Offtopic Purgatory

[Pat Gordzelik]

Also where I am, our MSM mastheads used to be newspapers. About 10-15 years ago, they started down that death spiral of reduced revenue (from rivers of gold advertising lost to online platforms) that forced continual cost cutting (journalists, editors, sub-editors, assistants etc). Now we're left with these digital platforms that are basically glorified soap boxes for opinion pieces that are normally ideologically aligned the given platform and their audience. We might get an investigative piece once every 6 months and what little news there is, is just sourced from an external supplier [sigh].

TP

Did someone say newspapers?

Trying to make it difficult for their employees

 

[Sandy H.]

[snip] Nikita Khrushchev once said America will be defeated without firing a shot. but from within. Someone else said, “The toughest battle you’ll ever fight in your life is the battle within yourself" and they weren't kidding. [/snip]

Yep. I hate that what Khrushchev said seems to be coming true. I imagine he thought it would be within his lifetime, but everything takes too long. I do believe we are our own worst enemy right now and I don't believe that Joe common guy could unify against an enemy anymore (although I still have faith in our armed forces, just not the common man).

I think history says that all dynasties fall eventually and usually from internal conflict. We seem to be on the bullet train for achieving that goal, at least from my perspective. I hope the kids step up, because my generation surely didn't. I'm afraid they won't, though.

Sandy.

 

[dr wogz]

I remember when the forums tired the 'score' thing, but you could add a negative just as easily as a positive.. (It was well abused)

as for 'news' do any of you watch / comment / have an opinion on the big three? ABC? NBS? CBS?
i as, as a Canadian looking for an opinion. We always seem to bash Fox & CNN (and MSNBC occasionally) but I nver see you all bash one of them. (And as aside note: most of our news will have segments from ABC..)

And is this factual?

 

[DAllen]

Joe Rogan lol

His participation in that idiotic "Ancient Apocalypse" farce on Netflix says all I need to know about that guy...

 

[rocket_troy]

Did someone say newspapers?

Another thing that's been lost over time [sigh] the April Fools pranks... At least around these woods.

TP

 

[DAllen]

What are you getting at?

The fact that I haven't got an answer to a legitimate question is...rather telling.

 

[Titan II]

What are you getting at?

The fact you do not know what he is getting at is...very telling.

 

[Bravo52]

The fact that I haven't got an answer to a legitimate question is...rather telling.

Your definition of "legitimate" is what's in question. You don't matter in the bigger scheme and Shirley don't get to define the terms of public opinion. You can have an input like everyone else, you can have an opinion like everyone else, but the fact of my not answering you for a day or two and you getting upset about it is the pretty much the point. We all just have an opinion.

 

[DAllen]

Your definition of "legitimate" is what's in question. You don't matter in the bigger scheme and Shirley don't get to define the terms of public opinion. You can have an input like everyone else, you can have an opinion like everyone else, but the fact of my not answering you for a day or two an you getting upset about it is the very point.

Ahhh I like this response. This is what I call "emotional projection." I never said I was upset nor did I indicate or imply that I was upset. You merely misinterpreted some plain text on a message board as me being upset. I suspect that these types of misinterpretations are usually subconscious and are a result of, "I don't like what Dave says therefore he must be (insert negative emotion)" Its an attempt at mind reading or more realistically a subtle way of telling me to STFU.

Can't stop people from incorrectly interpreting my true emotions over some innocuous words on the internet. Oh well.

 

[Sooner Boomer]

I remember when the forums tired the 'score' thing, but you could add a negative just as easily as a positive.. (It was well abused)

as for 'news' do any of you watch / comment / have an opinion on the big three? ABC? NBS? CBS?
i as, as a Canadian looking for an opinion. We always seem to bash Fox & CNN (and MSNBC occasionally) but I nver see you all bash one of them. (And as aside note: most of our news will have segments from ABC..)

And is this factual?

I disagree with the chart. Just my opinion, but I think a lot of the sources that are listed as being factual and only slightly left of center are more biased left than the chart indicates. One example is the BBC. They even admitted at one point in the early 2000's that they were, and pledged to be less "liberal". I also think a lot of the broadcast media is a lot more left-biased than the chart indicates. Looking at the chart, it seems like some of the sources listed as being right of center, and more opinion-based, are gaining in success/popularity (ratings). Fox is a good example of this. Two shows stand out as examples; The Five, and Gutfeld!. There has been a significant shift in ratings toward these two shows. Following the '20 elections, CNN saw a dramatic loss in viewership, and has restructured considerably, both in personnel and in bias. There's probably a core viewership that will always follow a channel/show, whichever side of center they're on, but will it be enough to keep them on the air?

Print media has been in decline for a long time. The internet had a lot to do with this. Consolidation of ownership (big media conglomerates buying up smaller papers) had a lot to do with it, too. Coverage became less local and more oriented to national events.

