Notice to AllTSRA Members Re:TSRA Web Site
Sam A. Kersh
instructions to the new Web Master. After years of service to the organization, James D. Nicholson
is no longer our web master. I asked Dark to post a notice to this effect on the board, but he has
chosen to ignore that request.
Sam A. Kersh
TSRA Live Member
exe...@tsra.com
Do you ever read your email Sam? I gather you don't, since you
completely misrepresented everything that I stated in our private
exchange of last week. At 3:29 p.m. on Thursday afternoon, I sent this
message to explaining that several changes have been made, even
enumerating them:
Sam,
Actually that would not be a correct statement. The site has been
maintained since that time. We added a voter's guide, and then changed
it repeatedly. We posted and corrected information on the women's
hunts and hunting & wildlife several times.
I will, however, be happy to add a statement that a new and vastly
improved website is forthcoming.
You should also know that the new website is expected to be constructed
and maintained at a significant savings to the association.
Jim Dark
I do appreciate that you graciously allowed one and half business days
for us to execute your whims before you pounded us on the usenet.
Given that incredible amount of generosity, I can only conclude that
you are mellowing out in your old age.
If you have any questions about the financial aspects of the decision
to switch the TSRA website to another provider, why don't you ask the
old webmaster? He is familiar with the details. And I think we both
know that he routinely posts to this forum, albeit under a psuedonym.
Jim Dark
Sam A. Kersh
instructed the new guy not to maintain the old site, but to build a new one. Don't know when he
signed on, but based on what I do know, it's been six weeks and NOTHING has changed on the old site
and the new site is still a day dream.
The tsrapac page for voter's info has a note on it stating it was last updated Jan 11, 2006. The
News for Gun Owners Page was last updated Jan 31, 2006, Jim N's last day.
Sam
Alan
news:o9tb129hpsqi3vauh...@4ax.com:
So what else is new? TSRA has done very little with my idea of expanding
shooting areas into more and more state parks. They wanted to run with
the idea themselves, then did nothing with it.
TSRA advocate open carry (as exists in wimpy New England states like
Vermont and New Hampshire, and in weenie effete New Mexico)? Never.
TSRA support reductions in the idiotic and even dangerous CHL laws in
Texas that are difficult to obey due to the numerous restrictions (unlike
other states)? Nope.
TSRA support ANY candidate who is hard-core, foursquare 2nd
Amendment/RKBA? Nope, just Republican lapdogging. Do you see TSRA
working hard for the candidate endorsed by Jerry Patterson and Ron Paul,
namely Don Zimmerman runing for State House Seat #50? Nope. Yet Don is
about as pro-2nd as you'll get, AND he's a Republican, but you see, he's
not a party machine Republican ....
TSRA isn't at local gun shows like the one in Austin, preferring to let
the poor old geezer from the NRA do their heavy lifting for them.
Sorry I'm not a happy camper, TSRA, but you're just a part of the NRA,
and the NRA is the most anti-gun gun group in the nation (no matter what
Charlton Heston used to say, or Ted Nugent says now).
exe...@tsra.com
Public or private, either way works for me. I still have a message in
my Blackberry indicating that I sent a message to you on this topic on
10:08 a.m. last Wednesday, in response to your message of 9:47 that
morning. I'm sorry that it took 21 minutes to respond. I'm sure
you're used to much faster service.
You responded to my message at 1:39 p.m the following day. I sent back
the aforementioned message (from my first post regarding this BS) on
3:29 p.m. the same day.
I heard nothing else until you took this public. You must have missed
a message somewhere Sam, but it wasn't because I didn't send it. My
suggestion is that you actually read your email (all of it) for a
change before you post this kind of nonsense. And for the record, I'm
not accusing you of lying. I'm just pointing out that you screwed up.
Also for the record, the old website contains no notification that Jim
Nicholson IS (or was) the webmaster. The TSRA-PAC site still has a
notice that he maintains the site, which I have ordered removed.
Do you actually think that it is a good idea to make a statement about
changing a webmaster, when there was no statement really indicating
that he was the webmaster in the first place? It strikes me as kind of
like issuing a correction statement in the magazine about a typo that
nobody noticed.
Jim Dark
Sam A. Kersh
>Sam A. Kersh <csmk...@flash.net> wrote in
>news:o9tb129hpsqi3vauh...@4ax.com:
>
>
>
>So what else is new? TSRA has done very little with my idea of expanding
>shooting areas into more and more state parks. They wanted to run with
>the idea themselves, then did nothing with it.
I have no info one way or the other on this.
>TSRA advocate open carry (as exists in wimpy New England states like
>Vermont and New Hampshire, and in weenie effete New Mexico)? Never.
You have a problem with unlicensed open carry? How strange. I've availed myself of that mode in
both New Mexico and Arizona prior to their both reaching a reciprocity agreement with Texas for
concealed carry. Vermont, NH and Alaska all treat gun owners a whole lot better than Texas does.
>TSRA support reductions in the idiotic and even dangerous CHL laws in
>Texas that are difficult to obey due to the numerous restrictions (unlike
>other states)? Nope.
TSRA got about half a dozen good laws passed in the 2005 session. One changed TxPC 30.06 so that
governmental entities couldn't use that to keep you from carrying in/on government
facilities/property. Another redefined "traveling" putting the onus on the DA to prove you weren't
traveling if you were in a private vehicle and found to have a handgun with you.
>TSRA support ANY candidate who is hard-core, foursquare 2nd
>Amendment/RKBA? Nope, just Republican lapdogging. Do you see TSRA
>working hard for the candidate endorsed by Jerry Patterson and Ron Paul,
>namely Don Zimmerman runing for State House Seat #50? Nope. Yet Don is
>about as pro-2nd as you'll get, AND he's a Republican, but you see, he's
>not a party machine Republican ....
You really need to go to the tsrapac.org site and review Doc Brown's recommendations. Yes, there's
a link to the NRA Texas recommendations, but so what. Doc's list DOES endorse strong RKBA Democrats
and Republicans. Bluntly, your talking through your ass.,
>
>TSRA isn't at local gun shows like the one in Austin, preferring to let
>the poor old geezer from the NRA do their heavy lifting for them.
That's because they can't get local TSRA members to volunteer their time to work the shows. If they
could get vols, TSRA would be happy to furnish all the materials needed.
>Sorry I'm not a happy camper, TSRA, but you're just a part of the NRA,
>and the NRA is the most anti-gun gun group in the nation (no matter what
>Charlton Heston used to say, or Ted Nugent says now).
Your just bitter 'cause they didn't kiss your ass. I've got problems with JD, not with TSRA itself.
Sam A. Kersh
NRA Patron Member
L.E.A.A. Life Member
TSRA Life Member
GOA, JPFO, SAF
http://www.whoseparanoid.com/csmk
===============================================================
When firearms go, all goes. We need them every hour.
George Washington
Sam A. Kersh
>Sam,
>
>Public or private, either way works for me. I still have a message in
>my Blackberry indicating that I sent a message to you on this topic on
>10:08 a.m. last Wednesday, in response to your message of 9:47 that
>morning. I'm sorry that it took 21 minutes to respond. I'm sure
>you're used to much faster service.
Never received it. Apparently you never sent it.
>You responded to my message at 1:39 p.m the following day. I sent back
>the aforementioned message (from my first post regarding this BS) on
>3:29 p.m. the same day.
Here's a copy of my 13:39 email of 3/9/2006.
<quote>....................................................................................................................................
Jim Dark wrote:
> Sam,
> The person hired is currently spernding most of the time he is being paid for
>creating a new website. He was instructed to do minimum maintenance on that site.
>
> Jim Dark
Jim:
In that case, what you should do is post a notice that the old site has
NOT been maintained since February 1, '06, and a new web site is under
construction. You should also state that Jim N. is no longer the web
master.
Sam
> -----Original Message-----
> From: "Sam A. Kersh" <csmk...@flash.net>
> Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2006 09:40:33 To:jim...@tsra.cbeyond.com, pres...@tsra.com
> Subject: TSRA Web Site
>
> It a sad thing to note that since Jim Nicholson's departure as web master not damned thing has been
> added or updated. If you've hired someone, you've wasted OUR money.
> Sam A. Kersh
> Life member, TSRA
> NRA Patron
>
>
>
> Sent via BlackBerry from Cingular Wireless
>
</quote>...........................................................................................................
>I heard nothing else until you took this public. You must have missed
>a message somewhere Sam, but it wasn't because I didn't send it. My
Bullshit. This is just like your lie about the former web master
posting under an alias. Any lie to cover your ass.
>suggestion is that you actually read your email (all of it) for a
>change before you post this kind of nonsense. And for the record, I'm
>not accusing you of lying. I'm just pointing out that you screwed up.
