Bob Kuczewski - 2015/02/15 06:45:31 UTC
Sockpuppets and False Accusations
Hi Tad (cc Steve),
Hi Bob. (Thank you for cc-ing Steve using Bob Show Nobody's registered e-mail address - same one he used here to register under the same screen name - and giving us yet more confirmation that you know exactly who he is - USHGA rated pilot 88875 - that he's not a sockpuppet, and that you have even more no rational justification for keeping him locked in your Basement.)
Thank you for the notification. But rest assured that I'm not gonna be missing a post/topic like that for very long anyway.
Please be more careful before you make false accusations in the future.
Let's first establish that I've actually MADE a false accusation. And preferably not something like:
Tad Eareckson - 2014/12/09 03:49:09 UTC
How very odd. I made exactly the same proposal to Bob and restored his status minus personal messaging a bit over two weeks ago and he told me to go fuck myself.
in which I've obviously paraphrased your actual words and obviously totally nailed the actual meaning behind...
Bob Kuczewski - 2014/11/22 18:19:41 UTC
I've read your post, but I'm not sure what you're asking about. Can you write back with exactly what you want to accomplish and include a specific proposal?
...your actual words.
By the way... As I've said before, you DO have the ability to log in here, send and receive personal messages, edit or delete your posts. And it would be a good bit easier for me if you communicated via PM 'cause it's a bit of a pain to harvest the time stamp in my format of choice - 2015/02/15 06:45:31 UTC - in the email stuff. I just ask that you not post 'cause I got fed up with crap like the turbulent jet stream right over your wing on launch which makes a hook-in check the straw that makes the break from near perfect safety to virtually certain death and:
http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=929
Training Manual Comments / Contribution
Bob Kuczewski - 2012/01/13 16:17:18 UTC
Note: The banning of Tad does violate this policy. When the policy was written, I did not anticipate the threat that could be brought to the forum (and the association) by allowing minors to communicate with known child molesters.
(And if you dream for a nanosecond that you're ever gonna come back from crap like that...)
But I guess you don't wanna log in here 'cause then people would be able to see that you have the ability to log in here.
http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=1759
2 + 2 = 7 ... A case study on how to be wrong.
Bob Kuczewski - 2015/02/15 06:01:39 UTC
2 + 2 = 7 ... A case study on how to be wrong.
Tad Eareckson certainly knows a lot about hang gliding. He particularly knows a lot about towing.
But not so much about the slope launch stuff. Totally incapable of understanding the deadly hazards of the turbulent jet stream six inches above the wing in all conditions and the insanity of doing hook-in checks just prior to launch. Two or three fatalities each year and scores of injuries too horrible to talk about.
http://ozreport.com/forum/files/copy_2_of_imgp1239_197.jpg
http://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7220/13949046702_ccfa0fafab_o.png
http://www.thekiteboarder.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/opener-532x800.jpg
He often characterizes his knowledge...
MY knowledge? I don't claim or want to have any corner on the knowledge market in this game. It's open to anybody capable of cutting pretty simple high school stuff.
...as being as straight forward as 2 + 2 = 4. In many cases he's right.
And "straight forward" is one word if you wanna work a bit on getting things right.
But Tad has a blind spot, and in hang gliding a blind spot can get people injured ... or killed.
Great...
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8143/7462005802_bbc0ac66ac_o.jpg
Let's focus on the blind spots of TAD's that can get people injured or killed. Way to prioritize!
Tad's blind spot is his absolute certainty that he's always right.
No Bob, I'm only absolutely certain that I'm right in the areas in which I'm absolutely certain that I'm right. If I were absolutely right about everything my chest would've been crushed under the weight of Nobel Prize medals decades ago.
That blinds him from seeing any possibilities where he might be wrong.
Like when there's a turbulent jet stream six inches over my wing and I decide to risk a hook-in check anyway - because I'd been too clueless to do Joe Greblo's Four or Five Cs back in the staging area a couple minutes ago.
Those possibilities don't exist for Tad, and that's exactly why he is unable to see the truth whenever it happens to be ... in his blind spot.
What a pity it is that you wasted all of your time becoming competent in Navier-Stokes equations instead of getting a degree in psychiatry.
Let's take a look at a recent example...
On November 19th, of 2014, I sent an email message to the US Hawks user registered as "Nobody" with a copy to Tad (Tad has asserted that "Nobody" is Steve, so I'll call him Steve since the use of "Nobody" is confusing).
