Expedition Exchange Bulletin Boards  

Go Back   Expedition Exchange Bulletin Boards > General
User Name
Password
FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #26  
Old April 27th, 2007, 08:52 PM
parantaeyang parantaeyang is offline
Won Park
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Ventura, California
Posts: 503
I haven't done so much reading as last two days. I was hoping to get some studying done for the HAM test.... Ho, maybe it WOULD be a good idea to ban me from the site until I have my call sign.

Here is what I have learned from RR7.

1. Jack has rep.
2. John has rep.
3. When you are a newbie buying a Rover, ask the people with rep.
4. When you are a rookie, becareful of the shit you put on your truck.
5. Build a rep before you become a chump.
6. John does post to SCLR and Discoweb.

When he does..... my 23'' monitor set vertically with maximum resolution will not even show the whole single post.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 크기변환_IMG_6055.JPG (144.9 KB, 35 views)
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old April 27th, 2007, 09:07 PM
alcruz
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by parantaeyang
When he does..... my 23'' monitor set vertically with maximum resolution will not even show the whole single post.
He has an uncanny way of getting his point across, you've got to love him
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old April 27th, 2007, 09:18 PM
johnlee johnlee is offline
John Lee
K6YJ
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Torrance, CA
Posts: 16,160
The SCLR board is obviously shut down, so I will post it here instead.

I would like to commend both Kevin Mokracek and Buddy Jones for taking a stand. Up to now, I have not seen a single member of the board of directors ever publicly take a position on anything. Never.

Kevin stated publicly that he is in favor of dry trail runs. This is gutsy. Please note that I am not commending Kevin for being in favor of dry trail runs. Rather, I'm commending him for making his position known publicly. Does any of us outsiders know what any other board member thinks about alcohol on the trail? Of course not. It's all discussed behind closed doors. Once the board makes a decision, it's announced publicly. We have no idea who voted for what. It's unreal.

Buddy Jones unlocked the alcohol thread that Nathan Woods previously locked. This is a gutsy move as well. Up to now, I don't know of a single public disagreement between the board of directors. Up to now, they have all spoken with one voice in public.

Thank you Kevin and Buddy for taking a position on something.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old April 27th, 2007, 10:08 PM
reelpain
 
Posts: n/a
I couldn't believe when I saw that. I made light that Nathan was responsible for the missing Whitehouse e-mails too! What a way to get indoctrinated as a new member into a club. Pathetic! Grow some Grapes People!!
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old April 28th, 2007, 12:33 AM
curtis
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by parantaeyang

Here is what I have learned from RR7.

1. Jack has rep.
2. John has rep.
3. When you are a newbie buying a Rover, ask the people with rep.
4. When you are a rookie, becareful of the shit you put on your truck.
5. Build a rep before you become a chump.
6. John does post to SCLR and Discoweb.

You have learned well grasshopper. The one thing you may have missed is that the one who delivered the message may not have rep at all, and thus, knows not what he speaks. Wisdom is only gained though experience and perspective. Those who have rep will have wisdom and vise-versa.

Just kidding. We are all idiots at the end of the day
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old April 28th, 2007, 07:42 AM
greghirst greghirst is offline
Greg Hirst
KI6CQL
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,290
Quote:
Originally Posted by parantaeyang
4. When you are a rookie, becareful of the shit you put on your truck.

I'd say you are doing pretty well with those XZL's on there.

However, some stainless fasteners would be nice...
Attached Images
File Type: jpg rr7006%20008.jpg (71.2 KB, 46 views)
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old April 28th, 2007, 07:02 PM
johnlee johnlee is offline
John Lee
K6YJ
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Torrance, CA
Posts: 16,160
Here is the last version of the Alcohol thread that I saved before it vanished all together:



This is topic Alcohol on SCLR-Sanctioned Trail Runs in forum Roverboard at SCLR Roverboard.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
http://www.sclr.org/cgi-bin/roverboa...c;f=1;t=001196
________________________________________
Posted by John Lee (Member # 305) on April 26, 2007 11:10 AMApril 26, 2007 10:10 AM:

There is some talk on DiscoWeb about Rover Rendezvous 2007. Several SCLR members have posted there. If you are interested, here is the entire thread on DiscoWeb:

http://www.discoweb.org/forums/showthread.php?t=34921

Included in such talk is an issue that I believe SCLR needs to address. And by “address”, I don’t mean behind the scenes. Somehow, SCLR has turned into a club where everything important is discussed behind the scenes or brushed under the rug. The issue is alcohol on the trail. Alcohol on the trail is an issue that greatly affects all SCLR and all fourwheelers. I say let’s address it publicly and openly.

I cannot recall the official club policy on alcohol on the trail. I had believed that the club’s policy was to have “dry” trail runs. That is, no alcohol on the trail, even during lunch or dinner breaks. Alcohol is fine around camp, but prohibited on the trail. Again, that is just my recollection. I thought that is what the club’s insurance policy required.

Nathan Woods posted on that thread that the Rover Rendezvous's policy is permit drinking in moderation during lunch breaks and depending on the trail leader’s policies for his own particular run:

http://www.discoweb.org/forums/showp...8&postcount=40

I might be mistaken about the club’s official policy. Nathan Woods might be mistaken. Again, I am not sure who is correct on the club’s official alcohol policy.

If the club’s alcohol policy is to permit alcohol during lunch breaks, I hereby move that we change the club’s official policy to prohibit alcohol during the trail runs. “Trail runs” includes lunch breaks and other trail stops.

This is not an abstract discussion. There was drinking on the trail at Rover Rendezvous. For example, Joe Nosal freely admits to it:

http://www.discoweb.org/forums/showp...4&postcount=79

Joe Nosal freely admits to drinking on the trail at Rover Rendezvous, and not just at lunch (not that drinking at a lunch break and then hitting the trail immediately thereafter is acceptable behavior). I guess Joe was bored enough on the trail that he felt the need to down a beer while waiting for the group to get moving.

There was also drinking on Cottonwood on Saturday. Ask anybody who was on Cottonwood and he will tell you that there was drinking. Adam Spiker even took pics of the drinking

Guess what we picked up on the trail on Pleasant on Sunday? You guessed it. A brand spanking new Bacardi Lime bottle. It was fresh. It hadn’t been sitting there for a long period of time. It still had liquid in it. It wasn’t covered in dust. It had just been discarded by whoever drank it. Coincidence? It could be. But I doubt it.

Read Kerlin lead Cottonwood on Saturday and Greg Hirst lead Pleasant Canyon on Sunday. I know both Read and Greg personally and have wheeled with them. I consider both of them friends and trust their judgment and integrity. Neither of them drinks on the trail nor condones such behavior. But there was drinking on both trails by the trail participants who either didn’t know the club’s alcohol policy or who--more likely--didn’t care.

This is an important issue for the club. Let’s discuss this. Let’s not brush this under the rug or discuss it behind the scenes, as the club has done for basically everything important for the past few years. Let’s discuss this issue openly. It affects us all.

Once again, if the club’s official alcohol policy is to permit drinking during lunch breaks, I hereby move that we change the club’s policy to prohibit drinking on the trail all together.



