Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Skip
I'll PM you offline ...something FJ still declines to do....
|
Skip,
Sorry I had to resort to blocking your PM's, you were getting annoying and using up my allowance and I don't think Don's intent was to have the PM system used for one member to continually harrass another. 4 messages in two days, three after I requested that you not, was getting to be a bit much. What do you have to tell me in private that you can't say in public? That's why I don't post my email or phone number. Recall that one of the reasons I wish to keep your group in the dark (you are in fact still in the dark, BTW) about my identity is because I do not wish to be harrassed (or threatened or blackmailed). Please feel free to converse with me over the public forum any time you wish...I enjoy our little public repartees.
Again, I have asked you to show me
in the text of HB1624 where it allows for the MP to continue to test new boats under the old method
using the 82dB limit. I have still not seen where you or anyone else has answered that, to my liking or to my disliking. In fact,
I would like it if you showed me
in the text of the bill were it will still allows enforcement of the old
82 dB limit, which was
one fourth as intense as the new 88 dB limit. Since it seems pretty apparent that the good Rep Whalley has succeeded in railroading this bill though under the radar, I can only hope that it will somehow result in quieter boats, as he has been telling everyone it will. I just don't see that
in the text of the bill.