I Was Fired Becuase of Gerry Swetsky
Mitch Bartlett
Just letting you people know what great people we are among. What kind
of world do we live in where I can get terminated by Elek-Tek for
posting a job add in USENET. All I did was inform people about an
opening. Elek-Tek has been handing out things to people in desperation
of hiring.
Gerry Swetsky, who is really popular for his stupidity around here, had
to start with his sarcasm on my posting. Of course I had to fire pack at
the idiot, to where he sent the whole thing to Elek-Tek. Elek-Tek wasn't
mad at what I said to him, they were just mad that I posted an
"advertisement" for a job opening.
So be careful of what you post and where you shop at. There is no
freedom here, and I doubt that anybody wants to shop at a pricey
computer store that believes it is right to terminate someone that had a
steady job, who busted his ass, whose not covered by health insurance
now because of termination and becuase his father also lost his job
recenlty, whose mother has cancer and is also not covered now. All
because I was trying to get the company some extra needed people. And
all becuase of Gerry Swetsky.
Mitch
movable articles
Mitch Bartlett (mit...@interaccess.com) wrote:
: Of course I had to fire pack at the idiot, to where he sent
I'm sorry about the job, but that sentence explains the your
predicament, which was self-inflicted. You did not have to
"fire back." You should have acknowledged the error (you
said it was accidental in another article) and apologized, or
allowed it to pass into oblivion without comment.
I cannot agree with Elek-Tek's position, but I don't have
their side. If there was no stated policy on job opening
ads or the Internet in general, their reaction seems harsh.
: So be careful of what you post
[snip]
That's excellent advice.
David
Mitch Bartlett
When I say "fire back". I mean that he fired at me first. Whatever i
did, there is absolutely no reason one should belittle another and
harass them with saying things that are offensive. Basically, I want to
be able to make a mistkae without hearing from the bastard. I can do
with polite people telling me my wrongs, I can't stand a person that
scans newsgroups for people to burn.
Mitch
Eric Bohlman
movable articles (w...@thymaster.interaccess.com) wrote:
: I cannot agree with Elek-Tek's position, but I don't have
: ads or the Internet in general, their reaction seems harsh.
Posting an ad to a newsgroup that does not want ads amounts to using
other people's property in a way that they don't want it to be used. It
doesn't seem harsh to me that Elek-Tek would take action against someone
who would do that with an ad carrying *their* name; it makes it look like
Elek-Tek was taking unfair advantage of other people's property to advertise.
John B. Hines
Sounds more like it was your stupidity that got you fired. I for one
am glad to see some real consequences involved with Usenet.
I hope more companies wake up to what goes on in the Internet under their
name, even with "disclaimers".
abraxas
> Mitch Bartlett (mit...@interaccess.com) wrote:
> : Of course I had to fire pack at the idiot, to where he sent
> : the whole thing to Elek-Tek.
>
> I'm sorry about the job, but that sentence explains the your
> predicament, which was self-inflicted. You did not have to
> "fire back." You should have acknowledged the error (you
> said it was accidental in another article) and apologized, or
> allowed it to pass into oblivion without comment.
>
> I cannot agree with Elek-Tek's position, but I don't have
> their side. If there was no stated policy on job opening
> ads or the Internet in general, their reaction seems harsh.
>
> : So be careful of what you post
> [snip]
>
> That's excellent advice.
>
> David
Heres what you need to know about people who work at elek tek: They are
overworked and WAY underpaid. It is yer basic retail trap. Period.
Elek-Tek doesnt have a 'side'. They are in it for the bucks, and that is
the end of the story.
-----yttrx
abraxas
In article <323738...@enteract.com>, "John B. Hines"
<jhi...@enteract.com> wrote:
Oh do fuck off, hines. Kiss my ass. Eat me.
You want consequences involved with usenet huh? Alrightey then.....:)
-----yttrx
John B. Hines
At least I've got the balls to use my name when I post.