[ April 27, 2007, 01:51 PM: Message edited by: Nathan Woods ]

________________________________________
Posted by Buddy Jones (Member # 618) on April 26, 2007 12:07 PMApril 26, 2007 11:07 AM:

John, thank you for your post. I take this as a serious issue. Since being elected President in February of this year, this issue has come up several times. I have read the By-Laws several times and have not found a policy on alcohol consumption on the trail. I do feel there should be a policy in regards to alcohol and drugs and have been working on one. When I first joined the club, it had been spoken that moderate consumption of alcohol was permitted at lunch.
The consensus thus far has been that alcohol in moderation at lunch was ok and up to the trail leader whether even that would be allowed. I know others may argue that one alcoholic drink will impair one's ability to drive and/or make good decisions. Therefore, I agree that we should open this discussion up to the membership.
Lastly, you bring up an excellent point about our insurance policy. I will look into that and if there is mention of it, then we must follow that policy.

________________________________________
Posted by Kevin Mokracek (Member # 631) on April 26, 2007 12:22 PMApril 26, 2007 11:22 AM:

Like Buddy said this has come up over and over again. It's tough to make everyone happy but that is not always possible. I dont know how we change the by laws but I am all in favor of limiting the use of alcohol to camp only and making all trail runs dry. If people cant handle that then they can organize private trips themselves and not make it an SCLR trip.


I just went back and re-read the super top secret Directors forum and there was no behind the scenes stuff. We had a discussion about complaints that had been brought up to some of us and all the complaints I received revolved around the use of alcohol. There were also some complaints about the food and raffle tickets but that is small stuff and easy to handle. I am new to this Vice President thing and was kind of thrust into it so I dont know the In's and outs of the club and it's inner workings. I just thought the issue of alcohol was important enough to bring up to the board and try and come up with some cut and dry policy.
Thanks for bringing it up and be sure that something will change.

________________________________________
Posted by Nathan Woods (Member # 752) on April 26, 2007 12:23 PMApril 26, 2007 11:23 AM:

I think a discussion of alcohol is probably a good idea. As Buddy said, I too am unaware of any official SCLR policy on the topic.

John makes a couple of points that need clarification though:
1. RR7 is not an SCLR event. Instead, Rover Rendezvous policies would be in effect for the RR7 event.
2. The policy I voiced on DWeb was my understanding of the RR7 policy and unrelated to any formal SCLR policy, if there is one.


________________________________________
Posted by John Gadd (Member # 468) on April 26, 2007 12:31 PMApril 26, 2007 11:31 AM:

As you know Rover Rendezvous is a multi club event, not an SCLR event. So what happened there is event specific. Not SCLR specific.

John, I'm just curious how many SCLR runs you have been on in the last couple of years? You lead/organize many runs during the year. But none open to all SCLR members via the calendar. On EE runs you have a right to be very person and rule specific. But the club needs to accommodate many different types of people and vehicles. I would hate to see you create a rift in SCLR regarding something that really doesn't seem to affect you that much.

________________________________________
Posted by Kevin Mokracek (Member # 631) on April 26, 2007 12:32 PMApril 26, 2007 11:32 AM:

OK, so how do we go about changing the by laws? Club vote? Directors vote?

________________________________________
Posted by Joe (Member # 592) on April 26, 2007 01:05 PMApril 26, 2007 12:05 PM:

I am certain alcohol is legal for those of us that are over 21.

Certainly not while driving.

I am unsure about state and federal laws but I know that certain areas, like OHV areas, do not allow alcohol. I don't know about National park rules, BLM land, etc.

Any by laws should obviously not contradict local state and federal laws but there is also the "whats next" mentality should we decide that SCLR be non-alcohol across the board.

No smoking?

Vegans only?

No shoes, no shirt, no SCLR?

I think the alcohol in moderation, such as lunch time, etc. and "dry" runs at trail leader discretion is a good policy if as stated it doesn't contradict any laws or add any liability to SCLR. i am curious how this attitude relates to applicable laws, SCLR bylaws, and insurance policy, etc.

________________________________________
Posted by Matt Sodaro (Member # 457) on April 26, 2007 01:05 PMApril 26, 2007 12:05 PM:

Drinking on the trail....hit someone and your going to be personally sued. that alone should be enough to wake people up.(it only has to happen once). The trash is what really pisses me off and is equally important.

________________________________________
Posted by Rupert Jung (Member # 635) on April 26, 2007 01:15 PMApril 26, 2007 12:15 PM:

My personal perspective is No Alcohol on an organized club or multi-club event, insurance liability would increase for any club. Enforcement of that policy would be diffult for the trail leader if the offenders refuse. The trail enjoyment would be ruined for the other participants.
Also there should be a policy of loud noise (music etc) on the trail. We wanted to listen to the birds at the end of the Cottonwood Canyon trail, but that samee couple decided to play it loud. Someone on the trip asked them to tone it down, which they did.
BTW, that couple was not from NCLR.

________________________________________
Posted by David Hobbs (Member # 773) on April 26, 2007 01:19 PMApril 26, 2007 12:19 PM:

I am a recent member to SCLR, however I wactched Roverboard for several years prior to joining. I have also been a member on DiscoWeb for quite some time.

I cannot believe all of whining, complaining and fighting that has been going on. The recent matters on DiscoWeb should have been addressed internally within our own organization.

I also believe that editing and removing of postings should be accomplished ONLY by someone that is NOT caught up in the ongoing disputes.

So let's get on with it and enjoy the opportunity to get out on the trail.

________________________________________
Posted by Huston (Member # 637) on April 26, 2007 01:19 PMApril 26, 2007 12:19 PM:

100 members can have a beer during lunch and be ok. It takes only that one guy who becomes beligerant and out of control and ruins it for everyone. I don't have a problem with dry runs if it protects the club members and our reputation. It only takes one. Odouls!

________________________________________
Posted by Randy Banis (Member # 167) on April 26, 2007 01:20 PMApril 26, 2007 12:20 PM:

With the concurrence of the BOD, Quint Kuhl banned drinking away from camp on all SCLR events, including lunch breaks, when he was SCLR president in 2004. This prohibition has been stated at each new member orientation since. Although I've been a little out of the loop this last year, I'm pretty sure that this policy is still in effect.

I would expect that if there occurred an unfortunate incident involving drinking on the trail, this would affect the SCLR's ability to defend itself and receive a payout from its expensive liability policy. And depending on the situation, I can envision how this might possibly open trail leaders to personal liability.

Outside of camp, drinking on the trail must stop on all SCLR trips.

Lastly, re: RR not being an SCLR event -- All I can say is that a good lawyer would cut that arguement to shreds, no matter how we feel about it. Registration is collected on the SCLR site, SCLR collects the money, SCLR members are covered by our liability insurance, the event is members only, and we receive income from it. Perhaps we would not bear full culpability for a negligence claim, we would certainly be assigned our fair share.