Well, I am accusing you of lying. You've got my e-address and I never
recieved any but the one message.
>Also for the record, the old website contains no notification that Jim
>Nicholson IS (or was) the webmaster. The TSRA-PAC site still has a
>notice that he maintains the site, which I have ordered removed.
Where did this piece of BS come from, JD? Every old time TSRA member in
this forum knows who the web master was and that the site was updated
daily, often several times a day.
>Do you actually think that it is a good idea to make a statement about
>changing a webmaster, when there was no statement really indicating
>that he was the webmaster in the first place? It strikes me as kind of
>like issuing a correction statement in the magazine about a typo that
>nobody noticed.
Yes, it's a good idea when you new boy is walking around with his finger
up his nose. It's been six weeks and nothings been updated on the old
page and not a thing on the new page. FYI, many here, myself included,
have built web sites and know your boy too damned slow or you haven't
down your part on reviewing and okaying the new site.
exe...@tsra.com
Here's the message you claim not to have received. I found it, oddly
enough, in my "Sent" box, just where I expected to be. Funny indeed.
It was there the first I went looking for it "splain" you a thing or
two. At the top of the message it says "Sent: Thu 3/9/2006 3:29 PM" I
guess I don't need to tell you what conclusions I draw from that, huh?
If you want to call me a liar over this, knock yourself out. Frankly I
am used to your incessent bitching and carping, and fully satisfied
that in this case, as in most cases, you simply don't know what the
hell you are talking about.
I am somewhat surprised that you deny that Nicholson is posting under a
psuedonym. Frankly, I figured he had let you in on it. But trust me
on this one, the message content and choice of psuedonym make it
abundantly who he is. So either you're lying to cover his ass, or he
didn't trust you enough to let you in on his act. Either way, I think
it's pretty dang funny.
As for your suggestions about the old-timers on this list, I don't
regularly factor in my decisions keeping the participants on this list
happy. Generally speaking, there are only about 15 people who
regularly post on this list, and most of them spend every waking moment
criticizing TSRA, NRA and other associated groups. I just don't see
the percentage in it. Also, the website is not geared to satisfy this
forum, it is geared to satisfy the general public. As for tx.guns, I
will personally consider your email blasts on this forum to be
sufficient notice for the folks here. Thanks, Sam.
The new webpage is progressing, and I expect to preview the new site
this afternoon, after receiving links to it. We will be making a
switchover, if everything meets our approval, the weekend of the 25-26
March. I have seen several websites produced by the company now doing
our website, and I am confident that the final product will be a
significant improvement over the old webpage, as well as generating a
savings of about $4,000 annually.
Jim Dark
**********************************************Message Sam claims not to
have received
follows********************************************************************
Sam,
Actually that would not be a correct statement. The site has been
maintained since that time. We added a voter's guide, and then changed
it repeatedly. We posted and corrected information on the women's
hunts and hunting & wildlife several times.
I will, however, be happy to add a statement that a new and vastly
improved website is forthcoming.
You should also know that the new website is expected to be constructed
and maintained at a significant savings to the association.
Jim Dark
Jim:
Sam
Sam,
Actually that would not be a correct statement. The site has been
maintained since that time. We added a voter's guide, and then changed
it repeatedly. We posted and corrected information on the women's
hunts and hunting & wildlife several times.
I will, however, be happy to add a statement that a new and vastly
improved website is forthcoming.
You should also know that the new website is expected to be constructed
and maintained at a significant savings to the association.
Jim Dark
Jim Nicholson
<snip>
> I am somewhat surprised that you deny that Nicholson is posting under a
> psuedonym. Frankly, I figured he had let you in on it. But trust me
> on this one, the message content and choice of psuedonym make it
> abundantly who he is. So either you're lying to cover his ass, or he
> didn't trust you enough to let you in on his act. Either way, I think
> it's pretty dang funny.
I don't think it's very funny, Jim. Want to let me know what pseudonym
you mistakenly think I am posting under?
>
> The new webpage is progressing, and I expect to preview the new site
> this afternoon, after receiving links to it. We will be making a
> switchover, if everything meets our approval, the weekend of the 25-26
> March. I have seen several websites produced by the company now doing
> our website, and I am confident that the final product will be a
> significant improvement over the old webpage, as well as generating a
> savings of about $4,000 annually.
Jim, not that I'm unhappy with someone else doing the website (albeit I
think it a shame that little has been posted since 2/1), but did you
factor in the seven or eight years I did the website on a voluntary
basis in your analysis?
Sam A. Kersh
>Sam,
>
>Here's the message you claim not to have received. I found it, oddly
>enough, in my "Sent" box, just where I expected to be. Funny indeed.
>It was there the first I went looking for it "splain" you a thing or
>two. At the top of the message it says "Sent: Thu 3/9/2006 3:29 PM" I
>guess I don't need to tell you what conclusions I draw from that, huh?
>
JD, you've got your head so far up your butt, you can't see for sh**.
From the attachment it's obvious that you DIDN'T e-mail me, but posted
to this forum and I responded to it in open forum.
>If you want to call me a liar over this, knock yourself out. Frankly I
>am used to your incessent bitching and carping, and fully satisfied
>that in this case, as in most cases, you simply don't know what the
>hell you are talking about.
No, I won't call you a liar, just stupid. Google message ID
1142286091.0...@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com for your "e-mail."
>I am somewhat surprised that you deny that Nicholson is posting under a
>psuedonym. Frankly, I figured he had let you in on it. But trust me
>on this one, the message content and choice of psuedonym make it
>abundantly who he is. So either you're lying to cover his ass, or he
>didn't trust you enough to let you in on his act. Either way, I think
>it's pretty dang funny.
On this one I will continue to call you a liar. Tell you what, post the
psuedonym and I'll check somethings, It would be enlightening, to say
the least.
>As for your suggestions about the old-timers on this list, I don't
>regularly factor in my decisions keeping the participants on this list
>happy. Generally speaking, there are only about 15 people who
And apparently you don't worry about keeping TSRA members happy either.
>regularly post on this list, and most of them spend every waking moment
>criticizing TSRA, NRA and other associated groups. I just don't see
>the percentage in it. Also, the website is not geared to satisfy this
>forum, it is geared to satisfy the general public. As for tx.guns, I
>will personally consider your email blasts on this forum to be
>sufficient notice for the folks here. Thanks, Sam.
You mean like this one? pcrd12971c2qdqg31...@4ax.com
Get your facts straight once in a while.
>The new webpage is progressing, and I expect to preview the new site
>this afternoon, after receiving links to it. We will be making a
>switchover, if everything meets our approval, the weekend of the 25-26
>March. I have seen several websites produced by the company now doing
>our website, and I am confident that the final product will be a
>significant improvement over the old webpage, as well as generating a
>savings of about $4,000 annually.
Hmmm, did you factor in the years Jim worked gratis? It wasn't until
you jacked him around 15 months ago and he resigned told you to find a
new web master. Then you were unable to find one for the salary to
board approved and were able to get Jim back at that price with the
stipulation you were to find a web master ASAP. Only took you a year to
do it.
OH, FYI, the "strange" string of numbers/letters are message IDs. Cut
and paste them into google to pop them up if your USENET browser can't
figure it out. Here's google to make it easy for you
http://groups.google.com/advanced_group_search
Sam
Sam A. Kersh
exe...@tsra.com
divided by eight, and plugged that in? I'm not sure how I could have
factored such a thing in. We looked at two things: what we expected
the final product to look like, and what it would cost to get there.
That was it.
Jim Nicholson
Remember, I am not unhappy about relinquinshing the web page, although
after ten years there had to be some remorse. If you had followed that
procedure you outlined above, you would have divided by ten, not eight.
The inuendo was that you were saving $40.000 over the ten year period.
Now how about addressing that pseudonym thing.
exe...@tsra.com
I tried your links, and every one of them generated a file not found
error.
I guess I could send you a screen snapshot of Outlook if you want.
There is most assuredly an email to you in my sent box. We have
discussed this thoroughly, and are now at the point of disproving the
notion that there is no horse too dead to beat.
Actually Jim resigned TWICE during my tenure. He resigned, and
reconsidered in 2002 during a spat with the Sue King led Oversight
Committee. The recent resignation, which you are content to blame on
me, had nothing to do with me. He specifically cited criticism from
one of his fellow Board members as the reason. Our officers and
Executive Committee handled that (with input from another special
committee), I was specifically not part of any of it, at my own
request. I'm not sure who the source of your information is, but you
have been badly misled.
Jim Dark
Sam A. Kersh
>Sam,
>
>I tried your links, and every one of them generated a file not found
>error.
Just speaks to your usual level of competence.
