[NSRCA-discussion] Chapter-12 computer science.
Fred Huber
fhhuber at clearwire.net
Mon Jul 2 23:27:10 AKDT 2007
Nothing useful..
Loops 256 times
returns the value 0
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Pavlick" <jpavlick at idseng.com>
To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Monday, July 02, 2007 9:16 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Chapter-12 computer science.
> OK, what does this do?
>
> char foo(void)
> {
> char cnt, num;
>
> for(cnt = 0, num = 0; cnt < 256; cnt++)
> {
> num++;
> }
> return num;
> }
>
> John Pavlick
> http://www.idseng.com
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Matthew Frederick" <mjfrederick at cox.net>
> To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2007 4:22 AM
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Chapter-5 Going too far.
>
>
>> I'd like to see the code myself... I've got quite a bit of Computer
>> Science
>> training.
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Fred Huber" <fhhuber at clearwire.net>
>> To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>> Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 3:23 PM
>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Chapter-5 Going too far.
>>
>>
>>> What computer language was the program written in?
>>>
>>> Send me the source code.
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "W. Hinkle" <whinkle1024 at msn.com>
>>> To: <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 10:25 AM
>>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Chapter-5 Going too far.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Dave is a good pilot but character being beyond reproach is a bit of a
>>>> stretch. Ask John Glizellis about when Dave shot him down and haggled
>>>> over
>>>> the price. This was to replace a brand new model with less than 30
>>>> flights
>>>> on it at the NATS. The incident was at the NATS during practice at the
>>>> AMA
>>>> field. We all make mistakes, but to penny pinch the guy that just cost
>>>> his
>>>> new model part way through the Nationals. JR had to step in and forced
>>>> the
>>>> hand. If it had not been for Dave the sponsorship threat Dave would
>>>> still
>>>> be
>>>> argueing the price of a new built model. Dave replaced it after some
>>>> debate
>>>> with JR. This is not character beyond reproach? Dave may be a good guy
>>>> just
>>>> don't be on the same freq. He'll tell how poor your model is built and
>>>> its
>>>> not worth the price of a professional built kit.
>>>>
>>>> I'll agree that both parties in this fight are not angels. I'm not a
>>>> fan
>>>> or
>>>> Eric's but my question to this forum
>>>>
>>>> Why is the NSRCA involved at all?
>>>>
>>>> Doesn't the NSRCA have better things to do with its time and energy
>>>> than
>>>> lynching a judge at the request of a couple pilots that have character
>>>> beyond reproach?
>>>>
>>>> I feel this is another sign of the NSRCA just wasting resources, time
>>>> and
>>>> money in the name of being the Savior of pattern flying. Beware people
>>>> beware. Come on. Getting two of Dave's best buddies in D1 to write a
>>>> program
>>>> to damn a person that they and David hate with a passion. To me is
>>>> smells
>>>> like old shellfish. These were the same judges who claimed in the past
>>>> the
>>>> judge that gave the zero was the one that got it right.
>>>>
>>>> The NSRCA has no business in this arena. I find it appalling the Board
>>>> even
>>>> had this on the agenda. I also find it appalling that a ruling was
>>>> made,
>>>> then Eric was notified of the charges and the conviction. As Eric
>>>> stated,
>>>> no
>>>> statistics can determine what the judge actually saw or better yet what
>>>> the
>>>> pilot actually flew. So Eric's scores were below the average for a
>>>> given
>>>> pilot. Maybe the pilot flew below average in Eric's eyes. This is why
>>>> the
>>>> NATS uses more than one judge. This is a fact of life. This looks very
>>>> one
>>>> sided by the NSRCA.
>>>>
>>>> The NSRCA has no place in this squabble.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>From: "John Pavlick" <jpavlick at idseng.com>
>>>>>Reply-To: NSRCA Mailing List <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>>>>>To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>>>>>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Chapter-5 Going too far.
>>>>>Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 01:27:00 -0400
>>>>>
>>>>>Len,
>>>>> All of the people involved were from D1 - I thought the good ol' boys
>>>>>were in D2 and D3! <LOL>
>>>>>
>>>>>John Pavlick
>>>>>http://www.idseng.com
>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>> From: Leonard Rudy
>>>>> To: NSRCA Mailing List
>>>>> Sent: Monday, June 25, 2007 8:47 PM
>>>>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Chapter-5 Going too far.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> John,
>>>>>
>>>>> The conflict may have blossomed like a Hockey Game Conflict,
>>>>> but
>>>>> in
>>>>>the NHL
>>>>> those "with the power" hear both sides and let each side present
>>>>> their
>>>>>case before
>>>>> the powers to be assign penalties. After the penalties are imposed,
>>>>> the
>>>>>player or
>>>>> individual still has the right to appeal the decision.
>>>>> You say Eric should take whatever the powers to be want and
>>>>> don't
>>>>>make any
>>>>> noise or waves.