________________________________________
Posted by Joe (Member # 592) on April 26, 2007 01:36 PMApril 26, 2007 12:36 PM:

RR was not members only, maybe that was the idea, not what happened. There were several trucks/people not registered as a participant nor a member of any of the clubs involved. I believe that was clearly stated over on d-web by John Lee's friend Jack.

Inflammatory posts or outright lies should be removed regardless of who is involved. This is not D-web. We are members of the same club because we choose to be. This topic should stay on topic and not become a free for all like D-web.

________________________________________
Posted by Matt Norton (Member # 789) on April 26, 2007 01:47 PMApril 26, 2007 12:47 PM:

New member opinion, FWIW:

I enjoy alcohol from time to time, but at camp, not on the trail.

I really don't want to be next to a truck driven by someone with such low self-control that they can't wait until they get back to camp for a tipple.

Also, regardless of which club you're in (or not in) I always felt that if you've joined a group on a run that you've agreed to run the trail by their rules.

The littering thing, of bottles, or anything else is completely unacceptable and inexcusable whether solo or grouped.

My friends and I don't drink when we shoot or drive and I don't really want to hang out with folks who do. I don't mind if they screw themselves, but I don't want to get dragged into the mess.

________________________________________
Posted by Rupert Jung (Member # 635) on April 26, 2007 03:24 PMApril 26, 2007 02:24 PM:

Since the alcohol policy or lack of was brought up, what about a gun policy? John, I believe made a fauxpas when he posted pics of his(?) pistola on the EE site under the heading of RR7. He might not have done an official trail but by implication guns are allowed at RR7.
NCLR has a no weapons policy in development and there is still much discussion on it.

________________________________________
Posted by Nathan Woods (Member # 752) on April 26, 2007 03:31 PMApril 26, 2007 02:31 PM:

quote:
________________________________________
Originally posted by Rupert Jung:
Since the alcohol policy or lack of was brought up, what about a gun policy?
________________________________________
I think in this specific case, it would be under BLM policies. I am not aware of any BLM restrictions on gun use in the areas around Death Valley other than the usual state and federal restrictions.

________________________________________
Posted by Adam Spiker (Member # 700) on April 26, 2007 04:44 PMApril 26, 2007 03:44 PM:

Wow. What a mess. How many forums are we going to put this on?

I will and have always been the first to raise my hand and say "spank me" when I've done anything to offend anyone or step outside of the rules. I'm raising my hand. I never condone littering and have never done it myself. I find it hard to believe the RR did this and give him the benefit of the doubt [because I haven't spoken to him, it's only fair to do so] that it was a mistake he would feel poorly about.

What I would like to point out however is the tone in which this thread is carrying. A club by its very nature is a fraternity of respect, consideration and appreciation for an aggregate common good or purpose. I hear this in the intent of the thread but have to read between the lines and overlook the hostility of the verbage. The tone contradicts the message.

One thing I have respected about the SCLR forum if nothing else is the general consideration we put into our text knowing that the readers cannot always "hear" the tone in which we write. I would hate to have that hostility and public ridicule brought into this forum as it is so openly condoned in [several] other forums. It negates the entire point of the thread. It's like yelling at your kid that it is wrong to yell at others.

There have been a couple of incidents in the past where objectors presented their case to everyone except the person[s] they charged with the offense. Again, do we lead by example in dealing directly with the persons[s] offending or make every issue a public one first?

Most of us run, or are high up enough in our businesses to know that the best customer service starts internally, with those in our fold. I would hope that we live that in how we relate to each other when we are faced with conflicts we feel so passionately about, such as this one. I know I am no different than anyone else if I say that I would personally respond much more quickly and favorably to a private and sincere objection than one made publicly without my ever being able to clarify my role in the offense or make a personal apology to those I've offended.

Objection Stated: Valid.
Method of stating it: I would request going to the person[s] directly first and ask that this be done in the future whenever I am the offender. I promise all I would give you the same respect in return.

Let's keep control over ourselves "here" if we expect others to keep control over themselves, as is the point of the thread. The value of whatever is accomplished in the end will be surely diminished if it is accomplished with such hostility.

Sorry for the dissertation. I deal with too many politics all day long. It is so terribly less efficient than going directly to the source for resolution.

Thank you very much John. I can say I have never and will never have anything against you or your supporters. You make a valid point and one which I will respect. I hope there is reciprocity.

p.s. I removed the images once I cought wind of this on another thread out of respect for discretion. It seemed to fuel the fire and seemed inappropriate to have such pictures out there. Since I was not involved in the beginning, I hope it is not seen as a cover up. Purely removing images which could be portrayed as condoning the behavior. Nothing more.

Cheers

________________________________________
Posted by Joe (Member # 592) on April 26, 2007 04:50 PMApril 26, 2007 03:50 PM:

I disagree.

Did someone see them "toss the bottle out the window" ?

Maybe they just set it down and forgot it, and good eye for seeing it and picking it up. I know many people that have forgotten "trash" on the trail. our own presidnet left his brand new camera on a rock out in the desert, technically thats littering. I dont think he meant to leave his $400 camera out there. Nor do i think robert left his GPs out there on purpose if that was the case that he lost it.

"degenerate music" ?

freedom of speech allows us to make whatever kind of music we want. just because you may not like it, doesn't make it degenerate. if you dont like the volume, ask them to turn it down a bit. i am sure they would oblige. instead you treat them like common criminals and call them names and degrade them.

Yes, they were nice. Did you meet them, have a conversation with them, anything? or are you just judging by what you saw or thought you saw, or more likely by 3rd hand information.

I for one was impressed that this guy brought his $90K rig to the desert to begin wheeling. Not only that, he has done his own modifications to it in the form of custom fab work for sliders. that doesn't make a him a nice guy or bad guy, but he's out there. dont bash him for it.

They are also new to wheeling. They may not know all the rules and legal issues and courtesies, etc. instead of railing them into the ground, why not embrace their ignorance and teahc them. what a great opportunity to instead of trying to reverse behavior, shwo them the right path from the beginning.

"not god" is right - this is not a religous or spiritual club to my knowledge. I always figured Webmaster was "God" when it came to the web page. And in that role, biased or unbiased he has carte blanche to delete edit as he see fit so that this forum doesn't become the pit of hatred and disrespect that D-web IS. On a similar note, i agree that your post was edited, what does you opinion of me or my comments on another forum have to do with the topic of this thread. so I got 5 speeding tickets last year, is that relevant to legal/moral issues of drinking on a trail run? NO. its just inflammatory, again, reference the pit of D-web.

"affected" - what are you a linguist? english major? we all know what he meant regardless of using the wrong term. thats just inflammatory albeit true. why bother belittleing someone?

many people here "have beef" with you and sevral of your group, in my opinion - i am sure many have "beef" with me. bu tthe main difference is for all of my mistakes, i am the first to step up and say i am sorry or i was wrong if that be the case. but not you. instead of just bringing up the alcohol issue to light publicly on our forum, you just had to post single post links to other forums that can now be taken out of context and bring up unrelated issues.

member #305, years of wheeling, product knowledge, etc. doesnt make you a better person or give you the right to treat people like garbage.