John B. Hines
Tommy the Terrorist wrote:
>
> In article <323757...@enteract.com> John B. Hines, jhi...@enteract.com
> writes:
> >> > I hope more companies wake up to what goes on in the Internet under their
> >> > name, even with "disclaimers".
> >At least I've got the balls to use my name when I post.
>
> "due process", NOR the protection of anonymity? I guess you feel pretty
> cocksure that none of YOUR political opinions will ever anger the Powers
> that Be. Lucky you... scumbag.
"due process" what does signing my name have to do with due process? And
how does it deprive me of due process.
I'm not afraid of signing my name to my words. If you believe in something,
stand up and be counted.
As for my political opinions, you obviously haven't seen the "Dave Barry
for President" section on my web page... I'm not taking the current
political season seriously, at least at the high level.
The declaration of independance would not have nearly the power it does,
if john hancock had signed it "an2...@penet.fi".
> However, this thread should be taken as a valuable lesson to others:
> if dealing with an employer who gives -zero- guarantee of your rights, a
> personal, anonymous account on a Dutch machine [-possibly- U.S. if the
> CDA and various other fascist bills are thrown out] is the only way to
> really be on the Internet after all. (and even then, watch your
> *connections*, if you're somewhere where someone might spy on them).
Hmm, the most popular anonymous re-mailer just folded, due to legal
problems in finland.
> Another apparent lesson is that staking Mom's cancer treatments on
> some capitalist tinpot dictator's whims is also a really BAD idea.
And if you have a controversial stand to take, its not a bad idea to
separate it FAR from your work. That way you just get flamed, and not
fired.
Gerry Swetsky
In article <323606...@interaccess.com>,
Mitch Bartlett <mit...@interaccess.com> wrote:
>
>Gerry Swetsky, who is really popular for his stupidity around here, had
>to start with his sarcasm on my posting. Of course I had to fire pack at
>the idiot, to where he sent the whole thing to Elek-Tek. Elek-Tek wasn't
>mad at what I said to him, they were just mad that I posted an
>"advertisement" for a job opening.
Oh, come on Mitch! I suggested you post your notice in chi.jobs
since that was what it was created for and you fired back at me
twice.
Your first post used vulgarity toward me which I hadn't instigated
and in your second letter you threatened to put me on every
mailing list you could find. I have the letters; shall I post
them?
I called ElekTek because of those two letters. There's absolutely
NO need for that type of behaviour!
Three more points; first, I did not ask for your dismissal.
Second, you were chastized because of your threats and language
used toward me. Third, E/T offered me a gift certificate which I
refused.
--
============================================================================
| Help stamp out stupid .signature files! Gerry Swetsky WB9EBO |
| lis...@vpnet.chi.il.us |
============================================================================
Tommy the Terrorist
In article <323757...@enteract.com> John B. Hines, jhi...@enteract.com
writes:
>> > I hope more companies wake up to what goes on in the Internet under their
>> > name, even with "disclaimers".
-and-
>At least I've got the balls to use my name when I post.
You mean, the stupidity? You want NEITHER the right to some kind of
"due process", NOR the protection of anonymity? I guess you feel pretty
cocksure that none of YOUR political opinions will ever anger the Powers
that Be. Lucky you... scumbag.
However, this thread should be taken as a valuable lesson to others:
if dealing with an employer who gives -zero- guarantee of your rights, a
personal, anonymous account on a Dutch machine [-possibly- U.S. if the
CDA and various other fascist bills are thrown out] is the only way to
really be on the Internet after all. (and even then, watch your
*connections*, if you're somewhere where someone might spy on them).
Another apparent lesson is that staking Mom's cancer treatments on
some capitalist tinpot dictator's whims is also a really BAD idea.
Does anyone have any suggestions for ways of making life miserable at
Elek-Tek? (to make this a challenging question, let's stick to legal and
'legitimate' methods...)