Just my opinion, but ratings seem to back it up.

 

[Bravo52]

Ahhh I like this response. This is what I call "emotional projection." I never said I was upset nor did I indicate or imply that I was upset. You merely misinterpreted some plain text on a message board as me being upset. I suspect that these types of misinterpretations are usually subconscious and are a result of, "I don't like what Dave says therefore he must be (insert negative emotion)" Its an attempt at mind reading or more realistically a subtle way of telling me to STFU.

Can't stop people from incorrectly interpreting my true emotions over some innocuous words on the internet. Oh well.

You misspelled "care". It's not spelled "like". Your silly response about " I haven't got an answer" is really the part that is important. It's the "I" part...You're that guy.

 

[DAllen]

You misspelled "care". It's not spelled "like". Your silly response about " I haven't got an answer" is really the part that is important. It's the "I" part...You're that guy.

No, like is the right word. But you go on trying to be a mind reader. You do you.

 

[rfjustin]

As far as the news/media goes, I'd say things are way out of balance right now on both sides - everything is polarized and that isn't overly helpful to a person who wants to know what's going on and form their own opinion.

I am curious if there is a person on the forum with a good history background. I did a bit of study on the history of Rome, but I'm thinking of more modern American history. With no factual basis in study, I believe that there have been times in the last 100-200 years when everybody was drunk/high and having sex and times where everyone was against drink/drugs and sex. Prohibition is obvious, but I'm thinking of earlier times in the 1800's as well.

Anyway, my random 'point' would be that I hope we are at an extreme time of division and the younger generation will be tired of all the junk going on and will turn away from the headline news and agenda based media and turn closer to fact based information. Not sure that it will happen, but at some point, if everybody is drunk and having sex, prudence will become the norm. Hopefully the crazy news cycle will cause people to want to think for themselves. Or, social media was the death of proper society, maybe.

Hey you darn kids! Get off my lawn!!! (I was a kid once, but I am now the cranky old man. . . ).

Sandy.

For the next generation to grow tired of the polarizing divide and move to a fact based approach would require parents like me (my daughter will be 6 this year), to hold high standards, teach discipline, respect, value of hard work, critical thought, and developing emotional intelligence. Many parents my age use devices (phone, laptops, tablets) as babysitters and do not actively arm their kids with the tools they will need to succeed in life.

If we don't get a better handle on taking ownership, embrace responsibility, and emotional intelligence, its going to be a poop show...

 

[DAllen]

You're that guy.

 

[Ez2cDave]

VERY IMPRESSIVE . . . Not to Scale ( too long & fin airfoil is incorrect ), BUT a GREAT FLIGHT !

 

[georgegassaway]

Sorry, that's not a 1:1 Nike Smoke.

It's a nice project rocket with the same shape, but does not look at all like a real Nike Smoke.

.

 

[Ez2cDave]

This "was" a good thread.

The facts are the bottom line, here. This Nike Smoke is not 1:1 scale ( George & I concur, a rare occasion - LOL ! ).

It resembles a Nike Smoke, but there are glaring inaccuracies, compared to the real thing.

REAL Nike Smoke :

Height : 19', 8.58"

Diameter : 16.44"

From the NZRA website : https://www.nzrocketry.org.nz/events/Havoc/nikesmoke



Compared to the REAL Nike Smoke . . . Diameter is wrong . . . Overall length is wrong . . . Fin airfoil is wrong . . . So, basically, it is NOT a "1:1 Nike Smoke".

With that said . . . This is a very impressive rocket, as was the flight !

Dave F.

Dave F.

 

[rfjustin]

The facts are the bottom line, here. This Nike Smoke is not 1:1 scale ( George & I concur, a rare occasion - LOL ! ).

It resembles a Nike Smoke, but there are glaring inaccuracies, compared to the real thing.

REAL Nike Smoke :

Height : 19', 8.58"

Diameter : 16.44"

From the NZRA website : https://www.nzrocketry.org.nz/events/Havoc/nikesmoke

View attachment 571860

Compared to the REAL Nike Smoke . . . Diameter is wrong . . . Overall length is wrong . . . Fin airfoil is wrong . . . So, basically, it is NOT a "1:1 Nike Smoke".

With that said . . . This is a very impressive rocket, as was the flight !

Dave F.

Dave F.

Your definition and reference to "wrong" depends on your own interpretation and frankly your own preference if this was intended to be a true scale model or not. You coming into the thread pointing out anything "wrong" is in essence poking these folks in the eye, and does not bring any value to the discussion.

So do us the favor and stop being prick for no reason...

 

[Ez2cDave]

Your definition and reference to "wrong" depends on your own interpretation and frankly your own preference if this was intended to be a true scale model or not. You coming into the thread pointing out anything "wrong" is in essence poking these folks in the eye, and does not bring any value to the discussion.