First link takes you to
http://groups.google.com/group/tx.guns/msg/a58ccdd790805b6
From: Sam A. Kersh <csmke...@flash.net>
Newsgroups: tx.guns
Subject: Re: Notice to AllTSRA Members Re:TSRA Web Site
Message-ID: <o9tb129hpsqi3vauh...@4ax.com>
References: <fqnb12l6a3skemhmn...@4ax.com>
<1142286091.0...@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 55
NNTP-Posting-Host: 69.148.172.148
X-Complaints-To: ab...@prodigy.net
X-Trace: newssvr31.news.prodigy.com 1142290246 ST000 69.148.172.148
(Mon, 13 Mar 2006 17:50:46 EST)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 17:50:46 EST
Organization: SBC http://yahoo.sbc.com
X-UserInfo1:
SCSYASJEFJUERT@[]BIDMUDATRXVPBQLGPQRZ\YIJYWZUYICD^RAQBKZQTZTX\_I[^G_KGFNON[ZOE_AZNVO^\XGGNTCIRPIJH[@RQKBXLRZ@CD^HKANYVW@RLGEZEJN@\_WZJBNZYYKVIOR]T]MNMG_Z[YVWSCH_Q[GPC_A@CARQVXDSDA^M]@DRVUM@RBM
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 22:50:46 GMT
JD, you want me to call you a liar here or in private? You sent ONE
e-mail stating that you had
instructed the new guy not to maintain the old site, but to build a new
one. Don't know when he
signed on, but based on what I do know, it's been six weeks and NOTHING
has changed on the old site
and the new site is still a day dream.
The tsrapac page for voter's info has a note on it stating it was last
updated Jan 11, 2006. The
News for Gun Owners Page was last updated Jan 31, 2006, Jim N's last
day.
Sam
On 13 Mar 2006 13:41:31 -0800, exec...@tsra.com wrote:
>
>Sam A. Kersh wrote:
>> All updates to the TSRA web site ceased on January 31, 2006 on Executive Director Jim Dark's
>> instructions to the new Web Master. After years of service to the organization, James D. Nicholson
>> is no longer our web master. I asked Dark to post a notice to this effect on the board, but he has
>> chosen to ignore that request.
>>
>> Sam A. Kersh
>> TSRA Live Member
>
>Do you ever read your email Sam? I gather you don't, since you
>completely misrepresented everything that I stated in our private
>exchange of last week. At 3:29 p.m. on Thursday afternoon, I sent this
>message to explaining that several changes have been made, even
>enumerating them:
>
>Sam,
>
>Actually that would not be a correct statement. The site has been
>maintained since that time. We added a voter's guide, and then changed
>it repeatedly. We posted and corrected information on the women's
>hunts and hunting & wildlife several times.
>
>I will, however, be happy to add a statement that a new and vastly
>improved website is forthcoming.
>
>You should also know that the new website is expected to be constructed
>and maintained at a significant savings to the association.
>
>Jim Dark
>
>I do appreciate that you graciously allowed one and half business days
>for us to execute your whims before you pounded us on the usenet.
>Given that incredible amount of generosity, I can only conclude that
>you are mellowing out in your old age.
>
>If you have any questions about the financial aspects of the decision
>to switch the TSRA website to another provider, why don't you ask the
>old webmaster? He is familiar with the details. And I think we both
>know that he routinely posts to this forum, albeit under a psuedonym.
>
>Jim Dark
Second Link gets
http://groups.google.com/group/tx.guns/msg/b270318786358155
From: exec...@tsra.com
Newsgroups: tx.guns
Subject: Re: Notice to AllTSRA Members Re:TSRA Web Site
Date: 13 Mar 2006 13:41:31 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 43
Message-ID: <1142286091.0...@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
References: <fqnb12l6a3skemhmn...@4ax.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 64.207.22.247
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1142286097 26725 127.0.0.1 (13 Mar 2006
21:41:37 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups...@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 21:41:37 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <fqnb12l6a3skemhmn...@4ax.com>
User-Agent: G2/0.2
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1;
.NET CLR 1.1.4322),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Complaints-To: groups...@google.com
Injection-Info: i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com;
posting-host=64.207.22.247;
posting-account=m_jysw0AAABrBoAlxnKFUH-r6xxxpYHq
Sam A. Kersh wrote:
> All updates to the TSRA web site ceased on January 31, 2006 on Executive Director Jim Dark's
> instructions to the new Web Master. After years of service to the organization, James D. Nicholson
> is no longer our web master. I asked Dark to post a notice to this effect on the board, but he has
> chosen to ignore that request.
>
> Sam A. Kersh
> TSRA Live Member
Do you ever read your email Sam? I gather you don't, since you
completely misrepresented everything that I stated in our private
exchange of last week. At 3:29 p.m. on Thursday afternoon, I sent this
message to explaining that several changes have been made, even
enumerating them:
Sam,
Actually that would not be a correct statement. The site has been
maintained since that time. We added a voter's guide, and then changed
it repeatedly. We posted and corrected information on the women's
hunts and hunting & wildlife several times.
I will, however, be happy to add a statement that a new and vastly
improved website is forthcoming.
You should also know that the new website is expected to be constructed
and maintained at a significant savings to the association.
Jim Dark
I do appreciate that you graciously allowed one and half business days
for us to execute your whims before you pounded us on the usenet.
Given that incredible amount of generosity, I can only conclude that
you are mellowing out in your old age.
If you have any questions about the financial aspects of the decision
to switch the TSRA website to another provider, why don't you ask the
old webmaster? He is familiar with the details. And I think we both
know that he routinely posts to this forum, albeit under a psuedonym.
Jim Dark
Third link brings back
http://groups.google.com/group/tx.guns/msg/e82a9a80dfcc40ac
From: Sam A. Kersh <csmke...@flash.net>
Newsgroups: tx.guns
Subject: Re: Notice to AllTSRA Members Re:TSRA Web Site
Message-ID: <pcrd12971c2qdqg31...@4ax.com>
References: <fqnb12l6a3skemhmn...@4ax.com>
<1142286091.0...@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
<o9tb129hpsqi3vauh...@4ax.com>
<Xns9785D4F815007...@24.93.43.121>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 65
NNTP-Posting-Host: 69.148.172.148
X-Complaints-To: ab...@prodigy.net
X-Trace: newssvr24.news.prodigy.net 1142354118 ST000 69.148.172.148
(Tue, 14 Mar 2006 11:35:18 EST)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 11:35:18 EST
Organization: SBC http://yahoo.sbc.com
X-UserInfo1:
SCSYASJEFJUERT@[]BIDMUDATRXVPBQLGPQRZQMIWIWTEPIB_NVUAH_[BL[\IRKIANGGJBFNJF_DOLSCENSY^U@FRFUEXR@KFXYDBPWBCDQJA@X_DCBHXR[C@\EOKCJLED_SZ@RMWYXYWE_P@\\GOIW^@SYFFSWHFIXMADO@^[ADPRPETLBJ]RDGENSKQQZN
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 16:35:18 GMT
On Tue, 14 Mar 2006 02:56:08 GMT, Alan <awe...@austin.rr.com> wrote:
>Sam A. Kersh <csmke...@flash.net> wrote in
Sam A. Kersh
NRA Patron Member
L.E.A.A. Life Member
TSRA Life Member
GOA, JPFO, SAF
http://www.whoseparanoid.com/csmk
===============================================================
When firearms go, all goes. We need them every hour.
George Washington
>I guess I could send you a screen snapshot of Outlook if you want.
>There is most assuredly an email to you in my sent box. We have
>discussed this thoroughly, and are now at the point of disproving the
>notion that there is no horse too dead to beat.
Immaterial. You or your ISP has screwed up more than once or you've
lied more than once about e-mail being sent. Only you know which.
>Actually Jim resigned TWICE during my tenure. He resigned, and
>reconsidered in 2002 during a spat with the Sue King led Oversight
>Committee. The recent resignation, which you are content to blame on
>me, had nothing to do with me. He specifically cited criticism from
>one of his fellow Board members as the reason. Our officers and
>Executive Committee handled that (with input from another special
>committee), I was specifically not part of any of it, at my own
>request. I'm not sure who the source of your information is, but you
>have been badly misled.
Now that's truly funny. But if that's the story you want to pretend is
true, continue on in your fantasy world.
>Jim Dark
And as those that know you, you never admit to mistakes, blunders, lies
or other F*** Ups. Typical.
Oh, and about that so-called pseudonym thing, you going to continue to
duck that?
exe...@tsra.com
Here is a quote from Jim's resignation letter. It's pretty
self-explanatory, and backs what I told you.
>>Jim, at the annual meeting in February I asked you to find someone to
>>take over the web site. That choice was made because of criticism by
>>one director/officer whose illogic astounded me. I told you that I
>>would not leave you in the lurch and have not. However, it appears
>>that a replacement has been found based on the committee report.