James Yorton
In chi.general mit...@interaccess.com writes:
: Just letting you people know what great people we are among. What kind
: of world do we live in where I can get terminated by Elek-Tek for
: posting a job add in USENET. All I did was inform people about an
: opening. Elek-Tek has been handing out things to people in desperation
: of hiring.
: Gerry Swetsky, who is really popular for his stupidity around here, had
: to start with his sarcasm on my posting. Of course I had to fire pack at
: the idiot, to where he sent the whole thing to Elek-Tek. Elek-Tek wasn't
: mad at what I said to him, they were just mad that I posted an
: "advertisement" for a job opening.
: So be careful of what you post and where you shop at. There is no
: freedom here, and I doubt that anybody wants to shop at a pricey
: computer store that believes it is right to terminate someone that had a
: steady job, who busted his ass, whose not covered by health insurance
: now because of termination and becuase his father also lost his job
: recenlty, whose mother has cancer and is also not covered now. All
: because I was trying to get the company some extra needed people. And
: all becuase of Gerry Swetsky.
: Mitch
Aw, boo hoo. Stop your whining.
It seems to me your beef should be with Elek-Tek. You violated
a policy, whether or not you or I think it was fair.
It looks like the real intent of your post, other than childish whining,
is to flame Gerry.
---
Jim Yorton
j...@xnet.com
http://www.xnet.com/~jjy/
abraxas
In article <323785...@enteract.com>, "John B. Hines"
<jhi...@enteract.com> wrote:
> Tommy the Terrorist wrote:
> >
> > In article <323757...@enteract.com> John B. Hines, jhi...@enteract.com
> > writes:
> > >> > I hope more companies wake up to what goes on in the Internet
under their
> > >> > name, even with "disclaimers".
> > -and-
> > >At least I've got the balls to use my name when I post.
> >
> > You mean, the stupidity? You want NEITHER the right to some kind of
> > "due process", NOR the protection of anonymity? I guess you feel pretty
> > cocksure that none of YOUR political opinions will ever anger the Powers
> > that Be. Lucky you... scumbag.
>
> "due process" what does signing my name have to do with due process? And
> how does it deprive me of due process.
>
> I'm not afraid of signing my name to my words. If you believe in something,
> stand up and be counted.
>
Spoken like someone who has never been severely persecuted for their beliefs.
> As for my political opinions, you obviously haven't seen the "Dave Barry
> for President" section on my web page... I'm not taking the current
> political season seriously, at least at the high level.
>
Sounds like someone who has never been arrested for their beliefs.
> The declaration of independance would not have nearly the power it does,
> if john hancock had signed it "an2...@penet.fi".
>
And to what 'power' are you referring, exactly? Spoken like someone who
has had their head buried in mud for the last 400 years.
> > However, this thread should be taken as a valuable lesson to others:
> > if dealing with an employer who gives -zero- guarantee of your rights, a
> > personal, anonymous account on a Dutch machine [-possibly- U.S. if the
> > CDA and various other fascist bills are thrown out] is the only way to
> > really be on the Internet after all. (and even then, watch your
> > *connections*, if you're somewhere where someone might spy on them).
>
> Hmm, the most popular anonymous re-mailer just folded, due to legal
> problems in finland.
>
Research the situation before you comment.
And I never use anonymous remailers. I use PGP when it counts. This
doenst count.
> > Another apparent lesson is that staking Mom's cancer treatments on
> > some capitalist tinpot dictator's whims is also a really BAD idea.
>
> And if you have a controversial stand to take, its not a bad idea to
> separate it FAR from your work. That way you just get flamed, and not
> fired.
I'll drink to that.
-----yttrx
abraxas
In article <DxLEB...@espada.chi.il.us>, lis...@vpnet.chi.il.us (Gerry
Swetsky) wrote:
> In article <323606...@interaccess.com>,
> Mitch Bartlett <mit...@interaccess.com> wrote:
> >
> >Gerry Swetsky, who is really popular for his stupidity around here, had
> >to start with his sarcasm on my posting. Of course I had to fire pack at
> >the idiot, to where he sent the whole thing to Elek-Tek. Elek-Tek wasn't
> >mad at what I said to him, they were just mad that I posted an
> >"advertisement" for a job opening.
