[Milsurplus] badham/goodham

[ejones@hiwaay.net]

de N4TGC Eric

The bad-ham group exists - it's <BadHam@yahoogroups.com>

One problem I've seen with it is, too many are quick to "shoot from the
lip" when they don't get quick service, or things appear to be going sour,
when it may turn out well later - but we don't hear about that part!

Dave's being booted may stem from the liability issue most lists have about
un-substantiated "character assassination".  What seems to work best is to
simply post the exact details of the transaction (or lack thereof), and let
"nature" take it's course.  Angrily giving your opinion of the miscreant's
ancestry invokes too many lawsuits for the list that allows it.  BadHam has
disclaimers specifically to prevent being sued.

In compiling this missive, I reviewed my own hard-copy lists of the good
and bad dealings I've had, or postings from both extremes.  Interesting
observations: A) one well-known respondant was in the list, whom I now
consider a good friend - I just had to get used to some of his quirks!  B)
Very few of the names in the "nix" list are still "on the air" - it appears
they shot themselves down ... C) most of the list was computer companies,
and computer geeks, both of whom I've found to be a consistantly unreliable
lot ... overall, Hams still rate as the most honest, reliable people around
...

What seems to work best in exposing the unworthy, is to simply and
accurately describe the exchange (echo the actual msgs, if possible), and
let others take warning as they may.  In one computer case I have on file,
the issue was resolved, and the accused was not even aware the items had
not been shipped, as he'd had to leave the country, his ISP had crashed
while he was gone, and his staff apparently just sat on their hands til he
got back!  No, it wasn't me ...

Anyway, I'll put in a good word for Dave S. - just try not to rant and rave
quite so much, guy - even if you have good cause!		e