________________________________________
Posted by John Lee (Member # 305) on April 26, 2007 04:54 PMApril 26, 2007 03:54 PM:

quote:
________________________________________
Originally posted by John Gadd:
As you know Rover Rendezvous is a multi club event, not an SCLR event. So what happened there is event specific. Not SCLR specific.
________________________________________
You and Nathan both tried to make this point, and Randy basically shut it down. Randy is correct on this issue.

quote:
________________________________________
Originally posted by John Gadd:
John, I'm just curious how many SCLR runs you have been on in the last couple of years? You lead/organize many runs during the year. But none open to all SCLR members via the calendar. On EE runs you have a right to be very person and rule specific. But the club needs to accommodate many different types of people and vehicles. I would hate to see you create a rift in SCLR regarding something that really doesn't seem to affect you that much.
________________________________________
How many SCLR runs have I been on in the past few years? I honestly can't recall. Other than Rover Rendezvous, it's been a very long time. So? Does that mean I no longer have a say in club policy?

If you're asking why I no longer do non-RR club runs, it's because there are irresponsible people in the club I can't stand and don't care to be with on the trail with. They have just as much right to be in the club as I do. I'm certainly not going to call for their elimination from the club. So I choose to wheel with people whose company I enjoy. My trail time is very infrequent and thus precious to me. I would rather wheel with my wheeling friends than with the club.

I make an exception for Rover Rendezvous because it's a very large and event and thus necessarily will be filled with people of all kinds. So I accept that. But my rare weekend trips are different and I greedily keep them to myself.

"But the club needs to accommodate many different types of people and vehicles."

That's a very veiled statement. Let's look at it. I have no idea what it means. By this do you mean that the club needs to accommodate trail drinkers and non trail drinkers? If not, then how what you wrote pertinent to the disucssion of alcohol on the trail? Had I written the same thing, Nathan Woods would have deleted it on the ground that it was "off topic", "meaningless", or "not related to the discussion".

This alcohol thing is admittedly a divisive issue. Am I creating a rift by bringing it up? I guess I am. But I think it's an issue that needs to be addressed publicly. I was stunned by the happenings at RR7.

________________________________________
Posted by Joe (Member # 592) on April 26, 2007 04:58 PMApril 26, 2007 03:58 PM:

that is what i meant by my first (deleted) reply.

I am fed up with the way people get treated around here by some and the excuse is always the same, blame you mistreatment of them on the fact they made a mistake. well that doesnt make it OK.

it makes you (anyone who does that) a weak person in heart and mind and most of us commoners see right through it transparency.

________________________________________
Posted by John Lee (Member # 305) on April 26, 2007 05:03 PMApril 26, 2007 04:03 PM:

quote:
________________________________________
Originally posted by Rupert Jung:
Since the alcohol policy or lack of was brought up, what about a gun policy? John, I believe made a fauxpas when he posted pics of his(?) pistola on the EE site under the heading of RR7. He might not have done an official trail but by implication guns are allowed at RR7.
NCLR has a no weapons policy in development and there is still much discussion on it.
________________________________________
Gun policy? Sure, if you want to move the club for a gun policy, go ahead.

I made a faux pas when I posted a pic of Greg Hirst's Luger? How so? Are guns illegal in Death Valley? They're not. Does SCLR have a gun policy? I don't think so. I don't think San Diego or Vegas does either.

Apparently, NorCal doesn't either. You just said that the gun policy is "in development".

So exactly how is posting a pic of Greg's Luger a faux pas?

For record, I wasn't armed at Rover Rendezvous. I forgot to pack my pistol while gathering my gear.

________________________________________
Posted by John Lee (Member # 305) on April 26, 2007 05:26 PMApril 26, 2007 04:26 PM:

quote:
________________________________________
Originally posted by Joe:
Yes, they were nice. Did you meet them, have a conversation with them, anything? or are you just judging by what you saw or thought you saw, or more likely by 3rd hand information.
________________________________________
Did you ever see that lame movie "Batman Begins"? There's a surprisingly deep line in that lame movie. Something to the effect of "Who you are is not what you are deep inside. Who you are is what you do."

This couple could be the nicest people on earth deep down inside (somehow I doubt that), but if they are blaring degenerate music, drinking on the trail, and tossing bottles on the trail, they are not "nice folks" in any sense of the word.

Who you are is not what you are deep inside. It's what you do. The "you don't know me" defense is lame. It's right out of Jerry Springer.

quote:
________________________________________
Originally posted by Joe:
They are also new to wheeling. They may not know all the rules and legal issues and courtesies, etc. instead of railing them into the ground, why not embrace their ignorance and teahc them. what a great opportunity to instead of trying to reverse behavior, shwo them the right path from the beginning.
________________________________________
Who doesn't know that blaring music and drinking on public roads is a bad thing? We're not talking about esoterica like treading on kryptobiotic soil. We're talking about matters that all reasonable people know and abide by.

quote:
________________________________________
Originally posted by Joe:
"not god" is right - this is not a religous or spiritual club to my knowledge. I always figured Webmaster was "God" when it came to the web page. And in that role, biased or unbiased he has carte blanche to delete edit as he see fit so that this forum doesn't become the pit of hatred and disrespect that D-web IS.
________________________________________
SCLR is a club. No one person has the powers you list. Nathan thinks he does, but he doesn't. No person in SCLR has the power to silence statements he disagrees with. We're not talking about cursing or porn or similar matters. We're talking about input on how the club should be run. These are matters that should be discussed, freely.

The pit and hated that Discoweb is? You mean like this example here?:


http://www.discoweb.org/forums/showp...&postcount=138


For those of you who don't read DiscoWeb, "Badfysh" is Joe Nosal.

You mean like that Joe?

quote:
________________________________________
Originally posted by Joe:
On a similar note, i agree that your post was edited, what does you opinion of me or my comments on another forum have to do with the topic of this thread. so I got 5 speeding tickets last year, is that relevant to legal/moral issues of drinking on a trail run? NO. its just inflammatory, again, reference the pit of D-web.
________________________________________
My comments about you were on this forum, not DiscoWeb. Nathan edited them. At the risk of being edited yet again by Nathan, I will repeat what I said earlier. You freely admit to drinking on the trail (and not just at lunch) at Rover Rendezvous. You also were doing donuts at Pismo in camp and you roosted Ho's two girls and Aaron Shrier's boy Evan. You freely admit to driving in the carpool lane even though you are alone, then get pissed off when you get a ticket for it. And now you admit to having had five speeding tickets in the past year.

I bring up these matters because they are clearly relevant to the alcohol discussion at hand. You are irresponsible and need to change your ways. Trouble follows you everywhere you go. Now, what you do on your own time is your business. But when you're drinking on the trail at SCLR events and roosting kids in camp, I have a big problem with that.

quote:
________________________________________
Originally posted by Joe:
many people here "have beef" with you and sevral of your group, in my opinion - i am sure many have "beef" with me. bu tthe main difference is for all of my mistakes, i am the first to step up and say i am sorry or i was wrong if that be the case. but not you. instead of just bringing up the alcohol issue to light publicly on our forum, you just had to post single post links to other forums that can now be taken out of context and bring up unrelated issues.
________________________________________
Taken out of context? I posted a link to the entire thread and encouraged people to read the entire thread. Let them see for themselves. I'm not linking out of context. You freely admit to drinking on the trail. Far from apologizing for it, you're actually proud of it. You think it makes you a real man and real fourwheeler.

quote:
________________________________________
Originally posted by Joe:
member #305, years of wheeling, product knowledge, etc. doesnt make you a better person or give you the right to treat people like garbage.
________________________________________
I have every right to treat people like garbage if they are in fact garbage.