>>Therefore, I will quit tending the TSRA web site as of the last day of
>>this month, 5/31/05. Earlier transfer of duties can be arranged if
>>desired.
I don't think that I'm the one living in a fantasy world. If a
different story is being told about the resignation, it was never
shared with me. I have operated, since the receipt of that message, on
the premise that I was told the truth about the reasons, and have never
heard anything to disabuse me of that notion.
As for the psuedonym, Jim has denied it. I will assume that is the
truth, but maintain a healthy amount of skepticism.
Jim Dark
Denny
Jim,
YOU accused him of posting under a psudeonym and then when he denies
it and demands YOUR proof, you respond as you did above!?!
OK, then how about this:
http://www.savethescv.org/Different%20Communication.htm
"From: Unknown
"Date: Tuesday, March 01, 2005
"To: undisclosed-recipients
"Subject: Different Communication
"
"In the last weeks, the SCV rank and file has been barraged by an
insidious propaganda machine. Mr. Jim Dark (ousted from the GEC) has
poured his life blood passion, anger and imagination into literally
hundreds of emails. He is now facilitating (2) websites. No one seems
to be willing to ask the REAL question? WHY?
"
"Regardless of all the hype, hysteria and rhetoric - several members
of the GEC took their concerns to court for an injunction. Whether
this decision was right or wrong is strictly academic at this point.
We can all speculate to their motives, but there are some glaring
assurances.
"
"1) For whatever reason, a Tennessee Judge has found that they have
some type of case. As a leader in this organization I frankly am VERY
concerned as to what type of OUTRAGEOUS CONDUCT has driven several on
the GEC to this type of controversial action. Many seem to be focused
on the "act" and not the reasons. I would hope that we have more
intelligence out there than I have seen demonstrated. THERE IS A
PROBLEM. The problem is less of a coup and more of questions that
indict our VERY LEADERSHIP.
"
"2) Wagging the Dog . . . . I’m sure Bill Clinton has a tear (of
admiration) in his eye for the very well thought out campaign launched
by Mr. Dark.
"
"This ridiculous campaign long ago crossed into the realm of fantasy,
went from half truths to outright lies and in general has been the
most disgraceful conduct I have ever witnessed in a supposed "leader".
Mr. Dark harps on the SCV Constitution. I wonder if he has read the
section dealing with CONDUCT. If his CONDUCT is a demonstration of
what CiC Sweeney finds acceptable to represent his
administration...well I’m surprised we weren’t in Court months ago.
Mr. Dark and his cronies have come up with cute buzz words such as
conspirators, coup, purges and all kinds of official sounding terms to
describe the actions of Dr. Hodges and his contemporaries. This all
becomes semantics, one could also use terms to describe them such as
Rebels, Revolutionaries, Patriots of the SCV and so forth. The point
is DON'T BE SUCKED INTO PROPAGANDA.
"
"A) Mr. Dark seems very active in trying to present mountains and
mountains of controversial data. When one sits down to read it – it
SAYS NOTHING. Its all conjecture, he said ... hearsay, manipulated and
illegally recorded PRIVATE CONVERSATIONS, outright lies and slobbering
threats and insults. Again, if CiC Sweeney was so honorable...why does
he allow one of his Chief Flunkies to represent his interests in such
a DISHONORABLE and IGNORANT MANNER? The rumor is that CiC Sweeney has
offered this slobbering buffoon and APPOINTMENT to LTCIC once Sweeney
has been restored to leadership and conducts HIS PURGE.
"
"B) Did I say Purge...Yes PURGE...Yesterday Dark pandered a fictitious
purge list out to the membership identifying "radicals" in the SCV. He
claimed this had been covertly acquired from the Hodges
administration. He claims that Dr Hodges, Beau Cantrell, Jeff Massey
and others are drooling over the prospect of throwing out a long list
of compatriots. Frankly several names on the list, starting with Jim
Dark need to be thrown out. Not because of their politics but their
total disregard for our Constitution and their totally unprofessional,
sewer rat behavior. The purge list was an interesting variant of the
John Wilkes Booth Society membership list with some names added to
camouflage it. What is the JWB you ask? This is CiC Sweeney’s "secret
society" within the SCV. They send out their own ignorant little
newsletter, conduct secret meetings and all the CiC Sweeney accuses
Dr. Hodges group of. Speaking with a KEY Sweeney leader he indicated
that if they are restored to power, they DO HAVE A BONAFIDE hit list.
Many Division Commanders and Camp Leaders were threatened not only
during this issue but as early as Dalton with problems if they didn’t
"get on board" and support Sweeney. Speaking of purges ... what
exactly do you call Sweeney’s actions of suspensions and
investigations?
"
"C) The LOS specter....Jim Dark denies he is an LOS member. He denies
he knows ANYONE in the LOS. In a recent conversation with a KEY LOS
leader- he referred to Mr. Dark as "Jim" and discussed at length THEIR
friendship. Doubt the LOS doesn’t have members in leadership? Ask
yourselves WHY THEY are so interested in this situation and are openly
SUPPORTING SWEENEY. Of course Dark can easily try and explain this all
away and then once again wag the dog by lying about Hodges
affiliations with Walt Hilderman. Very clever maneuvering if you ask
me.
"
"D) Culpability for this OUTRAGEOUS BEHAVIOR - as we mention, Mr. Dark
has clearly and egotistically violated Conduct of a member as well as
a number of laws during his lurid little misinformation campaign.
However in the BIG picture a former Military Officer and West Point
Graduate like CiC Sweeney would realize that in the end...HE is
ultimately responsible for the conduct of his "men". If CiC Sweeney
condones and encourages the personal attacks, immaturity, law breaking
and lying - he is AS GUILTY as his lap weasel Jim Dark. Is this the
type of administration you want running YOUR organization?
"
"Early on Mr. Dark threatened all of us about donating money to the
Hodges Legal Fund. He indicated that donations to this ultimately
would cause you the member to end up footing defense out of the SCV
treasury. Now that the shoe is one the other foot he is desperately
begging you for money to go to court with...he closed his note
threatening members who did donate to Hodges. I’m surprised he hasn’t
threatened you if you now don’t give him money. What I find
interesting is that the account he has set up is in HIS NAME. He
claims he will give money back that isn’t used but he has NO LEGAL
obligation to return funds. Additionally it’s pretty generic as to
what this money is to be used for. Likely it will be used BY HIM to
defend himself for several VERY QUESTIONABLE activities. If the
Sweeney administration has such a valid and righteous claim to
honorable conduct ... WHY aren't they waiting with the dignity of the
honorable man and taking their case to court? Because their lies,
deceit and manipulation wont work in court. They will destroy this
organization before the fact and then scamper off with the brain
washed to form a NEW organization that Sweeney and Dark can lord over
as true cult leaders. Of course once again they will need YOUR MONEY.
"
"In closing it is found VERY disgusting that Mr. Dark harps on the
winners and losers of this conflict. He prefaces that the winners and
losers are Sweeney Vs. Hodges. The real losers are the membership,
regardless of the outcome. But rest assured he doesn’t care about you.
He wants your money and he wants you as a soldier to further HIS
PERSONAL AGENDA. Many of you that have rushed off to follow this lying
PIED PIPER can rest assure he wants desperately to be YOUR NEXT CIC.
If that were to happen then you'll see who and what he really is. He
wants to think for you and wants blind obedience - hmmm reminds me of
Germany in the 1930's when another loud mouthed runt bullied and
manipulated his way to power. He too had a fanatical following that
didn’t want to see the truth till it was too late."
Just becasue someone else may practice it Jim, does not mean all do.
Denny
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
Jim Nicholson
> Sam,
>
> Here is a quote from Jim's resignation letter. It's pretty
> self-explanatory, and backs what I told you.
>
>
>>>Jim, at the annual meeting in February I asked you to find someone to
>>>take over the web site. That choice was made because of criticism by
>>>one director/officer whose illogic astounded me. I told you that I
>>>would not leave you in the lurch and have not. However, it appears
>>>that a replacement has been found based on the committee report.
>>>Therefore, I will quit tending the TSRA web site as of the last day of
>>>this month, 5/31/05. Earlier transfer of duties can be arranged if
>>>desired.
First, quoting from a private email wo permission is bad netiquette.
Second, Sam's observation about your foot-dragging is correct in
principle, if the gate was open to dump me February '05, and you
couldn't get around to it until 2/1/06. Let's see now that's lost
savings of 11 months at $4,000 ($44.000) plus two additional lost months
(February and most of March) of web maintenance. What's a TSRA Life
Member like Sam to think about your administration of TSRA funds?
>
> I don't think that I'm the one living in a fantasy world. If a
> different story is being told about the resignation, it was never
> shared with me. I have operated, since the receipt of that message, on
> the premise that I was told the truth about the reasons, and have never
> heard anything to disabuse me of that notion.
