wrote:
On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 16:52:47 -0500, wrote:

On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 21:36:04 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 16:19:48 -0500, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
"Reggie is Here wrote:

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 12:51:10 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould
wrote:

Answers: 1:B, 2:A, 3:A, 4:A, 5:C, 6:C, 7:C, 8:B, 9:A, 10:B
Now look what you've done - given everybody the answers.

~~ sheesh ~~
I got a 100, how did you do?
Missed one.
I hope it wasn't an important one!


Me too, I was torn between may and must sound the danger signal on the
crossing in the narrow channel. I thought I could miss him. ;-)

Didn't you know you were supposed to cheat and look at the answer sheet?

On Feb 11, 4:59*pm, "Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here
wrote:

You would expect one or two would use a newsgroup reader.

I also want to know why Google doesn't allow smart people over there?

"You would expect one or two would use a newsgroup reader."

Maybe I'm not smart because I must ask a question or two.

Most of you people pay for software to read news for/or to you?

Does this software also interpret the news for you?

Is there really such a thin as "news" on USENET?


I'll stop asking multiple questions in one post now, because even
though it may not help my case, I don't want to be identified as the
latest circle-jerker in rec.boats.

?:^ )

On Feb 11, 11:11*pm, wrote:
On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 20:52:07 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote:

Most of you people pay for software to read news for/or to you?

Does this software also interpret the news for you?

I paid about $15-20 bucks many years ago for Agent and it was worth
every penny.
It doesn't intrepret the news but it also doesn't keep track of
everything you look at and sell that information to spammers and
telemarketers like Google.

But that's one thing I like about G-mail. it blocks almost all the
spam that Google can sell.

Never a problem... only oppertunity!

Tim wrote:
On Feb 11, 4:59 pm, "Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here
wrote:

You would expect one or two would use a newsgroup reader.

I also want to know why Google doesn't allow smart people over there?

"You would expect one or two would use a newsgroup reader."

Maybe I'm not smart because I must ask a question or two.

Most of you people pay for software to read news for/or to you?

Does this software also interpret the news for you?

Is there really such a thin as "news" on USENET?


I'll stop asking multiple questions in one post now, because even
though it may not help my case, I don't want to be identified as the
latest circle-jerker in rec.boats.

?:^ )

Iim,
I can't figure out why anyone would think a Google User is any more or
less unintelligent that the other low lifes who hang around here.

On Feb 11, 11:17*pm, "Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here
wrote:
Tim wrote:
On Feb 11, 4:59 pm, "Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here
wrote:

You would expect one or two would use a newsgroup reader.

I also want to know why Google doesn't allow smart people over there?

"You would expect one or two would use a newsgroup reader."

Maybe I'm not smart because I must ask a question or two.

Most of you people pay for software to read news for/or to you?

Does this software also interpret the news for you?

Is there really such a thin as "news" on USENET?

I'll stop asking multiple questions in one post now, because even
though it may not help my case, I don't want to be identified as the
latest circle-jerker in rec.boats.

?:^ )

Iim,
I can't figure out why anyone would think a Google User is any more or
less unintelligent that the other low lifes who hang around here.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

good point!

On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 12:51:10 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould
wrote:

Captain's Class


Do you have the knowledge required to pass a USCG "Captain's License"
exam?
The following questions (and official answers) are extracted from the
pool of questions used on USCG exams.

=========================================

So is there a Captain Chuck in our future?

On Feb 11, 4:56�pm, BAR wrote:
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 12:51:10 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould
wrote:

Answers: 1:B, 2:A, 3:A, 4:A, 5:C, 6:C, 7:C, 8:B, 9:A, 10:B

Now look what you've done - given everybody the answers.

~~ sheesh ~~

Good liberal education policy.

Can't have boaters with self esteem problems.

Purpose of the exercise was to jog a few memories and/or teach a
couple of things to newbies. Putting the answers at the bottom simply
allows somebody to check their own work.

On Feb 11, 9:31�pm, Wayne.B wrote:
On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 12:51:10 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould

wrote:
Captain's Class

Do you have the knowledge required to pass a USCG "Captain's License"
exam?
The following questions (and official answers) are extracted from the
pool of questions used on USCG exams.

=========================================

So is there a Captain Chuck in our future?