________________________________________
Posted by Nathan Woods (Member # 752) on April 26, 2007 05:29 PMApril 26, 2007 04:29 PM:

John, as noted by others, I am a moderator on this forum.

At the head of the Roverboard it states:
"Your participation on the Roverboard should be governed by the same decorum and courtesies you would use on an SCLR trip. Please refrain from using profanity and attacks on other users. Such messages will be removed."

While not profane, your comments about a fellow SCLR member were construed as a personal attack by members of the Board of Directors, and removed accordingly.

On a separate topic, I appreciate your recognition of my omnipotence, but I must be candid and inform you that I have not yet been granted Deity status, though I have applied and have been told it’s under review. I was told the review process make take some time. Something about “…until it freezes over…” :-)

________________________________________
Posted by John Lee (Member # 305) on April 26, 2007 05:45 PMApril 26, 2007 04:45 PM:

quote:
________________________________________
Originally posted by Nathan Woods:
John, as noted by others, I am a moderator on this forum.

At the head of the Roverboard it states:
"Your participation on the Roverboard should be governed by the same decorum and courtesies you would use on an SCLR trip. Please refrain from using profanity and attacks on other users. Such messages will be removed."

While not profane, your comments about a fellow SCLR member were construed as a personal attack by members of the Board of Directors, and removed accordingly.
________________________________________
So my listing of what Joe did to Ho's and Aaron's children at Pismo was "construed" as a personal attack by the Board of Directors?

I spoke with Gerry Barragan this afternoon and he had no knowledge of a board discussion on the deletions and edits. He said there was nothing in the board section of the BBS about it.

Who made the call on the deletions and edits? You did.

Again, you are not God. You do not own SCLR. This is a club matter, that pertains to club policy about alcohol and safety on the trail. There was no profanity. There was no personal attack. I merely listed what Joe did.

Just because you disagree with what I write, that does not give you the right and power to delete it or edit it. Once again, your remedy if you disagree with me is post something yourself and say why I am wrong. Your remedy is not to make what I write disappear.

Note how Joe does not deny he roosted Ho's and Aaron's kids by doing donuts in the Pismo camp. If what I said is not true, let Joe defend himself and show that he did not do what I accused him of doing. If Joe does decide to deny it, let Ho and Aaron come forward and state their side of the story.

This is called discussion.

You are not God. Get over yourself.

________________________________________
Posted by Joe (Member # 592) on April 26, 2007 05:57 PMApril 26, 2007 04:57 PM:

the problem john is you listed it wrong.

like i said, this guy is far too righteous for me.


for the record...

1. i am badfysh
2. i had one beer at a 1.5 hour break
3. i had another later in the day at lunch
4. i never even did one donut in ANY campsite EVER
5. there were NO children around or even close by nor adults when I made a U-trun, in locked low range, yes on the gas, FAR away.
6. i havent had 5 speeding tickets, i was just making a point that it is not relevant to drinking. But again you cant seem to read and ignore everything else - carpool lane? the carpool lane is in violation of the law, so yeah, i drive in it. the lane itself is illegal hence the fight in the courts over it. challenging a rule of law doesnt make me irresponsible.
7. see above, once again, you are trying to highlight supposed irresponsibility and sideskirt the way you and others treat people
8. DID YOU CLICK YOUR OWN LINK? again it links to single post view. not the entire thread. I challenge anyone to read that thread and show me where i started it. I get sick of the way you guys treat people and finally i chimed in, albeit in a poor manner. at least it got you vultures and parasites off people that havent done anything wrong other not live up to high and mighty standards.

i personally for one am glad you dont go on any runs.

with that said, i will stand by SCLR rules on any run that is SCLR sanctioned and I have no more to say on this unless asked by BOD or Officers directly.

and lastly, you final statement says it all about you and you moral high ground.

________________________________________
Posted by John Lee (Member # 305) on April 26, 2007 06:09 PMApril 26, 2007 05:09 PM:

quote:
________________________________________
Originally posted by Joe:
the problem john is you listed it wrong.

like i said, this guy is far too righteous for me.


for the record...

1. i am badfysh
2. i had one beer at a 1.5 hour break
3. i had another later in the day at lunch
4. i never even did one donut in ANY campsite EVER
5. there were NO children around or even close by nor adults when I made a U-trun, in locked low range, yes on the gas, FAR away.
6. i havent had 5 speeding tickets, i was just making a point that it is not relevant to drinking. But again you cant seem to read and ignore everything else - carpool lane? the carpool lane is in violation of the law, so yeah, i drive in it. the lane itself is illegal hence the fight in the courts over it. challenging a rule of law doesnt make me irresponsible.
7. see above, once again, you are trying to highlight supposed irresponsibility and sideskirt the way you and others treat people
8. DID YOU CLICK YOUR OWN LINK? again it links to single post view. not the entire thread. I challenge anyone to read that thread and show me where i started it. I get sick of the way you guys treat people and finally i chimed in, albeit in a poor manner. at least it got you vultures and parasites off people that havent done anything wrong other not live up to high and mighty standards.

i personally for one am glad you dont go on any runs.

with that said, i will stand by SCLR rules on any run that is SCLR sanctioned and I have no more to say on this unless asked by BOD or Officers directly.

and lastly, you final statement says it all about you and you moral high ground.
________________________________________
Nathan? Isn't what Joe wrote much more of a personal attack than what I originally wrote about Joe and you saw fit to delete and edit? Or will you keep this one the board because Joe is against me, as are you?

I leave it to you, but I recommend keeping Joe's post on the board. Joe has just denied that he roosted Ho's and Aaron's children at SCLR's Pismo Beach run. Let's wait for Ho and Aaron to reply. This is better than brushing the entire issue under the rug as you are fond of doing. This is an issue that pertains to the entire club. I say keep it public.

Joe, here is the very beginning of this thread:
quote:
________________________________________
Originally posted by John Lee:
There is some talk on DiscoWeb about Rover Rendezvous 2007. Several SCLR members have posted there. If you are interested, here is the entire thread on DiscoWeb:

http://www.discoweb.org/forums/showthread.php?t=34921
________________________________________
I posted the entire thread. People are free to read it if they wish. In fact, I encourage it. Only later on did I link to individual posts for brevity's sake.

________________________________________
Posted by Ho Chung (Member # 238) on April 26, 2007 06:14 PMApril 26, 2007 05:14 PM:

Joe, Pismo trip last year. We were camped in a cul-de-sac. Wide playground area in front of the camp.

Do you remember? My kids and Aaron's boy were playing with their sand toys in front of the tents until they had sand all over them because you were running donuts kicking sand all over the campsite. Now do you remember?