>>>>> This is a clear message to others who will be judging at meets
>>>>> in
>>>>>the future. DO NOT GIVE THE GOOD OLD BOYS GROUP any low or bad scores
>>>>>or
>>>>>you may be on the receiving end of some form of penalty that you will
>>>>>not
>>>>>like.
>>>>>
>>>>> Len Rudy
>>>>> "Life is easier if you learn to plow around the stumps" or in
>>>>> other
>>>>>words, do not
>>>>> hand out low scores to the Good Old Boys or you will pay dearly for
>>>>> it
>>>>>one way or
>>>>> another.
>>>>>
>>>>> Fred Huber <fhhuber at clearwire.net> wrote:
>>>>> The penalty does not appear appropriate...
>>>>>
>>>>> It also sounds like it was not applied in a manner consistant with
>>>>> the
>>>>>rules system.
>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>> From: John Ferrell
>>>>> To: Don Ramsey ; NSRCA Mailing List
>>>>> Sent: Monday, June 25, 2007 8:12 AM
>>>>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Chapter-5 Going too far.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I have the good fortune to not be involved in this dispute. I am
>>>>>only aware of the conflict.
>>>>>
>>>>> Not being very good at staying out of arguments, I offer the
>>>>>following observations:
>>>>> A heated difference of opinions occurred.
>>>>> Every one involved is considered a valuable asset to the Pattern
>>>>>Game.
>>>>> Things were said that should not have been said.
>>>>> Every one thinks they are right.
>>>>> There was probably at least one (or may be several) bad call(s)
>>>>> by
>>>>>some one.
>>>>>
>>>>> The conflict blossomed like a Hockey Game Conflict and the net
>>>>>result was those with the power and responsibility treated it like a
>>>>>Hockey
>>>>>Game Conflict! A serious "time out" was assigned to the individual at
>>>>>the
>>>>>focal point of the conflict. It was their duty to put the problem on
>>>>>ice.
>>>>>
>>>>> The expectations of the rest of us who value the game and its
>>>>>players is that right or wrong the referee's call must be honored. The
>>>>>referee has the power to impose further penalties if the individual
>>>>>continues to make waves. Right or wrong, this is the was disputes are
>>>>>handled in the world of competition.
>>>>>
>>>>> If the individual was drawn into the conflict by goading it is
>>>>> still
>>>>>he who gets the penalty.
>>>>>
>>>>> Conflict resolution is not something that is natural to the
>>>>> human
>>>>>condition. Conflict is.
>>>>>
>>>>> Eric needs to take the penalty and get on with things.Those in
>>>>> power
>>>>>need to accept that the penalty has been applied and to continue the
>>>>>game.
>>>>>
>>>>> WE ALL need to be aware that we either play nice or get sent to
>>>>> the
>>>>>showers!
>>>>>
>>>>> Another factor to consider is that the higher profile one
>>>>> achieves
>>>>>in this sport the greater the need to hold that individual to higher
>>>>>standards.
>>>>> Eric is certainly a "high profile" player.
>>>>>
>>>>> John Ferrell W8CCW
>>>>> "Life is easier if you learn to plow
>>>>> around the stumps"
>>>>> http://DixieNC.US
>>>>>
>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>> From: Don Ramsey
>>>>> To: NSRCA Mailing List
>>>>> Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2007 7:32 PM
>>>>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Chapter-5 Going too far.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I would like to thank Eric for the nice complement in his
>>>>> comment,
>>>>>"To circumvent this conflict of interest problem and to keep the
>>>>>Nationals
>>>>>above reproach, I steeped out of line and asked Don Ramsey to
>>>>>independently
>>>>>choose the judges, Dave could not refuse this method, but I will tell
>>>>>you
>>>>>that he got extremely mad at me for doing it."
>>>>>
>>>>> I must respond that for good or bad I've been choosing the
>>>>> finals
>>>>>judges for many years. I started that process when Jeff Hill was Event
>>>>>Director. It must also be stated that I've never had any pressure of
>>>>>any
>>>>>kind from contest management regarding who I choose to judge. I try to
>>>>>pick the best candidates and rotate those so no single judge can
>>>>>influence
>>>>>the outcome extradionarly.
>>>>>
>>>>> Don
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>>>>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>>>>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>>>>
>>>>>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>>>> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>>>>> Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.9.6/863 - Release Date:
>>>>>6/23/2007 11:08 AM
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>>>>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>>>>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Building a website is a piece of cake.
>>>>> Yahoo! Small Business gives you all the tools to get online.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>>>>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>>>>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>>NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>>>>>NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>>>>>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>>>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>>>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>>> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>>>> Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.9/872 - Release Date:
>>>> 6/26/2007
>>>> 6:43 PM
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.14/884 - Release Date: 7/2/2007
> 3:35 PM
>
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list