Sam may have gotten some things honestly confused, but again, he was
right in principle. As far as your comment in an earlier note in this
thread about my trust in Sam, you can believe that it is implicit which
is more that I can say about some of my relations within TSRA.
>
> As for the psuedonym, Jim has denied it. I will assume that is the
> truth, but maintain a healthy amount of skepticism.
You're still wrong, JD, and I still want to know what pseudonym you
mistakenly attributed and appear to continue to attribute to me. You at
least owe me that much. Curious minds want to know. It wasn't Dark Vader
by chance? <G>
>
> Jim Dark
>
Jim Nicholson
Good catch, Denny. Maybe that explains why it took JD 11 months to come
up with my replacement as TSRA webmaster.
Richard
perceives us. Please fight your battles face to face or at the annual
meetings. Not here in public.
Richard Ator
Life member TSRA
Life member NRA
Sam A. Kersh
Richard,
Why are you afraid to let the world know what Jim Dark really is? TSRA
isn't the first organization he mucked up - just the one I'm interested
in not seeing going down the tubes....
You've seen his incompetence even to do a google plus his lying and
confusing e-mail with a post to the USENET. Do you want to see this
running the day to day operations of TSRA? I don't.
exe...@tsra.com
>principle, if the gate was open to dump me February '05, and you
>couldn't get around to it until 2/1/06. Let's see now that's lost
>savings of 11 months at $4,000 ($44.000) plus two additional lost months
>(February and most of March) of web maintenance. What's a TSRA Life
>Member like Sam to think about your administration of TSRA funds?
OK, let's strip away the BS and examine this statement. First of all,
it benefits from 20/20 hindsight. I would have needed to predict that
savings 9 or 10 months in advance. In February '05 I didn't even know
that our new webmaster existed. I heard his name for the first time a
bouple of weeks before we sent out bid requests, on a personal
recommendation from a vendor.
Second, "the gate was open to dump me in Feb '05" Huh? If so, only
because you opened it. I was certainly in no hurry, because I had no
decent alternative at the time. Recall, you got offended at a remark
made by a fellow board member, not any action on my part.
Third, through most of '05, the webpage situation was in the hands of
an ad hoc committee of which I had no part. Their recommendation was
considered by the Executive Committee, of which I am also no part,
which elected to retain your services. I was a non-player in this
entire process in 2005, a role that I was perfectly content with.
When ordered to conduct a bid process, I did so, in a timely manner,
with a reasonable amount of time for bids to be submitted. You were
part of that process. Once the deadline was passed, a decision was
made within a matter of just a couple of weeks.
Frankly, I never was much in favor of replacing you because I knew that
it was going to turn into the gigantic goat screw we are now
witnessing. My biggest regret is that you priced yourself out of the
running.
I believe that this whole statement came about because of your
contention that someone was "right in principle." Maybe they are,
assuming they own an M1A1 Crystal Ball and aren't afraid to use it.
Denny
wrote:
>Yall are not doing anything here to improve the TSRA or how the public
Richard,
As a Life Member myself, and someone who quit posting here a long time
ago, I would not have said a thing or posted a thing, if Jim Dark had
not accused Jim Nicholson, a past president of TSRA no less, of
posting under a pseudonym.
Further, for Jim Dark to have said the Jim Nicholson's name is not on
the TSRA website, while technically true, does not take into account
the many old timers here who know very well that Jim Nicholson was the
webmaster of TSRA.com and kept it regularly up to date with pertinent
and very helpful information.
http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.tsra.com
Now, up until January of 2002 Jim Nicholson's name was on TSRA.com:
http://web.archive.org/web/20020126143417/http://www.tsra.com/
Now, six weeks have passed since the new webmaster was assigned the
task of a new website and the only things updated on the existing site
are notices about a woman's hunt and that Election Guides have been
updated at www.tsra.org, which is a TSRA site and in fact states that
the site IS maintained by Jim Nicholson.
So, what we have is the sitting EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR of TSRA calling a
past president an unknown, a sneak, and a coward (IMO) in a public
forum. When called on his actions, he does not respond as if he is
above such matters, when in fact, he started it.
If that does not deserve a public response, and a hard one, then I do
not know what does.
Do yourself a favor, and anyone else reading this as well, go do a
search on Google, or your favorite search engine, of this newsgroup
and the name Jim Dark. Further, then do a search of Jim Dark and SCV
and then make up your own mind.
Denny
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
exe...@tsra.com
Denny wrote:
>
> Do yourself a favor, and anyone else reading this as well, go do a
> search on Google, or your favorite search engine, of this newsgroup
> and the name Jim Dark. Further, then do a search of Jim Dark and SCV
> and then make up your own mind.
>
> Denny
>
By all means go ahead. Get the words about me from people who have
sued me, unsuccessfully, and got sent packing out of a Tennessee court
with their tails between their legs. They hate me because I raised the
money that facilitated them getting the butts kicked.
Most of the people involved in the writing of those materials are
disgruntled former members, who have either resigned, been expelled or
removed from office and membership.
Frankly, this whole exercise makes about as much sense as getting an
opinion about TSRA from the idiots who sued us in 1999, unsuccessfully,
and got banished from the organization for it.
This is a really good way to get the real truth, unvarnished, without a
hint of bias...
Yeah, right. But it's good enough for Denny. It's posted to the
internet, so it must be true
Max Tindell
Max
Sam A. Kersh
wrote:
>Looks like it is time to choose a neutral site, seconds and weapons.
>
Grass at dawn works for John A and myself.
>Max
>
>On 14 Mar 2006 21:52:40 -0800, exe...@tsra.com wrote:
>
>>>Second, Sam's observation about your foot-dragging is correct in
>>>principle, if the gate was open to dump me February '05, and you
>>>couldn't get around to it until 2/1/06. Let's see now that's lost
>>>savings of 11 months at $4,000 ($44.000) plus two additional lost months
>>>(February and most of March) of web maintenance. What's a TSRA Life
>>>Member like Sam to think about your administration of TSRA funds?
>>
>>OK, let's strip away the BS and examine this statement. First of all,
>>it benefits from 20/20 hindsight. I would have needed to predict that
>>savings 9 or 10 months in advance. In February '05 I didn't even know
>>that our new webmaster existed. I heard his name for the first time a
>>bouple of weeks before we sent out bid requests, on a personal
>>recommendation from a vendor.
>>
>>Second, "the gate was open to dump me in Feb '05" Huh? If so, only
>>because you opened it. I was certainly in no hurry, because I had no
>>decent alternative at the time. Recall, you got offended at a remark
>>made by a fellow board member, not any action on my part.
>>
>>Third, through most of '05, the webpage situation was in the hands of
>>an ad hoc committee of which I had no part. Their recommendation was
>>considered by the Executive Committee, of which I am also no part,
>>which elected to retain your services.
>>.......................................................... I was a non-player in this
>>entire process in 2005, a role that I was perfectly content with.
Could it be because you were somewhere else fighting a lawsuit?
Enquiring minds want to know.
>>When ordered to conduct a bid process, I did so, in a timely manner,
>>with a reasonable amount of time for bids to be submitted. You were
>>part of that process. Once the deadline was passed, a decision was
>>made within a matter of just a couple of weeks.
>>
>>Frankly, I never was much in favor of replacing you because I knew that
>>it was going to turn into the gigantic goat screw we are now
>>witnessing. My biggest regret is that you priced yourself out of the
>>running.
>>
>>I believe that this whole statement came about because of your
>>contention that someone was "right in principle." Maybe they are,
>>assuming they own an M1A1 Crystal Ball and aren't afraid to use it.
JD, the question here is, you're spending time with the SCV and,
apparently, the web master for the Texas Division's site, when you
should be devoting time and effort to TSRA.
Lurkers: This isn't about the TSRA; it's about the ExDir futching off
when he should be humping his arse for TSRA.
Sam A. Kersh
imagination or are you going to come up with a name?
Denny
Jim,
Are you not going to provide the proof that Jim Nicholson posted under
a pseudonym or not? If not, then ask yourself just how much time did
you have to really spend doing this over the past two or three years
and what did you do to piss them off so badly to sue you. The second
question you should ask yourself is just how much time did it take
away from TSRA business. And, as for the truth of the matter, since
when do lawyers deal in truth?
Your actions, inactions, slurs, and refusal to answer for them really
do piss people off.
Now, are you going to provide the proof that Jim Nicholson used a
pseudonym or not Dark Vader?
Denny
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
exe...@tsra.com
>
> JD, the question here is, you're spending time with the SCV and,
> apparently, the web master for the Texas Division's site, when you
> should be devoting time and effort to TSRA.
>
> Lurkers: This isn't about the TSRA; it's about the ExDir futching off
> when he should be humping his arse for TSRA.
