All things hang gliding. This is the main forum. New users, introduce yourself.

Moderators: sg, mods

User avatar
By bobk
EDIT: Bob Kuczewski committed voter fraud, and asked the forum administrator to change peoples votes in the Hang Gliding Associations of Americas vote for a new chairmain

Bob Kuczewski has been BANNED from HangGliding.org, the Oz Report and every other major hang gliding website in the world.

------- original post below ---------------
I guess I have a new "badge of honor" to add to my list...

I replied to one of Bill Helliwell's postings on the Oz Report, and I got this PM message from Davis Straub himself:
Davis Straub wrote:Posted: Fri, Feb 26 2010, 11:56:05 pm
Subject: Stay out of the threads

Voting in the USHPA BOD and What's in the USHPA minutes.

Keep yourself to USHPA R3 forum.

Quit polluting these other threads.

If you can't stop doing this you will be stopped from making any posts here.
Apparently, Davis did not like me posting my comments to the "Voting in the USHPA BOD" and "What's in the USHPA minutes" topics. So I replied:
Bob Kuczewski wrote:If Bill Helliwell can post his comments then I will post mine as well.

If you want to ban me for that, then please do so right now.

You either provide a level playing field or you don't. Make up your mind.
Davis replied almost immediately:
Davis Straub wrote:Okay, you are banned.
He then posted the following public message to his forum:
Davis Straub wrote:Bob K has been banned.

Bob dared me to ban him, so I did.

I wrote a private message to him asking him to quit polluting a couple of threads with material that belonged in the forum regarding his recall. He refused and dared me to ban it.

I did.
You'll note that I did not "dare" Davis to ban me, but I did give him the choice to either provide a level playing field or ban me. I guess banning was his preferred choice.

I will say that leading up to this, Davis had been chopping up a lot of topics and moving my posts around which made them seem out of context. So I had been struggling with him on these kinds of issues for some time.

I don't know what else to say at this point. I guess the lines are being drawn, and we now know where Davis stands.
User avatar
By Bobfly
Well, he sounds like a complete dik wod. Sorry it's come down to this, Bob. I still think your supporters will triumph in the end. All you can do is fight the good fight and stand by your principles which these other people seem to have in short supply.
User avatar
By FormerFF
Just another reason for me to stay off of the Oz Report.
User avatar
By bobk
By the way, I believe this was one of my last posts before being banned. Bill Helliwell had posted (as quoted) and I responded in that same topic. Davis had removed my posting and put it in another topic, so I reposted it following Bill's. That led to the PM discussion above which led to my ban. Here's the post:
Bob Kuczewski, on the Oz Report Forum topic 'Voting in the USHPA BOD' wrote:
Billhelliwell wrote:Here are my thoughts on how a regional director should approach voting at a board meeting. After reading comments by Brad and Davis, I wonder if I am in fantasy land.

Decisions made at board meetings sometimes determine how USHPA's resources will be used. The resources include your dues money and peoples time. Other times the decisions may affect how things are done. Fundamentally the goal of any decision should be to promote our foot launched flying. Any decision should be decided by a vote of the regional directors, not by a committee or individual.
Agreed (this is Mom and apple pie). What about secret ballots? What about publishing voting records of Directors?
Billhelliwell wrote:Some decisions are straightforward. Suppose there is a motion to give XYZ $100. Suppose this has been done every year in the past and the result has always been directly measurable and enhances our sport by at least $100, and no one has an alternative cheaper way to get that result. Then a regional director can make the decision, yes or no, on the spot, without any difficulty.
Agreed (this is Mom and apple pie). What about secret ballots? What about publishing voting records of Directors?
Billhelliwell wrote:A vote on whether to continue with special observers or eliminate them requires a little more research and consideration. The fact that there are no special observers in a regional directors region is not a sufficient reason to vote to eliminate them. There are broader concerns. If special observers are important in some other region then that needs to be taken into account by all regional directors. It may be possible to get all the relevant information out at a board meeting and allow each director to make a decision that best meets the needs of USHPA and his own region. The benefits or lack thereof associated with having special observers are easy to see and can readily be discussed at a meeting. So a vote can probably take place. If some directors raise serious questions that can't be adequately addressed then the vote should be postponed.
Is there an actual position anywhere in this statement? If there is, can someone point it out for me?
Billhelliwell wrote:When a proposal is going to change something, all directors have a responsibility to get answers to a few questions before voting.

