Am I allowed to post here?

Status
Not open for further replies.
iwire said:
It does not get any better then having spongebob on your side. :cool:


Captain: Are you ready kids​

Kids: I I Captain.​

Captain: I can't hear you.​

Kids: I I Captain​

Captain: OHHHHHHH​

Who lives in a pineapple under the sea?​
Click to expand...
You're both all wet.:grin:
 
iwire said:
Kids: I I Captain.
Click to expand...
I generally try to disregard spelling errors, but not this time. ;)

It is "Aye, Aye," Captain. ("Aye" is Navy speak for "yes.")

Regards,
Charles E. Beck, Commander, US Navy Reserve, Retired. :)
 
charlie b said:
Forgive my skepticism, but I find that assertion surprising, and I tend to doubt that you are right. But regardless of what the law has to say, or not say, anybody can sue anybody else for any reason, with our without just cause, and the person getting sued will not enjoy the experience. Mike has made it a policy, and has asked the moderators to enforce the policy, not to allow how-to questions from non-electricians. I think that fact would speak in his favor, in the event he does get sued.
Click to expand...

The law is real, and after many tests in courts of law it has been upheld numerous times (when the lawsuits have been dismissed). Its called "section 230". What you or I post on Mike's forum can not come back to haunt him. Yes, he can be sued, but that lawsuit will be immediately dismissed based on section 230 - which is what happened in all the other lawsuits.

For your reading pleasure:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_230_of_the_Communications_Decency_Act
 
Thanks, tech, but I never consider wikipedia to be "reading pleasure." I maintain a healthy distance from that site, not wanting to "get any of it on me," as it were. I don't believe in unauthenticated mis-information sources.

But whatever the law might say, and however a lawsuit might end up being resolved, the forum rules are what Mike says the forum rules are going to be.
 
iwire said:
Aye Aye Commander
Click to expand...

barclayd said:
As a Petty Officer a few decades ago, I was always taught that it stood for: " I Understand, and I Will Obey".

That sounds better than "Yes".

(We never believed ANYTHING officers told us.)

db
Click to expand...

I was never enlisted, but I worked for the Navy for 3 and a half years and the head of my department was a Commander. What I learned is that no one called him "Commander xxxxxxx" to his face, they just said "Yes sir." The only time anyone actually mentioned his rank, it was to call him "Commander Jackass" behind his back. :D
 
drbond24 said:
I was never enlisted, but I worked for the Navy for 3 and a half years and the head of my department was a Commander. What I learned is that no one called him "Commander xxxxxxx" to his face, they just said "Yes sir." The only time anyone actually mentioned his rank, it was to call him "Commander Jackass" behind his back. :D
Click to expand...

It's lonely at the top of the heap. :cool: He probably didn't care what you called him, as long as you were still saying "Yes, sir," when within earshot.
 
charlie b said:
Thanks, tech, but I never consider wikipedia to be "reading pleasure." I maintain a healthy distance from that site, not wanting to "get any of it on me," as it were. I don't believe in unauthenticated mis-information sources.
Click to expand...

Some articles have some good-valid references, some others dont.
 
Mayimbe said:
Some articles (refering to wikipedia) have some good-valid references, some others dont.
Click to expand...
And the reader has no way of knowing which is which (i.e., whether a cited reference is valid, or whether the person posting had accurately interpreted the reference). That is my objection to the site.
 
charlie b said:
And the reader has no way of knowing which is which (i.e., whether a cited reference is valid, or whether the person posting had accurately interpreted the reference). That is my objection to the site.
Click to expand...

Well, the reader can click on the cited reference and see where it goes to...

It really depends in what kind of information are you looking for in this site, and what do you really expect to find. For example, I confess to know Nothing about chemistry, a good way to start if I happen to be interested on the matter, is reading the information that site provides. When I finish the reading it would leave a vague idea of chemistry in my head, nothing more. But again its a good start.

I generally use it to read biographys, which they can be interpreted in any way (For example, the gospels in the bible) so I dont have any concern about who wrote it.

Its a good subject to discuss in some other forum instead of this one.
 
charlie b said:
Thanks, tech, but I never consider wikipedia to be "reading pleasure." I maintain a healthy distance from that site, not wanting to "get any of it on me," as it were. I don't believe in unauthenticated mis-information sources.
Click to expand...

So instead of doing an internet search on the term "section 230" and finding tens of thousands of other sites that discuss this "safe harbor" law, because it happens to be on wiki its automatically wrong? :roll:
 
Thanks charlie...I really hope you guys do not think you are anonymous on here..the internet is backed up continuosly and every computer has a mac id and a signature...So go ahead and believe you are anonymous.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top