Probably not. I read the regs probably way-too-strictly to ever
qualify with 360 days at sea. I still say that there isn't any real
wiggle room in the standard that a day of sea service consists of
eight hours *underway*. There is a provision for the sea day to be
reduced to four hours if the operating schedule of the vessel
precludes an 8 hour day, but that's really supposed to mean situations
like a passenger ferry that's only actually "underway" maybe half the
time and the other half time is spent loading/unloading. I can go an
entire year and only get one or two days where I am underway for a
full eight hours. I normally try to make port or drop and anchor after
no more than a 5-6 hour run- (anything longer than that begins to get
tiresome).

And yes, most people self certify and most people lie, egregiously.
In fact, I've sat through seminars in which Captain's License schools
are pitching prospects, and when the subject of sea service comes up
they all but come right and suggest that people lie. One of the
schools actually said, "We'll go over your certification form with
you, and we'll keep working on it until we can show 360 sea days.
Don't worry about that."

I could do the same thing and always be ashamed of my
"accomplishment", or simply figure there are already enough bogus and
unqualified "captains" tottering down the ways and forget about
joining the Joe Six-pack herd. I think I'll go with the second option.
I'd much rather respect myself for being honest than enjoy some
imaginary respect from somebody else because I hung an unearned title
in front of my name.

"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
...
On Feb 11, 9:31�pm, Wayne.B wrote:
On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 12:51:10 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould

wrote:
Captain's Class

Do you have the knowledge required to pass a USCG "Captain's License"
exam?
The following questions (and official answers) are extracted from the
pool of questions used on USCG exams.

=========================================

So is there a Captain Chuck in our future?

Probably not. I read the regs probably way-too-strictly to ever
qualify with 360 days at sea. I still say that there isn't any real
wiggle room in the standard that a day of sea service consists of
eight hours *underway*. There is a provision for the sea day to be
reduced to four hours if the operating schedule of the vessel
precludes an 8 hour day, but that's really supposed to mean situations
like a passenger ferry that's only actually "underway" maybe half the
time and the other half time is spent loading/unloading. I can go an
entire year and only get one or two days where I am underway for a
full eight hours. I normally try to make port or drop and anchor after
no more than a 5-6 hour run- (anything longer than that begins to get
tiresome).

And yes, most people self certify and most people lie, egregiously.
In fact, I've sat through seminars in which Captain's License schools
are pitching prospects, and when the subject of sea service comes up
they all but come right and suggest that people lie. One of the
schools actually said, "We'll go over your certification form with
you, and we'll keep working on it until we can show 360 sea days.
Don't worry about that."

I could do the same thing and always be ashamed of my
"accomplishment", or simply figure there are already enough bogus and
unqualified "captains" tottering down the ways and forget about
joining the Joe Six-pack herd. I think I'll go with the second option.
I'd much rather respect myself for being honest than enjoy some
imaginary respect from somebody else because I hung an unearned title
in front of my name.

Now that's the kind of honesty I'm looking for in a car/boat/RV salesman. ;-

On Feb 12, 5:18*am, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:
On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 20:52:07 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote:

Is there really such a thing as "news" on USENET?

Originally, in the land of the Intertubes and long before the WWW,
Usenet was the way to organize, thread and post messages of interest.
During the early days, it was the way for the average joe to
communicate with others via computer. *A lot like IRC (which came a
lot later) actually only much more text based and permanent. It was
kind of an offshoot of the original ARPAnet.

Originally, Usenet was set up in hierarchies and those hierarchies
were enforced by common discipline. *Originally, there were eight
hierarchies - comp (computer), misc., news., sci. (science), talk,
soc. (social), rec. (recreational), and humanties.

The individual hierarchy group approval process requried a FAQ and a
strict spam policy and a review of it's purpose by a "council" and an
open discussion group of wether the new group was a duplication of a
current news group or something original. *It was lengthy.

This control was eventually challenged by the alt. category (created
originally by the open net crowd) who chaffed under the "control"
enforced by the original eight hierarchy and the approval process.

At some point, the system became so large and unmanageable that
everybody pretty much gave up trying to control it. *At about the same
time as the control collapse, the WWW started to really take off and
new methods replaced Usenet like web forums, chat, etc.

So the answer to the question is that yes, once it served a great
purpose and worked as long as everybody played the same game.

Now? *Not so much.

Tom, jsut in the last couple years a friend of mine passed away But he
was on the "ground floor" of public computer link and internet
technology. He was the origional "Sysop" of "Omega Bullitin Boards.
Com) Omegabbs.

He used to monitor his various chat forums,a nd if somebody go into a
cussing fit, he'd give them an hr. or so "time out". or if servere and
repeated he'd boot em off.

So primitive in the day that he'd have to shut the main computer down
at from 2:AM- 4:AM just so it could "purge" itself...


anyhow ....