>
Sam,
I don't think any reasonable person has ever suggested that I am not
allowed to have a life outside of TSRA. Are you?
I do work under the terms of a written employment contract. I am
obligated contractually to spend at least 40 hours a week for the
benefit of the TSRA. I routinely spend far in excess of that. If the
contract was followed to the letter, it would work to my benefit, not
the TSRA's.
There are 168 hours in a week. You do the math. Don't you see where I
could possibly have time for a hobby?
Also, for clarification, I have not been the webmaster for the Texas
Division since about 1999 if memory serves. I started their first
website in 1995, and served as webmaster for a few years. I was
relieved by Sandy Keathley years ago (far preceeding my employment with
TSRA) and have not served in that capacity. I do maintain, on my
personal webspace, a very small webpage for my local chapter. That's
it. It also probably hasn't been updated in over a year, so it isn't
exactly a time vampire.
Jim Dark
Jim Nicholson
You gotta understand, Denny. Jim Dark rarely, if ever, will admit to a
mistake. Proof of that exists in this thread.
Look at these two Dark Vader statements:
"But trust me on this one, the message content and choice of psuedonym
(sic) make it abundantly (clear) who he is."
followed later by:
"As for the psuedonym(sic), Jim has denied it. I will assume that is
the truth, but maintain a healthy amount of skepticism."
Is that denial, or what! Then, of course, it would take guts to post the
pseudonym. Much easier to skirt it and play with diversions. Right, Jim?
exe...@tsra.com
Jim Nicholson wrote:
> Is that denial, or what! Then, of course, it would take guts to post the
> pseudonym. Much easier to skirt it and play with diversions. Right, Jim?
Good point, Jim. About as much guts as spouting off here and then
correcting people privately like you admitted to me earlier today that
you had done.
Since you chose to "punish in public, and praise in private" don't
expect anything better than that. I'll contact you off list once I get
a couple more straight answers and explanations. You see, I'm not the
only one who leaves an impression of being evasive.
Did you ever see that movie "Tombstone?" Remember the line about "My
hypocrisy knows no bounds?"
Jim Dark
Jim Nicholson
Tell me about hypocrisy, JD. You advise me off line last night (11:14
pm) that we should follow Richard Ator's advice and then minutes
later(11:52 pm), with no further prompting from me, here you are posting
like mad, replying to me on tx.guns and then you kept following up.
Next, pray tell me when did I praise? Your first year as TSRA exec, but
when since then?
You accused me in public, now clear it up in public. No more off line
stuff. When you're wrong, you're wrong . . . "a healthy amount of
skepticism" needs clarification. A statement like that will not get you
off the hook. Posting the pseudo may.
Denny
Jim,
There is nothing like calling someone names, and when called on it,
realize that not everyone will accept such bullshit, and then you
refuse to answer for such- shows exactly what you are made of Jim
Dark.
pha...@bellsouth.net
I am responding to the initial post of this thread, though I have read what
is now more than 30 posted exchanges. I am a bit surprised at both the
length of the thread and of the intensity of these exchanges. The main
reason for my surprise is that this started with what I viewed as a simple,
informational posting in the form of a supplementary notice.
==============
> "Sam A. Kersh"
> All updates to the TSRA web site ceased on January 31, 2006
> on Executive Director Jim Dark's instructions to the new Web Master.
> After years of service to the organization, James D. Nicholson is no
> longer our web master. I asked Dark to post a notice to this effect
> on the board, but he has chosen to ignore that request.
Left as that; this would have been notice to me that JDN was no longer the
WebMaster and that this post was placed here because there was no notice of
that fact posted at the TSRA site to that effect. I will not argue the
precise accuracy of the term "all updates" or of the precise date as I
frankly do not acknowledge that there is any expectation of agreement of
what "Updates" constitutes, or the precise importance of a particular day.
In any case, I was surprised at the first response:
=========
> Jim Dark:
> Do you ever read your email Sam?
> I gather you don't, since you completely misrepresented
> everything that I stated in our private exchange of last week.
> At 3:29 p.m. on Thursday afternoon, I sent this message to
> explaining that several changes have been made, even
> enumerating them:
A comment typed as a question does not disguise the sarcasm or the slur
inferred. It is followed by what you "gather" from your own slur, taken as
fact and an accusation based upon it. More egregiously, this is a public
refutation citing private and therefore unknown and not verifiable
statements, is bad manners at best, at worst the act of a person without
ethics. Is the time, correct to the minute, with the date narrowed to the
afternoon pedantic or an attempt to lend credence to what cannot be
verified?
=======
> Jim Dark (same post)
> Sam,
>
> Actually that would not be a correct statement. The site has been
> maintained since that time. We added a voter's guide, and then
> changed it repeatedly. We posted and corrected information on
> the women's hunts and hunting & wildlife several times.
>
> I will, however, be happy to add a statement that a new and vastly
> improved website is forthcoming.
>
> You should also know that the new website is expected to be
> constructed and maintained at a significant savings to the association.
> Jim Dark
Throughout your comments above I note that you have again attempted
refutation with the use of the words: "several changes," "maintained,"
"added," and "posted and corrected." None of these terms constitute, in and
of themselves, the inclusive term "Updated" and if I am not mistaken;
updated was the term under discussion.
You are obviously a politician; you say that "I ... will add" followed by a
glowing assessment of what does not yet exist. Yes, you even attempt to
provide my (future) judgment for me, even as you infer my gratitude for its
economy in construction and maintenance.
Many here are computer literate - ask the group how many times they have
been told to expect software of such excellence in construction, on time and
at cost savings... then step back to listen...
================
Jim Dark (same post)
> I do appreciate that you graciously allowed one and half business
> days for us to execute your whims before you pounded us on the
> usenet. Given that incredible amount of generosity, I can only
> conclude that you are mellowing out in your old age.
When you attempt to be condescending it would be best that you remember in
later postings (where you cite your "much greater than business hour
dedication") that you have also used "one and a half business days" as a
useful limitation for yourself.
Sarcastic selection his "generosity" (while you acknowledge that he is not
listed as the WebMaster so why should I notify that he is not now) while you
also acknowledge his voluntary unpaid services, is almost as demeaning as
that crack about old-age - and all us other codgers see the attempted
insult. I will warn you that when age actually does affect us, we are
willing to gang-up...
===============
Jim Dark (same post)
> If you have any questions about the financial aspects of the
> decision to switch the TSRA website to another provider,
> why don't you ask the old webmaster? He is familiar with the
> details. And I think we both know that he routinely posts to this
> forum, albeit under a pseudonym.
This is what prompted me to post.
Can't even recall the name - the "old" WebMaster" - ?!?!
You have stated as fact, known to you and Sam ("both") that JimN posts under
a pseudonym, and does so routinely. You have been repeatedly asked for the
pseudonym, the posts or proof... without response, acknowledgement of your
egregious statement, retraction or apology.
I have been reading posts by Sam A. Kersh and Jim Nicholson and others
posting in this thread for some years. I do not believe Jim does this
and demand proof or retraction and apology. Without one or the other you
will remain, in self expressed depictment; a LIAR, a Damned Liar and a
Cowardly Liar...
Jim Huston
pha...@bellsouth.net
Jim Nicholson
That is an amazingly astute post, Jim Huston. You have rare powers of
observation and deduction. I've known Jim Dark for four years and your
post pretty well describes the attributes of the JD I have come to know.
Russ B
<exe...@tsra.com> wrote in message
news:1142370722.6...@e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
FWIW, The old site sucked. I hope the new one is better. Airing dirty
laundry in public is stupid. Maybe I ought to spend my dues to join some
other association if the "old-timers" of the TSRA are going to act like a
couple of teenagers in a pissing match on an internet chat baord because
their feathers got ruffled.
Sam A. Kersh
Kid, if you don't like it, learn to use a kill file.
Russ B
"Sam A. Kersh" <csmk...@flash.net> wrote in message
news:j3oq12pto9pco6sp5...@4ax.com...
I'm no kid. You, Dark an Nicholson are the ones acting like kids. I'm a
TSRA member, crap like this doesn't belong here. Maybe I ought to just
"killfile" the TSRA. I pay dues, but if the ED, you, and other "old timers"
don't care what I have to say then I can just let it run out. I can call my
Congressmen, write letters, and spend my time telling people I know why it's
a good idea for me (and them) to be able to keep and carry a firearm without
spending money on membership.
Sam A. Kersh
<gofast@REMOVE_THIStexoma.net> wrote:
>
>"Sam A. Kersh" <csmk...@flash.net> wrote in message
>news:j3oq12pto9pco6sp5...@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 01:12:29 -0600, "Russ B"
>> <gofast@REMOVE_THIStexoma.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>><exe...@tsra.com> wrote in message
>>>news:1142370722.6...@e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
>>>> So during the budgeting process, I should have taken your proposed fee,
>>>> divided by eight, and plugged that in? I'm not sure how I could have
>>>> factored such a thing in. We looked at two things: what we expected
>>>> the final product to look like, and what it would cost to get there.
