Re: UL Required to get License

["mikey" <loismustdie@xxxxxxxx>]

Finally.

"Allan Waghalter" <awaghalter@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:2Wemf.3010$Zb2.1591@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Robert,
> This thread is a perfect example of why you get so much flak in the
> newsgroup.  You were not UL listed when you were installing, most of us
> can't afford $2500 to be a member.  Your whole discussion appears to be
> argumentative and demeaning to everyone!  I generally agree with your
> postings, but you are out of line here.
> Allan
>
> <robertlbass@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:1133997167.837679.21900@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> First, poll the audience and see how many here are UL...
> >
> > I'm not interested in knowing how many other guys here don't care about
> > standards.  The subject at present is your attacks on UL -- based
> > entirely on the fact that you can't compete for commercial fire alarm
> > jobs with firms that choose to adhere to the standards and to uphold
> > those standards by paying their dues.
> >
> >> ...there is a difference in the commitment to standards...
> >
> > You babble on about a "commitment to standards" yet you refuse to
> > u8phold those very standards.  Please stop posting such rubbish.
> >
> >> ...pay a membership fee to a club, which in one aspect,
> >> has out lived its usefulness...
> >
> > Try to stay on track.  No one is talking about the AAF.  We're
> > discussing the importance of following standards and submitting your
> > work (I guess you call it that) to the authority of the standards
> > writing agency.  Instead of complying you choose to denigrate the
> > agency.
> >
> >> You just like to be argumentative... --- whine, whine, whine ---
> >
> > Stop, you're embarrasing yourself.
> >
> >
>
>