Thread
:
Do the DVHRC support Worthless Wiecky's thuggery? was Peter
View Single Post
#
3
(
permalink
)
September 21st 07, 01:58 AM posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.marketplace,rec.antiques.radio+phono
Shawn K
external usenet poster
Posts: 1
Do the DVHRC support Worthless Wiecky's thuggery? was Peter
To Andre Jute:
OK, I am fed up with you now. You have not posted anything on this
newsgroup (rec.antiques.radio+phono) that would be helpful or even
remotely useful to anyone. Peter, on the other hand, has been very
helpful to many people here, including myself, by offering advice,
giving away equipment (only asking to have postage covered), and doing
seminars at Kutztown.
So GO AWAY! STOP posting here, unless you have something interesting to
contribute about antique radios. You are VERY annoying, and that is
putting it mildly.
I am now going to add you to my filter list, so I will never be able to
receive e-mail or posts from you ever again.
PS: I apologize to all good forum members for putting up with my rant.
PS: Andre Jute: GO AWAY!!
wrote:
I've been very careful not to drag the organising club of the Kutztown
Radio Meet into the nightcart-load of trouble Peter Wieck has brought
upon himself. Gray Glasser went further and removed them from
suspicion by saying "the Delaware Valley Historic Radio Club (DVHRC)
is reputable and respectable". But now some thoughtless fulminator
from the DVHRC has taken it on himself to give an opinion, in a
tribute thread to Worthless Wiecky no less! Bending over backwards to
be fair, I have waited over a day for calmer heads to prevail and the
retraction to arrive. It hasn't happened.
On Sep 18, 5:33 pm, " wrote:
On behalf of the DVHRC, we have been silent in regards to the prior
posts, for the obvious reason that they do not deserve a response.
Perhaps you will tell us, Mr Saegers, or whatever your name is, since
the DVHRC is now officially taking a position that the "prior
posts ... do not deserve a response", which prior posts are the DVHRC
thereby condemning?
Are you describing the posts supporting Peter Wieck as beneath a
response?
Are you describing the posts accusing Peter Wieck of crapping in other
people's houses as beneath a response?
Rather than choosing the lose-lose option of taking sides, you would
have been so much smarter to remain silent.
With sympathy,
Andre Jute
"Blessed is the man who, having nothing to say, abstains from giving
us wordly evidence of the fact."-- George Elliot
--
Shawn K
www.thisoldradio.com
Shawn K
View Public Profile
View message headers
Find all posts by Shawn K
Find all threads started by Shawn K