So do us the favor and stop being prick for no reason...

It was claimed to be a "1:1" model . . . That "opened the door to comparison" . . . It is NOT "1:1", as illustrated by the data I and George posted . . . Simple facts.

George Gassaway and I both reacted similarly to this thread . . . Are you calling him a "prick", too ?

I "poked no one in the eye" . . . In fact, I acknowledged their amazing project and congratulated them on a great flight.

Unlike you, I attacked or insulted no one . . .

Dave F.

 

[rfjustin]

It was claimed to be a "1:1" model . . . That "opened the door to comparison" . . . It is NOT "1:1", as illustrated by the data I and George posted . . . Simple facts.

George Gassaway and I both reacted similarly to this thread . . . Are you calling him a "prick", too ?

I "poked no one in the eye" . . . In fact, I acknowledged their amazing project and congratulated them on a great flight.

Unlike you, I attacked or insulted no one . . .

Dave F.

You have a pattern on this prickly behavior on TRF, this isn't a one off, this your MO, and I called you out on it, deal with it...

 

[Ez2cDave]

You're both right. Dave, you have earned a reputation for prickliness, and Justin I think you're responding to that reputation more than to what Dave wrote this time.

Joe,

You are correct . . . Someone else needs to work on their "reading comprehension", especially since the same "comment", directed at me, was not made, in regards to George Gassaway's, which paralleled my sentiments.

Thank you for the "voice of clarity", sir !

Dave F.

 

[georgegassaway]

Dave Fitch should NEVER DARE to be speaking on my behalf!!!!!

He either did not have the sense to realize what I was talking about, or intentionally twisted it to seem to support his problems.

My issue was not small errors in dimensions as Fitch claims, and drug me into his mess.

For me, it was calling it a 1:1 Nike Smoke, which is NOT PAINTED in any manner like like the real thing was. So, it's not a scale model of a Nike Smoke. It's the shape of a Nike Smoke.

I have had similar objections when people do "Scale" models like bastardized big Little Joe-II's and monster Soyuzes, with HUGE logos of a motor manufacturer / sponsor plastered onto it. Totally ruining/disfiguring it as a "scale rocket". Or Building a huge "Cury-Redstone" (Mercury Redstone without the Escape Tower)

Or pink and yellow (or whatever non-scale color) of "Nike Smoke"models..

People ought to call those by another name, or precede the name with "inspired by", or something else creative. Noke Smike?

Scale rockets are not generic shapes like an Alpha or Big Bertha as a canvas for whatever unscale paint jobs someone feels like whipping up, yet CALLING it the name of a scale model.

 

[Ez2cDave]

Dave Fitch should NEVER DARE to be speaking on my behalf!!!!!

He either did not have the sense to realize what I was talking about, or intentionally twisted it to seem to support his problems.

My issue was not small errors in dimensions as Fitch claims, and drug me into his mess.

For me, it was calling it a 1:1 Nike Smoke, which is NOT PAINTED in any manner like like the real thing was. So, it's not a scale model of a Nike Smoke. It's the shape of a Nike Smoke.

I have had similar objections when people do "Scale" models like bastardized big Little Joe-II's and monster Soyuzes, with HUGE logos of a motor manufacturer / sponsor plastered onto it. Totally ruining/disfiguring it as a "scale rocket". Or Building a huge "Cury-Redstone" (Mercury Redstone without the Escape Tower)

Or pink and yellow (or whatever non-scale color) of "Nike Smoke"models..

People ought to call those by another name, or precede the name with "inspired by", or something else creative. Noke Smike?

Scale rockets are not generic shapes like an Alpha or Big Bertha as a canvas for whatever unscale paint jobs someone feels like whipping up, yet CALLING it the name of a scale model.

George,

I did not "speak on your behalf" . . . BUT, after reading your last post, I clearly see that you deserve the same "moniker" that Justin gave me, perhaps more so.

At any rate, however any model is painted, the dimensions are the most critical, when one claims to have built a "1:1" ( 100% ) model of a Scale Prototype.

The "paint job" is "relative" ( see pics below ) . . . While not painted in the "traditional" color schemes, ALL of them could be built and constructed as Precision Scale or Sport Scale models, provided that documentation for their paint patterns accompanied them !

Dave F.

 

[bjphoenix]

The "paint job" is "relative" ( see pics below ) . . . While not painted in the "traditional" color schemes, ALL of them could be built and constructed as Precision Scale or Sport Scale models, provided that documentation for their paint patterns accompanied them

I've noticed this when searching for alternate paint schemes for scale models. I wonder if rocket displays at military bases and so forth get less than inspired paint jobs, maybe the base commander gives an order to repaint the displays and the maintenance department gets out whatever paint they have on hand.