What problem exists that needs to be fixed by this change? It must be a real problem, not a hypothetical problem. Show specifically what the problem is: names, dates, events. It must not be a personal issue, such as a friend of mine was ranked lower than someone I don't like in a meet and changing the scoring rules would switch the standings.

Does the proposed change address the specific problem. Too many times we see proposed solutions that would not have prevented the problem that occurred. (Would full body scans have disclosed the explosives carried by the underwear bomber?) The proposed change should be applied to the identified problem and it must be shown that the problem would be fixed.

Does the proposed change create other problems? This is more difficult to answer. Discussions with those who have experience with the problem can help disclose consequences of the change.
Again, is there an actual position in there anywhere in this statement?
Billhelliwell wrote:At the next board meeting a change to competition may be proposed. In January a panel of experts (?) got together to discuss some issues and come up with recommendations for a solution. If all regional directors know the members of the panel and can be confident that all aspects of the issue were adequately discussed then the regional directors can hear the proposal, participate in the debate at the meeting and decide how to vote. However if a regional director doesn't know the panel members then that director should be able to review the proposal and talk it over with competition pilots he does know. The vote should be delayed to a later time. (Apparently the vote will be delayed until the fall meeting.)

That is how I see one of the responsibilities of a regional director and how he should approach voting.
I'm sorry Bill, but you haven't said anything about anything in these statements. You effectively say that if the Directors know what to do then they'll know what to do. These are nice platitudes, but how about some real answers? If you go to the Candidate Debate topics you'll find a whole bunch of actual questions that actual pilots are asking (including a few of my own). I think it would be helpful for you to let us know where you stand on some of those real issues rather than spending a lot of time saying nothing.

User avatar
By bobk
Bobfly wrote:All you can do is fight the good fight and stand by your principles ...
You're absolutely right. In the end, that's what defines us.

User avatar
By Paul H
Davis always has his own agenda and if you don't agree with him then he doesn't want to hear about it. He is always right, didn't you know?
User avatar
By peanuts
more heresay

bob, is there anything that you think could/should have been done differently by EITHER party?
User avatar
By Spark
Bob K,

Sorry you got banned from the ozreport forum.

It seems like alot of bad *stuff* comes down on you. :?
Last edited by Spark on Fri Feb 26, 2010 8:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
By bobk
peanuts wrote:bob, is there anything that you think could/should have been done differently by EITHER party?
You tell me. Here's the topic where Bill Helliwell made his post.


Davis made a post after Bill's post and I followed with my previous posting (above) to reply to Bill. That's when I got the PM message from Davis.

Please read that topic and ask yourself if my posting (above) was out of line or should have been removed. We know these topics wander all over the place, and the key is keeping it civil and at least close to the topic. I think my comments were fine.

But let me know what you think. ... Thanks.

Spark wrote:Bob K,

Sorry you got banned from the ozreport forum.

It seems like alot of bad *stuff* comes down on you.
It's all part of standing up for principles. There are lots of people who don't like anyone challenging them, and many of them have more power than I do. It goes with the territory. :)
User avatar
By Willmrx
What do you expect from a pilot like Davis? He can't even handle (The turbulence) at Lake McClure. Pussy comes to mind.

User avatar
By Windlord
I've never gone to nor have I had any interest in the "ODD" Report.
ODD Report, what's it good for, absolutely nothing.

It's been a very loooong time since I've seen anyone within the organization
be so vocal for what they and other members believe in. Keep the heat up
So many want to be complacent and do not want to make waves. When the
tide goes out, they will be standing alone.
User avatar
I won't be on the Oz Report eitherImagethe Pussy.We really need to pull together And flush these turds down the toilet.Hang in there Bob. :mosh:
User avatar
By Windlord
OSCAR wrote:I won't be on the Oz Report eitherImagethe Pussy.We really need to pull together And flush these turds down the toilet.Hang in there Bob. :mosh:
I flushed a while ago, does that count? :mosh:
User avatar
By jimrooney
Oh please.
Drama Queens.

Bob, you were not being a nice guy. You were posturing.
And yes, you dared him to ban you.
You didn't put it that way, but please. Any five year old could figure that one out.

If you were truly being an adult, you would have asked Davis to stop Bill from posting, not joining in behavior that you knew full well would get you banned.