>>>> That was it.
>>>>
>>>
>>>FWIW, The old site sucked. I hope the new one is better. Airing dirty
>>>laundry in public is stupid. Maybe I ought to spend my dues to join some
>>>other association if the "old-timers" of the TSRA are going to act like a
>>>couple of teenagers in a pissing match on an internet chat baord because
>>>their feathers got ruffled.
>>>
>>
>> Kid, if you don't like it, learn to use a kill file.
>>
>Sam,
>
>I'm no kid. You, Dark an Nicholson are the ones acting like kids. I'm a
>TSRA member, crap like this doesn't belong here. Maybe I ought to just
>"killfile" the TSRA. I pay dues, but if the ED, you, and other "old timers"
>don't care what I have to say then I can just let it run out. I can call my
>Congressmen, write letters, and spend my time telling people I know why it's
>a good idea for me (and them) to be able to keep and carry a firearm without
>spending money on membership.
>
The bottom line is, you want to curtail my and others freedom of speach
'cause it bothers you. Grow up and move on.
pha...@bellsouth.net
news:dvnia...@enews1.newsguy.com...
This is your second direct threat to "Quit" in your two posts to the thread.
Both
are prefaced with the qualifier: "maybe." In this, the most current, you
ask if either side (or anyone) "don't care what I have to say ..." followed
by another way to Quit - "let it run out." (and what did you say?)
Both of your posts, and all threats to quit, are founded upon your
definition of the issue: "Airing dirty laundry in public," "acting like
kids" and "what I have to say ..." But these are not the issues.
All organizations change over time. All select new officers, establish new
systems and take new directions. Some of these are cooperative, some are
contentious. The organization will either survive, thrive and grow -or- it
will die - due to these choices - in some length of time.
Have you ever heard the saying that: "Ten percent of the members perform 100
percent of the work." ?
It would not have taken much to post an announcement on the site, such as:
We are currently in the process of creating an entirely new WebSite. This
Site was started and has been maintained by Jim Nicholson, initially on a
voluntary, unpaid basis and later as the paid Webmaster. We have selected
the company that will design and implement our new web presence and it is
our hope that the new site will be an improvement in both design and
function.
Note that it did not even require "Thanks." The issue, and the determining
factor for the character of the organization, is the relationship and
treatment of the members; especially those that have done the work for so
long. And THIS is the issue.
I need know nothing more of a person (leader?) that states:
> Do you actually think that it is a good idea to make a statement
> about changing a webmaster, when there was no statement
> really indicating that he was the webmaster in the first place?
> It strikes me as kind of like issuing a correction statement in
> the magazine about a typo that nobody noticed.
Well, Yes I do think it a good idea; it is never an error to give credit
where it's due. This would also give notice of how the organization and
those that lead it, value volunteers, members and others they associate and
interact with.
And a typo is a mistake; and should always be corrected in any circumstance.
And believe me, people do notice.
The lack of the ability to recognize and acknowledge the work and
accomplishments of members, not to mention the dedication this requires, is
not a typo, NOT a mistake. I can see the leadership qualities and the ethics
and values contained and represented in that statement above.
And BTW - I am not interested in your view that "The old site sucked" - as a
matter of opinion. You have a right to your view, but this is not accurate.
There is, of yet, no New One - as opposed to the "Old One" that "sucked" (as
if there is a "past tense and a new site to compare to).
Perhaps you should volunteer, on an unpaid basis, to work for the
organization instead of threatening to quit ... ?
ByTheWay:
While the "From:" line indicates postings by exe...@tsra.com the postings
themselves are signed "Jim Dark."
Are these posts from the office of the executive director and representative
of the organization OR are these the personal postings of an individual...?
Yes, this is important - and inquiring minds want to know...
JimH
Jim Nicholson
> Sam A. Kersh wrote:
>
>
>>JD, the question here is, you're spending time with the SCV and,
>>apparently, the web master for the Texas Division's site, when you
>>should be devoting time and effort to TSRA.
>>
>>Lurkers: This isn't about the TSRA; it's about the ExDir futching off
>>when he should be humping his arse for TSRA.
>>
>
> Sam,
>
> I don't think any reasonable person has ever suggested that I am not
> allowed to have a life outside of TSRA. Are you?
>
> I do work under the terms of a written employment contract. I am
> obligated contractually to spend at least 40 hours a week for the
> benefit of the TSRA. I routinely spend far in excess of that. If the
> contract was followed to the letter, it would work to my benefit, not
> the TSRA's.
>
> There are 168 hours in a week. You do the math. Don't you see where I
> could possibly have time for a hobby?
<snip>
Hobby? Hardly, more like an obsession.
>
> Jim Dark
>
What about the contract you worked under in 2003 and 2004 and part of
2005? Can you say that you did not violate that contract with your
time-consuming SCV activities?
The contract that you quote from above was rewritten by a permissive
president that was different from any contract since a popular
suggestion by George Tubb at the Doubletree in Dallas in 1994 to curtail
activities in outside association that consumed too much of the
director's time as happened with Dave Edmonson and his NRA board
debacle. What about the contract you were hired under, Jim?
We are still waiting for you to share the pseudo!
Jim Dark to tx.guns, 3/13/06: [And I think we both know that he
routinely posts to this forum, albeit under a psuedonym (sic).]
Jim Nicholson
>
> FWIW, The old site sucked. I hope the new one is better. Airing dirty
> laundry in public is stupid. Maybe I ought to spend my dues to join some
> other association if the "old-timers" of the TSRA are going to act like a
> couple of teenagers in a pissing match on an internet chat baord because
> their feathers got ruffled.
So, Russ, with regard to the web site, it appears that you have no
interest in:
NRA Competition and Match Schedules
Information on Texas Concealed Handgun Law
Pro-Gun candidate endorsements
Pertinent info on Texas and national legislative issues affecting your
civil rights
Current and archived Dr. John Lott information
Up to date gun news on the pulse of pro-gun/anti-gun activities across
the nation
Documentation of the lack of success with anti-gun laws in the UK, Oz,
Canada and other countries
Gun Collecting
Well, you get the drift. Just what would you have been interested in?
Pretty colors?
Russ B
"Jim Nicholson" <jam...@5akamail.com> wrote in message
news:MI_Tf.62081$dW3....@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
No, the colors were fine. The old site is difficult to navigate, and opens a
new window for every link from the home page.. For example, If I wanted to
participate in a shooting competition (in Texas) and I wanted to see
upcoming events, I naturally would click "competitions". No joy...that's a
link to some two-year-old results and one event for 2006 as far as i can
tell. Once I find the right link, I have to go through two levels of pages
to get to the right one...THEN I have to search through events all over the
country to find out if there is one in Texas. Generally speaking, web
surfers are lazy folks when it comes to finding information. I still haven't
found information about which candidates in the Republican primary were
pro-gun and which weren't, but that's pretty much irrelevant now. I was
afraid I would have to make my vote based on cmapign advertisements, which I
don't like to do. Fortunately, I got a chance to talk to one of the
candidates and found him to be pretty evasive on RKBA. Bottom line... If the
site isn't more convenient to use, it won't be used.
Russ B
Jim Nicholson
Webmaster can only post match results that match directors send him.
After years of cajoling and begging directors for match results, I gave
up and let the page get stale. (Check the law enforcement pages if you
want to see stale.) If the directors do not care enough to have the
results posted, what's a webmaster supposed to do. If the law
enforcement director has nothing to post, what else is he doing or not
doing?
The NRA match schedule is posted for all disciplines across the US of A.
Putting a find on "Texas" shouldn't be that much of a challenge. Do you
subscribe to Shooting Sports, USA? The same information is in that
magazine, but the distribution is less that 15000 copies per month. I do
not know how to organize that much information into a one-level click
that is workable. Most regular shooters bookmarked the NRA_Sub.htm file.
The match schedules and contact information was not available on any web
site, including NRA's, except the TSRA web site. NRA said they did not
have the manpower to keep it posted. That was a project that I started
and made arrangements for the information to be forwarded to the new
webmaster every month. So far, none of it has been posted. It will be
interesting to see if it is ever posted again. I posted the April
informaiton last Feb. The June info could and should now be posted. It's
not.
Same thing with Lott Page and a bunch of other stuff. You see, there
never was any interest in keeping the web site up to date with good
information from the directors, staff, or the executive director. It was
primarily a one-man show for ten years. If I ever heard from a member,
which was rare, I always responded and changed the web site when
appropriate. Even so, I heard more from members than from TSRA
directors. That is why that after eight years I quit doing pro bono and
started charging -- trying to get their attention.