Why don't you call him Steve because...
http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=1638
Basement Bob
Bob Kuczewski - 2014/11/20 05:37:34 UTC
Hi Bill,
I don't think you could have been any nicer or friendlier to "Nobody". You even added a considerable amount of self-deprecating humor for his benefit.
Here's your reward from Tad's forum (aka "kitestrings"):
Re: The Bob Show
Steve Davy - 2014/11/20 05:32:16 UTC
Bill,
You watched that video, saw bisfal bisto crash after having his weak link break, then advised that he not increase the strength of his weak link.
What kind of a sick person would offer that advice? Do you enjoy watching folks crash? What the f**k is wrong with you, Bill?
I'll say it again, rot in Hell pigf**ker!
From:
http://www.kitestrings.org/topic33-320.html#p7036
If there was ever proof that you just can't be nice to some people ... this is it.
...you know bloody goddam well he's Steve.
In my email message of November 19th...
Yes, we've already established that it was your email message of November 19th.
I was asking to have a telephone conversation with Steve as a prerequisite to restoring some of his posting privileges on the US Hawks.
Bob Kuczewski - 2014/11/19 18:53:30 UTC
Hello Steve (cc Tad),
I've been having a conversation with Tad regarding your reinstatement to the general US Hawks forum.
As you may remember, I took the position that people should not be allowed to attack others on our forum without people knowing who they actually are ... in real life. That's why I restricted your posting to the "Free Speech Zone" on our forum.
I've seen too many forums where "puppet" users are created to make it appear that there are lots of people with a particular view, when the reality was that they were just a bunch of aliases for one person. In fact, I was personally told this by someone doing that exact thing on the hanggliding.org forum. I am hoping to do something better on the US Hawks forum.
So I've arrived at my own policy to avoid that situation. My policy is that I want to have a reasonable certainty of the identity of each person who is engaging in any significant personal attacks against others. I currently do that with at least one phone call (possibly more). It's not a perfect system, but I think it's better than what we see on most of the other national forums. I stand behind giving people a public voice, but only if they're willing to stand behind it as well.
I welcome the chance to discuss this with you, and you are welcome to call me any time at 858-204-7499.
Thanks for signing up with the US Hawks.
Sincerely,
Bob Kuczewski
As part of that email message I wrote this:
Bob Kuczewski - 2014/11/14 18:53:30 UTC
I've seen too many forums where "puppet" users are created to make it appear that there are lots of people with a particular view, when the reality was that they were just a bunch of aliases for one person. In fact, I was personally told this by someone doing that exact thing on the hanggliding.org forum.
Today (February 14th, 2015)...
Valentine's Day. Can't you feel the love?
And before we move on to today (February 14th, 2015) let's not forget this LATER despicable email message you sent on November 19th:
Bob Kuczewski - 2014/11/19 19:12:48 UTC
Steve and Tad,
Let me apologize that my memory appears to be failing me.
I generally like to think that most people are reasonable and rational individuals who really want to come to resolutions about issues.
But when I looked up "Nobody’s recent posts, I found this:
http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=1514
Crash
Nobody - 2014/02/23 06:25:51 UTC
You've got shit for brains, Bill. Rot in Hell pigfucker.
It's hard for me to imagine the kind of human being who would write something like that on a public forum to someone as experienced and thoughtful as Bill Cummings.
So while my offer to reinstate "Nobody" based on a telephone discussion stands, I have to say that it will be a long conversation (maybe many conversations) and may not conclude with a restoration of posting rights.
As it stands (and evidenced above), Nobody remains free to post in the "Free Speech Zone" even to this day. Despite Tad's complaints, that's far more of a voice than Tad has given to myself on his forum. So Tad, if you want to argue for Nobody to post MORE on our forum, then maybe you should FIRST allow me and others the same posting rights on your forum that he ALREADY HAS on ours.
Sincerely,
Bob Kuczewski
...I found that Tad had quoted that same passage on
his forum followed by this "logical" analysis:
Tad Eareckson - 2015/02/14 16:42:09 UTC
So aside from the single instance in which you were, in fact, personally told this by someone doing that exact thing on the hanggliding.org forum, how have you been or become aware of the sockpuppet problem on so many forums?
I'm only seeing three other possibilities:
- It was fu**in' obvious to everybody that an individual member was running sockpuppets.
- A moderator was able to determine that an individual member was running sockpuppets.
- You were the individual member running sockpuppets.
And in the first two scenarios the sockpuppet strategy blows up in the face of its perpetrator - destroys his credibility and damages whatever position he was taking or supporting.