You just don't get to talk down to the owner of the forum. You don't talk to SG like that do you?
... Yeah but "Davis this or that"... doesn't matter. His house, his rules. You don't get to tell him what his rules are. You don't like it?... There's the door.

I know there's a lot of anti-Davis BS over here.
(which is why you're here looking for sympathy.. which you'll likely get)
That's fine.

You knew what you were doing.
You knew it would get you banned.
Now you're playing the martyr?

I don't buy it.

User avatar
By knumbknuts
Davis is easier to understand if you throw out of your mind everything you thought you knew about internet forums, read his sticky on forum rules, and then heed his warnings.

Bob, I'm on your side, you know that, this may be a blessing in disguise. The topic... err... all of them, have been thoroughly hashed out at this point. You may have started losing supporters due to fatigue on all the topics.

As with other types of politics, right and wrong and facts have little bearing on reality... it's a game. Bleah.
User avatar
By bobk
Hi Jim,

You're wrong that I was looking to be banned (to be a martyr or a drama queen or anything else).

More than anything, I wanted a chance to debate the actual issues with Bill Helliwell in an open forum. I had asked him to post to any of 4 different forums (including hanggliding.org, OzReport, and a couple of local sites) where we could hold a debate. He chose the Oz Report, and so that's where I began posting. The topic where I posted was about voting on the USHPA Board, and as you know that's been one of my main issues. If that's where Bill was posting, then that's where I had every reasonable expectation to post my own comments. Instead, Davis formed a separate forum (not just a separate topic) where he wanted the debate to be held. I didn't like that it wasn't in the main "Hang Gliding" forum, but I was willing to accept that compromise. But when Bill started posting to the voting topic (in the main forum) and my own posts there were removed by the moderator (Davis?) I called him on it. I asked him to choose between a level playing field or banning me. He chose to ban me.

What do you think?

Bob K.
User avatar
By jimrooney
I think it wasn't the "fairness" of the actions that mattered... it was your reaction to them.

If you had talked to Davis about that and made your case with him, then I'd understand.

However, you decided instead to carry on anyway... saying that's not fair!... fix it!

Ain't your forum.
You don't get to do that.
User avatar
By bobk
Hi Jim,

I'm in the middle of a recall campaign for my Directorship. Personally, I'd be happy to walk away from USHPA, but I made a commitment to those who voted for me and those who want to see the changes that I've championed. I'm not an instructor or a business owner or a competition organizer. I'm just a pilot. So if it wasn't for my sense of obligation to those who elected me, I'd be gone.

So I'm trying to have a debate with Bill Helliwell who won't come to hanggliding.org, so I go to the Oz Report since that's his forum of choice. Davis continually divides my topics and moves my posts from one topic/forum to another - often destroying the context of my own posts. That kind of heavy handedness is just wrong - especially when he allows Bill's posts to stay, but wisks mine off to the boondocks. How would you like it if SG just took your previous posting and put it in a separate topic in the basement?

Sure, you can say it's Davis's playpen so he can do what he wants, and you're right. But as a community, I think this behaviour should open our eyes a bit. Don't you think so?

Bob K.
User avatar
By SkyPilot
I've never really hung around the Oz Report but from what I am hearing it is nice to know that SG is much more open than that. Although one might know where SG stands on issues at least he is tolerant of other views and allows posts to remain in chronological order and in context as long as they refrain from personal attacks. Is it any wonder why this place is the larget HG site in the world? I don't think so!
User avatar
By jimrooney
Bob, I've been watching this whole drama from the beginning.
I've also been on the Oz Report forum for a very long time.
I know Davis personally.

I'm quite familiar with all this stuff.

You can try to claim the high road here.
You can point out the righteousness of what you're trying to do.
That's all good and well.

But that still doesn't excuse your actions.
The actions of others don't give you license either.

I understand what you're trying to do.
But as has been pointed out by others, you are in fact your own worst enemy.

You wanted to debate Bill.
Now you can't.
Slice it any way you like it... this was counter productive.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 7

Campers, Has anybody seen the ElectraFlyer? (No r[…]

The only learning curve I found was everything hap[…]

Deserves a go,mates. https://www.youtube.com/watch[…]

Some Fall Color in SoCal

Friday 2017.11.17 at Crestline.... http://www.you[…]