I confronted you right after you did it. And you said you were sorry and that you didn't see the kids. Still don't remember?

Aaron and I thought such behavior plus past records (being restless while waiting for the trucks to get moving, and shooting off the trail doing your yahoo moves, speeding on the road during a trail run and being ticketed for it) made you a liability to the club. Aaron and I asked the BOD to have you removed from the club. Did any one in the BOD contact you because of that?

Do you remember now?

________________________________________
Posted by Read Kerlin (Member # 526) on April 26, 2007 06:18 PMApril 26, 2007 05:18 PM:

I whole hardily support "dry" trail runs. Let's face it, it's a no brainer. It's not something that needs to be debated about period. I did not even bring up the issue at the drivers meeting before we hit the trail. Why? It was the first time I had lead a trail for RR and because I naively thought everyone was familiar with CA law. I assumed it might have been covered when they took their driving license test. Instead, I spent the time in the meeting going over Tread Lightly/leave no trace practices.

I also believe it is poor form for a moderator to edit a post for content when that individual for what ever reason is directly involved with the issue at hand. It just looks bad. Nathan, it's just poor form. Please use better judgment in the future. As I will use better judgment while leading any other trail in the future.

Thank you.

Read K

________________________________________
Posted by Nathan Woods (Member # 752) on April 26, 2007 06:22 PMApril 26, 2007 05:22 PM:

John, I am not opposed to discussing the Pismo trip if you wish, offline, though I find it odd to do so as you were not there. Regardless, it is not relevant to THIS discussion that you have initiated.

For the record, I was at the Pismo event, standing very near to Ho at the time of the incident, and saw absolutely nothing of consequence that would affect my or my family, including my two small children who were near Aaron's baby and not far from Ho's kids. So you can enter their testimony into the fray just as I can, but official complaints were already filed and dealt with adminstratively by the Board of Directors at the time. I learned from an Ashley Judd movie a while back that someone can't be punished twice for the same crime.

At this point, it comes across as just another personal attack from you. This entire thread and any surrounding discussions is now locked, and should the Board decide to delete it, so be it.

If you wish, you may start another thread related to the use of alcohol, but keep it on topic please.

________________________________________
Posted by John Lee (Member # 305) on April 27, 2007 02:12 PMApril 27, 2007 01:12 PM:

Buddy, I want to thank you for unlocking this thread that Nathan locked. Oftentimes on matters such as these, a BOD will want to "speak with one voice" on controversial acts by a particular member of the BOD. Unlocking this thread that Nathan locked shows backbone is commendable. Well done.

With the presence of numerous other threads on this trail alcohol subject, it is patently clear that the discussion on this subject had not run its full course before Nathan locked it.

No, Nathan, the BOD did not decide to delete this thread the way that you had requested in your usual veiled manner above. No, Nathan, the BOD did not decide to remove this thread to the BOD area. Yes, Nathan, the board decided to keep this thread visible for SCLR members to read. And Yes, Nathan, the BOD decided to to unlock this thread for further comment from SCLR members.

Roger Davis, the owner of the white Mk3 telephoned me this morning to discuss my comments about him. Roger asked me to remove the pics of him and his wife and I agreed. The pics are now gone. My reasoning for removing the pics was based not so much on Roger's request, but moreso because the pics are not mine. They are Adam's pics and I pirated them because I sensed they would disappear like my posts and this thread. Adam, I apologize for pirating your pics. I saved the pics and posted them merely to show that the trail alcohol issue is not an abstract discussion. It's a very real problem that the club's members have to discuss and form a policy on.

Roger Davis also gave me his side of the story. I encouraged Roger to post his side of the story. Roger replied that he could not post here because he was a San Diego member and not an SCLR member. I told Roger to email the webmaster and request special privileges. I believe Roger has requested special Roverboard privileges to post his side of the story, and I hope that he does. If Roger's side of the story is credible, then I will retract my previous comments.

I also invite further comment from more SCLR members. Make your opinions known. This is an important issue for the club, and club includes all of us. I believe Nathan's editing and deleting days are over, so please feel free to post your true feelings on this matter.

________________________________________
Posted by Joe (Member # 592) on April 27, 2007 02:40 PMApril 27, 2007 01:40 PM:

My true feelings are if the issue can stay on topic and not become a war like d-web, then fine, unlock it. this forum is for open discussion exactly as you stated, but it also has rules that are enforced. You cant falsely disparage someone and expect them to just sit back and take it. It then just leads to a war on a thread just like D-web abd gets us no where, personally between members or directly related to the club.

I have to say, your comments regarding SUPPOSED actions by me are entirely false and I have discussed those privately with Ho and copied select people that are relevant to the situation. Those past issues have no bearing on having an open club discussion about another topic.

While I agree irresponsibility is relevant, making false statements based on 3rd hand information, etc. is NOT relevant. In addition the statemants were wrong.

I have been pretty clear about my position on this topic. i dont feel alcohol should be banned in its entirety, unless of course that is dictated by state and federal laws, lands we are on, etc. I also said I will satnd by whatever the BOD/club decides is best for ALL. i also dont think drinking and driving is OK. You seem to want to lay blame that "freely" admitting to having a beer at lunch is a bad thing.

WERE YOU AT THE NEW MEMBER MEETING? NO.

Well, I was, and I clearly heard our new and current president state "drinking and driving is not allowed on any SCLR run. However should you care to indulge with some wine with your cheese at lunch or the like, in moderation is accepted".

That may change, but don't come down on me for stating the truth, I had a beer, and that as far as I knew it was OK and I don't feel I did anything wrong and then try to spew all kinds of negative disparagement about me thats unrelated.

please.keep it to the topic at hand.

________________________________________
Posted by Nathan Woods (Member # 752) on April 27, 2007 02:43 PMApril 27, 2007 01:43 PM:

John, For the record, I advocated NOT removing the thread. I locked it because it had gotten off topic and the Board as a group needed to collect our thoughts, take a breathe, and then proceed.

I did not at all want the thread to stop, in fact, I encouraged you to keep it going, but I gave a warning that is still in effect and is consistent with what Buddy said earlier. Keep it on topic, or start another thread...and I'll add: keep it social.

As for Roger Davis, he did submit a formal complaint about your defamatory discussion of him that occurred on the SCLR forum. However, he did not request his letter to be reprinted to the public, and unless he does, it shall remain private.

We will comply with his requests and remove your comments about him.

________________________________________
Posted by John Lee (Member # 305) on April 27, 2007 03:05 PMApril 27, 2007 02:05 PM:

quote:
________________________________________
Originally posted by Joe:
I have to say, your comments regarding SUPPOSED actions by me are entirely false and I have discussed those privately with Ho and copied select people that are relevant to the situation. Those past issues have no bearing on having an open club discussion about another topic.
________________________________________
Sure it does. Your roosting kids at Pismo in camp definitely has a bearing on the alcohol issue. It goes to disregard of safety. Just as you have no problem with drinking on the trail, you have no problem with driving fast in camp. The two are absolutely related.

quote:
________________________________________
Originally posted by Joe:
You seem to want to lay blame that "freely" admitting to having a beer at lunch is a bad thing....