So the only way any of the sockpuppet ops of which you know could have been damaging to the forums and principles you espouse would've been if you were running and getting away with them.
In other words, Tad used his "infallible 2+2=4 logic" to deduce that I must have been "running sockpuppets" myself.
Bullshit. Tad used his "infallible 2+2=4 logic" to deduce that:
the only way any of the sockpuppet ops of which you know could have been damaging to the forums and principles you espouse would've been if you were running and getting away with them.
Try actually reading the stuff you quote. If it's beyond your reading comprehension range try finding someone to explain it to you.
The only problem is that I have never been "running sockpuppets" on any forum ... ever.
Fine. I never said you were. You have other despicable tactics you use to achieve the same objectives.
Let's see where Tad went wrong.
Why bother? Most of your Bob Show assholes already know I'm always wrong about everything. Sam, for example. And he's quite a genius!! Such a genius, in fact, that he doesn't even need to read my long winded posts to already know I'm always wrong about everything.
Tad asked the question:
So aside from the single instance in which you were, in fact, were personally told this by someone doing that exact thing on the hanggliding.org forum, how have you been or become aware of the sockpuppet problem on so many forums?
Then Tad went on to list what he thought were the only three possibilities:
- It was fu**in' obvious to everybody that an individual member was running sockpuppets.
- A moderator was able to determine that an individual member was running sockpuppets.
- You were the individual member running sockpuppets.
We did that already - just before four sentences ago. Do we really need to waste the bandwidth?
He then used his "logic" to eliminate the first two leaving him with the third as the only possibility. But Tad forgot to list one possibility. In fact, he forgot to list the one possibility that was ... true:
- Multiple people had personally told me that they were using "sockpuppets" on other forums.
I didn't forget it, Bob. I FULLY considered that one. But I didn't waste my time with it because if that were the case any reasonable reader would see your statement:
In fact, I was personally told this by someone doing that exact thing on the hanggliding.org forum.
as deliberately misleading. You know, the "the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth" thing.
Only ten of those things? Are you sure that's enough? I think when you're expressing my embarrassment for me you should use at least fifteen or twenty. I have a few extras...
Feel free to use them as you wish.
Tad appears to have taken my statement that "In fact, I was personally told this by someone doing that exact thing on the hanggliding.org forum" to mean that was the only time ("single instance") that anyone had ever told me they were using "sockpuppets" on other forums. It was not.
Yeah Bob? How 'bout asking if any of your Dedicated Sycophants had any different interpretations.
Tad failed to see that important possibility...
No he didn't. See above.
...and he "convicted" me based on that blind spot in his own thinking.
Oh, you think I've treated you unfairly?
My point is that the conclusions Tad draws from his famous "2 + 2 = 4" logic are faulty when they're based on his faulty assumptions.
OK, how 'bout YOU explaining why, when you're trying to sell your bullshit premise of keeping Steve locked down in your ratty little Basement with outrageous restrictions beyond just not being able to post on the mainstream, that he might be somebody else's sockpuppet, you tell us:
...I was personally told this by someone doing that exact thing on the hanggliding.org forum.
instead of:
Multiple people had personally told me that they were using "sockpuppets" on other forums.
What logical, rational reason could you possibly have for doing that? What logical, rational person would do something like that? "We need to deal with this Ebola thing and we need to do it now 'cause I know of this guy in Sierra Leone who got REALLY SICK for a week last month."
Unfortunately, Tad is blind to this problem because he will not allow himself to see any possibilities that would undermine the point he wants to make.
No Bob, I'm not gonna waste my time and the bandwidth posting wacko scenario possibilities like:
"Multiple people had personally told me that they were using "sockpuppets" on other forums but I'm only gonna tell you about the one on The Jack Show when I'm trying to whip up a storm of sockpuppetphobia amongst my Dedicated Sycophants."
If you wanna elaborate and reveal yourself as twenty times the wacko as previously perceived I will defend that right to my death.
So while I believe that Tad has a lot to offer to new pilots...
1. But, of course, NOTHING to offer to anyone over a six months or a Two - whichever comes first.
2. 'SPECIALLY new pilots of varying ages.
3. Well, it's just your BELIEF - so what the fuck.
...I must also caution them that Tad has many blind spots of his own making.
Well aren't we lucky to have your perspective on that...
http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=649
missing release
Peter Birren - 2011/08/29 18:59:08 UTC
Coward Tad. Big talker. No brains. No comprehensive ability. Still spouting the same blind, ignorant crap.