As far as opening in a new window, that was by design to keep on the web
site. The feature was recommended by the committee that reviewed the web
site last year.
The pro-gun candidates were always rated as A+, A, B, C, etc. An A+ was
always gung ho for out rights and an A was plenty good. A+ usually
introduced pro-gun legislation. An "A" candidate always voted for
pro-gun legislation, or if he had no voting record (new candidate) he
had filled out the questionnaire to support gun rights. So, bottom line
is that if you had looked at the voting guide, you would have known how
each legislative or state wide candidate was rated.
The site was being used. It was getting over 3000 hits per day while it
was being maintained. About 1/3 of the hits have dropped off recently.
Randy Howard
(in article <MI_Tf.62081$dW3....@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com>):
That's all good information.
I'm kind of interested in why the www.tsra.com site currently
loads ABSOLUTELY nothing, a blank page with nothing on it.
Makes a real good impression. If they are switching hosting
providers or working on a new site, perhaps they could get
someone competent to do it smoothly.
Maybe they're looking at a real community site running a
full-blown content management system (Xoops, Xaraya, Drupal,
etc.) so that the members will have something to sustain their
interest?
> Well, you get the drift. Just what would you have been interested in?
> Pretty colors?
Well, anything but the circa-1980 flashing text and non-standard
HTML scrolling banners would be nice. That was just hideous.
I also note that the tsrapac.org site has some pages on it with
no navigation at all, so if you land on one from a google
search, there is no link back to home. Bizarre.
Link on tsrapac.org to the blank TSRA page. Nice touch.
I especially love to see that they are still endorsing
candidates, but apparently only at the state level, yet listing
the NRA ratings anyway for the federal level elections. Of all
the people to rate A+, Tom Delay would have to be my favorite.
*cough*
I guess we'll have to wait a while longer to find out what
they'll try to do to Ron Paul next time he is up.
No endorsement for Kinky? Aww.... no, I can definitely see
where they would want to endorse someone like Perry, who wants
to steal land from Texan property owners for a toll-road system
instead.
The html markup on votersguide.htm is hosed, overwriting text in
columns. Must have been tested with a tiny font size, or not
tested at all.
Finally, I note that Jim Dark sent me a letter inviting me to
upgrade from a life member to a higher level, despite ignoring
me when I ask questions about things like how they might be
planning to reform the ratings/endorsement system. I wonder if
he will be surprised at my choice not take up his offer?
--
Randy Howard (2reply remove FOOBAR)
"The power of accurate observation is called cynicism by those
who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw
Randy Howard
(in article <TBeUf.2948$4L1...@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com>):
> Webmaster can only post match results that match directors send him.
True.
> After years of cajoling and begging directors for match results, I gave
> up and let the page get stale. (Check the law enforcement pages if you
> want to see stale.) If the directors do not care enough to have the
> results posted, what's a webmaster supposed to do.
Post the home phone number of the match director and ask the
reader to contact them at home, preferably late at night.
Problem should be rectified in short order.
> If the law enforcement director has nothing to post, what else is he
> doing or not doing?
Good question.
> The NRA match schedule is posted for all disciplines across the US of A.
> Putting a find on "Texas" shouldn't be that much of a challenge. Do you
> subscribe to Shooting Sports, USA? The same information is in that
> magazine, but the distribution is less that 15000 copies per month. I do
> not know how to organize that much information into a one-level click
> that is workable. Most regular shooters bookmarked the NRA_Sub.htm file.
Then just link to it directly.
> The match schedules and contact information was not available on any web
> site, including NRA's, except the TSRA web site. NRA said they did not
> have the manpower to keep it posted.
But they have plenty of "manpower" to go after Ron Paul. They
do not have enough manpower to meet their promised to call back
life members and answer their questions though either. They do
have enough manpower to take congress vermin on shooting
boondoggles to the Wittington money pit. Strange set of
priorities over there these days.
> That was a project that I started
> and made arrangements for the information to be forwarded to the new
> webmaster every month. So far, none of it has been posted. It will be
> interesting to see if it is ever posted again. I posted the April
> informaiton last Feb. The June info could and should now be posted. It's
> not.
Guess what? NOTHING is posted right now. The site is MIA.
> Same thing with Lott Page and a bunch of other stuff. You see, there
> never was any interest in keeping the web site up to date with good
> information from the directors, staff, or the executive director. It was
> primarily a one-man show for ten years. If I ever heard from a member,
> which was rare, I always responded and changed the web site when
> appropriate. Even so, I heard more from members than from TSRA
> directors. That is why that after eight years I quit doing pro bono and
> started charging -- trying to get their attention.
Ugh. Sounds to me like the management at TSRA is need of a good
housecleaning.
> As far as opening in a new window, that was by design to keep on the web
> site. The feature was recommended by the committee that reviewed the web
> site last year.
It's also recommended against strongly by just about every
reputable web design guideline. Fortunately, some browsers
allow you to get around it.
Just to be clear, the TSRA had enough time to form a committee
to review a website, but not enough time to actually put any
useful content on it? Sounds like a government operation.
> The pro-gun candidates were always rated as A+, A, B, C, etc. An A+ was
> always gung ho for out rights and an A was plenty good. A+ usually
> introduced pro-gun legislation. An "A" candidate always voted for
> pro-gun legislation, or if he had no voting record (new candidate) he
> had filled out the questionnaire to support gun rights. So, bottom line
> is that if you had looked at the voting guide, you would have known how
> each legislative or state wide candidate was rated.
>
> The site was being used. It was getting over 3000 hits per day while it
> was being maintained. About 1/3 of the hits have dropped off recently.
I'm guessing the hits will be going to zero if it stays as it is
today. :-(
Jim Casey
> But they [NRA] have plenty of "manpower" to go after Ron Paul. They
> do not have enough manpower to meet their promised to call back life
> members and answer their questions though either. They do have
> enough manpower to take congress vermin on shooting boondoggles to
> the Wittington money pit. Strange set of priorities over there these
> days.
I have to point out that political activities are conducted by the
NRA-ILA, and they are funded by specific contributions, not member dues
or fees. IOW, they shouldn't take away from shooting sports or
education activities.
BTW, does anyone know if the NRA's budget is public? I couldn't find it
online.
- Jim
David Moffitt
"Jim Casey" <sea...@houston.rr.com> wrote in message
news:12266td...@corp.supernews.com...
%%%% Become a life member and you can get that information.
If something can go wrong, FIX it! (To hell with Murphy.) When in doubt,
THINK! If you can't win, change the rules. If you can't change the rules,
ignore them. The squeaky wheel gets canned. Do things by the book, but be
the author. If you can't beat 'em, join'em then beat'em. Everything in your
life is based on something else and in order to live a full life you must
find what lies at the root of all else. For me, it's my self.
Jim Nicholson
It's available to all members who attend the annual member meeting.
Sam A. Kersh
<randy...@FOOverizonBAR.net> wrote:
>I'm kind of interested in why the www.tsra.com site currently
>loads ABSOLUTELY nothing, a blank page with nothing on it.
TSRA web site had a notice that they would be down several daze*
starting the 23rd. As to why ExDir Dark, SCV web master, and his
professional web designer chose not to put up a "Site Under
Construction" notice as done by PROFESSIONALS across the 'net is a
question you might direct act him.
Sam A. Kersh
Huh?
> There is a test page and notice up now....
>
Nice - a little over 2 hours after you posted his email address for every
spambot to grab. Nice. You need some manner lessons.
Jim Casey
> Nice - a little over 2 hours after you posted his email address for every
> spambot to grab.
This newsgroup does not seem to have that problem. The only spam that I
get at this address is from PCs that are infected with viruses.
- Jim
Jim Nicholson
> On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 20:45:39 GMT, Randy Howard
> <randy...@FOOverizonBAR.net> wrote:
>
>
>>I'm kind of interested in why the www.tsra.com site currently
>>loads ABSOLUTELY nothing, a blank page with nothing on it.
>
>
> TSRA web site had a notice that they would be down several daze*
> starting the 23rd. As to why ExDir Dark, SCV web master, and his
> professional web designer chose not to put up a "Site Under
> Construction" notice as done by PROFESSIONALS across the 'net is a
> question you might direct act him.
Question in my mind is why not build the site on a local hard drive and
when finished, publish to the web. Why go dark for an extended period?
Wonder how the search engine robots are reacting to all of this?
Randy Howard
(in article <aCWUf.4788$4L1....@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com>):
Exactly. It should have been a seamless transition. I guess
that "Esolutions" company they hired doesn't quite know what
they are doing.
> Wonder how the search engine robots are reacting to all of this?
That all depends upon when they hit it.
Sam A. Kersh
Where'd this whiner come from?