That may change, but don't come down on me for stating the truth, I had a beer, and that as far as I knew it was OK and I don't feel I did anything wrong and then try to spew all kinds of negative disparagement about me thats unrelated.
________________________________________
You're kidding, right? A beer a lunch. Your story has changed. You don't even realize that your story has changed? Now it's a beer at lunch?

You freely admitted to drinking to having a "coldy" on the trail:


http://www.discoweb.org/forums/showp...4&postcount=79


Which is it? One beer or two?

________________________________________
Posted by Joe (Member # 592) on April 27, 2007 03:12 PMApril 27, 2007 02:12 PM:

John,

Again you are WRONG. I didnt roost any kids and that is a matter of witness accounts that two sides contradict on. You werent there. NOT relevant!!!!

Yes I had a beer during a long break ON THE TRAIL, and DURING OUR LUNCH BREAK.

See page two of this thread.

"Which one is it?" man you Ho sound like a couple of broken records. Do you guys even read these posts or do you just quote the part that suits your warped view?

Its neither one nor two. I had one each at two different times. clearly stated in my post.

Do people really believe this crap you lay out there? If so, its a sad day for SCLR.

________________________________________
Posted by Joe (Member # 592) on April 27, 2007 03:14 PMApril 27, 2007 02:14 PM:

funny, for some dumb reason, i clicked your lame link again, linked to only a single view post on a D-web thread.

________________________________________
Posted by Joe (Member # 592) on April 27, 2007 03:18 PMApril 27, 2007 02:18 PM:

Since its going to become an off topic thread and someone brought up policy etc. i will be right back. I am going to go over to the Gun Policy thread which clearly states firearms are ILLEGAL on National park Land and post the link to yours or Ho's or jacks or whom evers photos of a Ruger being displayed at camp.....hmmm, i hope you boys werent firing that illegal weapon on National land.

I have tried to be fair and discuss this topic without criticizm or judgement. and yet all i get is these guys bashing for stuff that hasnt even happened or they have a differening view on.

Don't start hunting me John because you are wrong and you will get a war if thats what you keep asking for. I wont play it out here because its not the place, you keep talking.

________________________________________
Posted by John Lee (Member # 305) on April 27, 2007 03:24 PMApril 27, 2007 02:24 PM:

quote:
________________________________________
Originally posted by Nathan Woods:
John, For the record, I advocated NOT removing the thread. I locked it because it had gotten off topic and the Board as a group needed to collect our thoughts, take a breathe, and then proceed.
________________________________________
OK, let's examine this statement. You locked the thread because it had gotten off topic and the board needed to collects its thoughts, take a "breathe", and then proceed?

What kind of double-talk is that? Here are your own words:

"At this point, it comes across as just another personal attack from you. This entire thread and any surrounding discussions is now locked, and should the Board decide to delete it, so be it."

You locked the thread because you perceived an attack by me against you. I had requested several times that you refrain from editing and deleting other people's posts. This is your only tool. Whatever you disagree with, you immediately silence. You have nothing else to go on, because your position is untenable.

I had requested several times that if you disagreed with what I wrote, your remedy is not to edit or delete what I wrote, but rather to reply with your reasons for why what I wrote is wrong. I posted this several times.

Had you exercised your only tool yet again, you have looked like a chump in front of everyone. So you came up with a new tool and locked the thread.

Several other people started new threads. Why? Because they wanted to be heard and couldn't post on this thread because you locked it. The discussions went on.

Note that your story about the board's wanting to collect its thoughts and take a breather is wholly incongruous with this. Why would the board have to take a breather on this? Isn't it a good thing if SCLR members voice their opinions on this issue? None of the other threads was locked as this thread was. Your story doesn't jive.

quote:
________________________________________
Originally posted by Nathan Woods:
I did not at all want the thread to stop, in fact, I encouraged you to keep it going, but I gave a warning that is still in effect and is consistent with what Buddy said earlier. Keep it on topic, or start another thread...and I'll add: keep it social.
________________________________________
You hardly "encouraged [me] to keep it going". Think about that. You locked this thread, and you encouraged me to keep it going? Again, think about that. You can say whatever you want but your actions speak louder than your words.

quote:
________________________________________
Originally posted by Nathan Woods:
As for Roger Davis, he did submit a formal complaint about your defamatory discussion of him that occurred on the SCLR forum. However, he did not request his letter to be reprinted to the public, and unless he does, it shall remain private.

We will comply with his requests and remove your comments about him.
________________________________________
"Defamatory"? Are you an attorney once again? Something is not defamatory unless it is shown to be untrue. Where has Roger shown that what I said is not true? He hasn't. Why not? Because he can't. When Roger and spoke on the telephone today, his defense was only that he did not know that drinking on the trail and blaring loud music were inappropriate conduct. That was it. He never denied drinking on the trail. He never denied blaring the loud music. There is nothing defamatory about what I wrote.

Yes, of course his letter shall remain in private. Everything about SCLR lately has been behind closed doors. I'm stunned.

Oh, I noticed you did some more editing this afternoon. Note that the post locations have moved. My post after this thread was unlocked was originally on page 3. Now it's on page 2. My opening post was also edited yet again:

" [April 27, 2007, 01:51 PM: Message edited by: Nathan Woods ]"

Of course you were just taking the High Road once again when you did this.

Nathan, you are completely out of control. You are not SCLR. SCLR is composed of all of its members, and its members have a say.

I have said it numerous times before and I will say it yet again: if you dislike or disagree with what I write, your recourse is to post yourself and say why I am wrong or why you disagree with me. Your remedy is not to delete or edit what I write to suit your own ideas of what is right or wrong.

This board should not be edited lightly. It is the single most powerful communication device with in the club. The members live so far away from one another and it's so inconvenient to meet regularly that the board is what we use to communicate with each other. We discuss ideas and discuss policy on this board. Without the board I daresay the club would quickly die.

But you wield your editing and deleting sword so heavy-handedly that I say you have lost all meaning of what it means to be an SCLR officer and represent the desires of the SCLR members.

This is not a personal attack. This is open discussion on the conduct of an SCLR member and an SCLR director. Your conduct is outrageous. I can't believe I'm the only one who seems to think so.

________________________________________
Posted by Nathan Woods (Member # 752) on April 27, 2007 03:26 PMApril 27, 2007 02:26 PM:

John, final warning. Keep it on topic.
Joe, you may continue to defend yourself, but no counterattacks.

KEEP IT ON THE TOPIC

________________________________________
Posted by Nathan Woods (Member # 752) on April 27, 2007 03:30 PMApril 27, 2007 02:30 PM:

Okay, my post above was in reply to you and Joe, I did not see your comments about the editing actions until after I posted. I want to be clear that my warning was in relation to your discussion with Joe, not about my editing.

However, I will say this again, this thread is for discussion of alcohol. If you wish to discuss my role as moderator, START A NEW THREAD

________________________________________
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old April 28th, 2007, 08:44 PM
parantaeyang parantaeyang is offline
Won Park
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Ventura, California
Posts: 503
Quote:
Originally Posted by greghirst
I'd say you are doing pretty well with those XZL's on there.

