely correct. The whole point is to promote ham radio not this jam radio crap. Bob doesn’t need to spend his bandwidth on a train wreck of Billy followers.

Billy Crowell said...

Evvy you need to wake up and join the rest of us in "reality land." Bob can do anything he damn well pleases with his resources providing no contracts guide him otherwise. You're living in a fantasy world that doesn't coincide with the real world. Perhaps, Bob deemed the behavior on the streamed frequency wasn't something he wanted associated with his site. If this is so, it is interesting that Bob disagrees with the idiotic, mentally derranged ramblings of the likes of -BNQ, -AYJ, -TXH, -GU, -EZV, et al.. while seeing no problem with the mindless, moronic idol worshipping of The Loop which had dominated the tuner's selected frequency. The only thing that the instigators crew have over the zombie, thoughtless art fanboys is that they have no problem contradicting the fanboys' body of worship when he's wrong; which is quite often (accept it, fan boys!). Outside these instigators, Orv was the only person who had the cojones to contradict -OBB when he would spew out false or just plain stupid comments. Coupling this with his brilliant mind towards various ham radio principles (electronics, antennas, rf...), Orv was the only thing that kept the ever moving lord of the loop frequency crowd worth listening to.

Anonymous said...

Did he take down ?

Bill Crowell said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Bill Crowell said...

I did not post the foregoing comments which appear under the name "Billy Crowell" N6AYJ

Bill Crowell said...

Just kidding... I did. I just like adding suspense to everything.

Anonymous said...

Billy is obsessed with Art. And
Were not talking oils!

Bill Crowell said...

Like I said, I didn't write the foregoing posts. Somebody else is signing my name to them. I don't give a shit about Art.

And "liveinthewire", you dumb shit, I keep telling you, you've been pantsed! Everybody knows you're Pete Slagle, K6XL! Damn, you dipshit, how do you figure you can still keep posting anonymously after everybody knows who you are? What a freakin' dummy! Write Pete at QRZmail@K6XL.US to tell him how dumb he is.

evvy said...

bill wrote:
Write Pete at QRZmail@K6XL.US to tell him how dumb he is.

Why bother when we can tell him right here? Of course EVERYONE knows he's Pete Slagel!

The real question is: does Pete know???

Anonymous said...

So here we have liveinthewire and on the air Yogi Bear says over and over fire in the wire

Freddie__J said...

I was booted (censored) from Evvy's Yahoo group because I said I would contact Yahoo Abuse if I saw threats posted. Since Evvy likes threats against hams, she booted me so she could keep her group. She is a hypocrite.

Bill Crowell said...

In case any of the Art Bell stalkers didn't know, Timmy ("My favorite ham") is one of the consistant jammers on 75m at night. Here's the quiz for y'all, do you know which one ?

Art Bell said...

I was wonder where all my loser stalkers were hanging out!

liveinthewire said...

Bill Crowell wrote:

And "liveinthewire", you dumb shit, I keep telling you, you've been pantsed!

Oh you are so clever! Silly me!

While you were being so clever, did it occur to you that if I had cared at all about anonymity, I would have simply have posted as "anonymous"?

Did ya take enough French to learn the phrase "nom de plume"?

Or did you simply assume in your own way that anything that isn't immediately obvious must be hidden for devious reasons?


Legal fine print:

Copyright © 2003 evvy garrett. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

Unauthorized reproduction without prior permission is a violation of copyright laws.

The statements or opinions posted in The HamFanz Grudge Report are solely those of the author, who assumes no liabilities for those statements or opinions.

Most comments are published ASAP. This site respects the right of users to express themselves. Comments will not be posted if they contain commercial spam, illegal pornography, threats of violence, or personal harassment directed at myself or another user.

All pages and content of The HamFanz Grudge Report are the intellectual property of the author(s), (Comments are the property of their original posters) and protected by law.