Ignorant coward, you haven't got a clue about reality. Still not taking your meds?
http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=818
Peter (Linknife) Birren
Peter Birren - 2011/12/01 01:19:21 UTC
Nope, NOBODY foot launches or uses 2:1 bridles. Nobody, that is, except those in the US, Australia, South Africa, Poland, Uruguay, Canada, England, France, Russia, Turkey and wherever else foot-launch static line towing is being done.
EVERYBODY knows people who compare apples and oranges are willfully blind fools. And EVERYBODY knows one shouldn't argue with an idiot: When you argue with an idiot people cannot tell the two apart. So after your having denigrated for the last time my good friends Don Hewett and Rob Richardson, twisting the words and experiences of both to suit your own agenda, and the impossibility of carrying on a rational discussion with you, I'm done.
So very few voices of reason keeping everybody neatly lined up on the straight and narrow. Wanna know somebody else who focuses a lot on my psychiatric issues?
http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=15716
weak links
Davis Straub - 2009/04/26 22:05:31 UTC
Tad obviously completely lacks social intelligence and probably a few other forms of intelligence. Also, he obviously has other mental health issues.
http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=25015
Zippy pounds in
Davis Straub - 2011/09/02 18:37:09 UTC
Concussions are in fact very serious and have life long effects. The last time I was knocked out what in 9th grade football. I have felt the effects of that ever since. It changes your wiring.
Did you also play a lot of football when you were a person of varying ages? And, of course, that WOULD go a long way to explain why you're so unshakably certain that people of varying ages under the precise age of eighteen are all so utterly incapable of making personal decisions without YOUR consent.
He can be very insistent and convincing that he's right ... when he's really dead wrong.
If it weren't for guys like you and Peter...
http://www.chgpa.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2467
weak links
Brian Vant-Hull - 2007/07/21 13:00:33 UTC
I'll be lazy and ask if any of your references give a physical reason for the 0.8 to 2 g range they quote as safe. If not, constructing a reasonable physical argument could be a major contribution. You clearly have the physics down well enough (as good as anyone else in the world) to do so.
http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=12403
weak link table
ian9toes - 2009/06/14 15:18:37 UTC
Gold Coast, Queensland
I strongly disagree with banning the one guy who has the most knowledge about safety issues involving what I believe is the most dangerous part of our sport. I hear someone dies every year from towing. I hope SG bites his tongue in the interest of public safety.
http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=31781
Another hang check lesson
Alan Deikman - 2014/09/23 19:47:06 UTC
Amazing how when this topic comes up every time you see people argue the same arguments over and over again. It has been a classic (although niche) endless Internet flame topic.
I suspect that some of the parties that have posted in threads like these before are refraining now since they have learned that it is nearly (completely?) impossible to change people's minds on the topic.
For my part I will just refer you to the classic Tad Eareckson essay which I call "
the gun is always loaded" which is a bit overworked but probably all you will ever need to read regarding FTHI. A lot of people will find it gores their particular sacred Ox, but I have never seen anyone point out a flaw in his logic.
http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=881
Davis Straub; Idiot Statist, Endless Wars & Tyranny
Warren Narron - 2015/02/07 02:25:31 UTC
Tad: Uncensored
IMO, Tad Eareckson's analysis and logic of things as they ought to be in hang gliding are right on the money.
Quote me some other people saying stuff like that about other people.
So anyway, Bob...
Multiple people had personally told me that they were using "sockpuppets" on other forums.
Maybe you could explain to us how come you've got so many buddies so comfortable confiding to you that they're running sockpuppet ops. You do part-time work as a Catholic priest? You know about them but are bound by the Sacred Confidentiality Mandates of the Confessional not to expose them and their specific scams?
P.S. Your post has been up for well over eleven hours now - probably over twelve 'cause I know fer certain that I've been seeing them stamped an hour ahead of when they're actually posted - and so far none of your Dedicated Sycophants has jumped on your "Tad Definitely Has Some Loose Wiring" bandwagon.
---
Edit - 2015/02/15 18:45:00 UTC
P.P.S. Yeah, the time stamp on YOUR forum post is definitely an hour ahead of actual 'cause the stamp of your email message giving me the link is:
2015/02/15 06:45:31 UTC
while the post itself is:
2015/02/15 07:01:39 UTC
So unless you're buddies with Doctor Who... (And I'd be horrified if you were.)
)