However, some stainless fasteners would be nice...

Stainless fasteners for where? what? how?
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old April 28th, 2007, 09:09 PM
greghirst greghirst is offline
Greg Hirst
KI6CQL
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,290
Look at the pic above and maybe these:

http://www.expeditionexchange.com/mu...k001%20014.jpg
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old April 28th, 2007, 11:22 PM
parantaeyang parantaeyang is offline
Won Park
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Ventura, California
Posts: 503
after I paint my truck orange.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old April 29th, 2007, 12:04 AM
greghirst greghirst is offline
Greg Hirst
KI6CQL
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,290
Ah, the elusive G4 Defender...

Don't change the Coniston Green.

It's my favorite Defender color.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old April 29th, 2007, 04:44 AM
traveltoad traveltoad is offline
Aaron Shrier
KI6BCA
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: San Fernando Valley
Posts: 2,628
I can't beieve that I missed all this!

For the record:

Joe did come flying into the SCLR camp at Pismo turn hard to the right, making about a 150 degree turn spraying sand all over the kids. Then came back into the camp at approximately the same rate of speed, slammed on his brakes stopping in the middle of where the tents were set up and where the kids were playing.

He was immediately aprroached by me (I do not remember if Ho approached Joe at the same time as I or came up shortly after). I do not remember my exact words, but I said something to the effect of "what the hell are you doing". Joe denied the action. Ho then also gave Joe the "what the hell are you doing" speach.

Upon return from Pismo, Ho and I asked that Joe be refunded his membership dues and be asked to leave the club.

I can ask Gabrielle to post her view on what happened if anyone would like. She was sitting and playing with the kids at the time. However, when I told her about the latest drama on the SCLR board and told her that Joe was involved she asked if "this was the same Joe that sprayed sand on us". So I think I know what she will say.

Joe can deny the action all he wants. It happened. I was there.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old April 30th, 2008, 05:59 PM
johnlee johnlee is offline
John Lee
K6YJ
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Torrance, CA
Posts: 16,160
This pic is funny:


http://nwoods.smugmug.com/photos/100..._syQpR-O-3.jpg


I like his comment too:

Quote:
Originally Posted by nwoods
Scott from Expeditions West is currently without a Land Rover, but we like him and let him wheel with us anyway.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old May 27th, 2008, 12:10 PM
johnlee johnlee is offline
John Lee
K6YJ
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Torrance, CA
Posts: 16,160
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old May 27th, 2008, 12:37 PM
montanablur montanablur is offline
Sinuhe Xavier
yes
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Neither here, nor there...
Posts: 584
Maybe he has joined a Jeep Club.
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old May 27th, 2008, 01:08 PM
JSQ JSQ is offline
Jack Quinlan
KI6CTP
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: San Diego
Posts: 3,491
Trailering a Jeep.

Man, we had that loser pegged from the beginning.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old May 27th, 2008, 02:04 PM
parantaeyang parantaeyang is offline
Won Park
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Ventura, California
Posts: 503
Nothing new. Last year he was one of the "Trail Leaders" at the SCLR - New Member Orientation, and his wife brought a Jeep to the event.

http://nwoods.smugmug.com/gallery/2632159#139002927
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old May 27th, 2008, 02:39 PM
traveltoad traveltoad is offline
Aaron Shrier
KI6BCA
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: San Fernando Valley
Posts: 2,628
Don't let the door hit you in the ass on your way out.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old May 27th, 2008, 03:40 PM
mtnrovr mtnrovr is offline
Ryan Tolentino
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 174
funny that he smudged out his white LR3 in the second photo down.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old June 27th, 2008, 11:45 PM
read read is offline
Read Kerlin
KI6CSI
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 306
Thought about renewing with this "new direction" the board was going. So I was checking out the new BBS. Stumbled across this listing: http://www.sclr.org/forums/ubbthread...8467#Post18467 and it reminded me of the other reason not to.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old June 28th, 2008, 10:37 AM
Matt Kendrick Matt Kendrick is offline
Matt Kendrick
KI6CGL
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Garden Grove, CA
Posts: 363
making friends as usual i see. probably a short amount of time before that place wants nothing to do with him either, which will be truly amazing seeing as they put up with all kinds of morons....and he's a "board member", lol.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old June 28th, 2008, 11:21 AM
greghirst greghirst is offline
Greg Hirst
KI6CQL
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,290
Read-If you are wanting to go wheeling just email a few local people here that you would feel comfortable with and make some plans.

If you really feel the need to join a club then NCLR at least has a reasonable drinking/driving policy IMHO.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old June 28th, 2008, 10:55 PM
kellymoe kellymoe is offline
Kevin Mokracek
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 51
Read,

I recently renewed with SCLR. Right now i a just keeping a low profile and doing solo trips or trips with friends. Waiting to see what happens to the club in the future.

I was a member back in 95 when they used to send out the monthly club news letter. I found my 1969 IIa in one of those flyer's. That was also back in the days of the OC Contras, who I have no idea who was part of that group but I liked their style. I think one of their stickers is still on the Lippencot Rd sign.

I also remember a trip to Rhower Flats back in probably 96. I was late and caught up to the group half way up the trail. I think John and Ho where there. Kris Swanson was there also. I remember Kris attempting a hill climb and gunning his Disco up the hill only to spin his tires and back down. I asked if he aired his tires down and he said airing down wouldn't help After the group moved on I put my Disco in low and walked right up it without spinning a wheel. I then moved over to another climb to the left of the other that was supposed to be harder and crawled right up. If I remember right Ho and John walked right up it too.

I guess it's memories like this that make me not want to totally give up on the club. That and some good guys like Bill Ruttan, Randy banis, Paul Von K, Frank Budenbrock and a handful of others that are still excited about wheeling their trucks and have a great attitude.

I know I'll get slammed for what I just wrote but I still want to give the club a chance.


Waiting in the wings.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old June 28th, 2008, 10:56 PM
kellymoe kellymoe is offline
Kevin Mokracek
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 51
Oh, did you see who's leading the Pismo Trip
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old June 30th, 2008, 02:04 PM
kellymoe kellymoe is offline
Kevin Mokracek
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 51
I retract my previous statement. It sounds like Joe has been doing a good job and heard nothing but good things about his recent trip to MJT. I want to be fair. I have had definite differing opinions with Joe about things in the past but i cant speak to things that have not even happened yet. Poor form on my part.


Quote:
Originally Posted by kellymoe
Oh, did you see who's leading the Pismo Trip
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Le Tour de France johnlee General 114 June 22nd, 2010 10:53 AM
K-80 SuperSport johnlee General 131 February 19th, 2009 05:44 PM
2005 Omega porn david General 97 May 25th, 2007 04:00 PM
SCLR BOD Meeting / "Election" reelpain General 24 May 22nd, 2007 03:11 PM
04 Envy... hanchung General 225 September 17th, 2006 06:53 PM


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:01 PM.




Copyright © 2001-2012 Expedition Exchange Incorporated. All rights reserved.
Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.