>
> Oh, come on Mitch! I suggested you post your notice in chi.jobs
> since that was what it was created for and you fired back at me
> twice.
>
> Your first post used vulgarity toward me which I hadn't instigated
> and in your second letter you threatened to put me on every
> mailing list you could find. I have the letters; shall I post
> them?
>
> I called ElekTek because of those two letters. There's absolutely
> NO need for that type of behaviour!
>
> Three more points; first, I did not ask for your dismissal.
> Second, you were chastized because of your threats and language
> used toward me. Third, E/T offered me a gift certificate which I
> refused.
>
Hey how much did you get? Whats ratting on a manager worth, ya think?
-----yttrx
abraxas
In article <323757...@enteract.com>, "John B. Hines"
<jhi...@enteract.com> wrote:
> abraxas wrote:
> >
> > In article <323738...@enteract.com>, "John B. Hines"
> > <jhi...@enteract.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Mitch Bartlett wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Just letting you people know what great people we are among. What kind
> > > > of world do we live in where I can get terminated by Elek-Tek for
> > > > posting a job add in USENET. All I did was inform people about an
> > > > opening. Elek-Tek has been handing out things to people in desperation
> > > > of hiring.
> > > >
> > > > Gerry Swetsky, who is really popular for his stupidity around here, had
> > > > to start with his sarcasm on my posting. Of course I had to fire pack at
> > > > the idiot, to where he sent the whole thing to Elek-Tek. Elek-Tek wasn't
> > > > mad at what I said to him, they were just mad that I posted an
> > > > "advertisement" for a job opening.
> > > >
> > > > So be careful of what you post and where you shop at. There is no
> > > > freedom here, and I doubt that anybody wants to shop at a pricey
> > > > computer store that believes it is right to terminate someone that had a
> > > > steady job, who busted his ass, whose not covered by health insurance
> > > > now because of termination and becuase his father also lost his job
> > > > recenlty, whose mother has cancer and is also not covered now. All
> > > > because I was trying to get the company some extra needed people. And
> > > > all becuase of Gerry Swetsky.
> > >
> > > Sounds more like it was your stupidity that got you fired. I for one
> > > am glad to see some real consequences involved with Usenet.
> > >
> > > I hope more companies wake up to what goes on in the Internet under their
> > > name, even with "disclaimers".
> >
> > Oh do fuck off, hines. Kiss my ass. Eat me.
> >
> > You want consequences involved with usenet huh? Alrightey then.....:)
> >
> > -----yttrx
>
> At least I've got the balls to use my name when I post.
Finger me, fuckwit...That IS my real name.
-----yttrx
Matt Hucke
In article <DxLEB...@espada.chi.il.us>,
Gerry Swetsky <lis...@vpnet.chi.il.us> wrote:
> Oh, come on Mitch! I suggested you post your notice in chi.jobs
> since that was what it was created for and you fired back at me
> twice.
>
> Your first post used vulgarity toward me which I hadn't instigated
> and in your second letter you threatened to put me on every
> mailing list you could find. I have the letters; shall I post
> them?
Aha! Now we see the facts, conveniently omitted from Mitch's original
post. He threatened Gerry with mailbombing! Elek-Tek acted properly
to protect themselves from being associated with a criminal
denial-of-service attack.
Another arrogant net abuser has been reduced to "do you want fries
with that?". Not that working for Elek-tek was much better... I
called there a few weeks ago, asked for a 10base2 transceiver,
described it as "hanging off the AUI port", and was asked if I wanted
an ISA or PCI version.
--
hu...@cynico.com
Cynico Network Consulting Graveyards of Chicago:
http://www.enteract.com/~hucke http://www.graveyards.com