Re: UL Required to get License

["Bob Worthy" <securinc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Allan,

Roberts contributions to this thread are nothing more than an attack on me.
That is OK, he doesn't bother me. I sometimes wonder if his negativity
sometimes dilutes the importancy of some of the information though, whether
it be from me, you or anyone else. He, for one, is the first to shot the
messenger. He is definately disruptive at times. I could have brought info
to the group that cow's are going to be mooing to the tune of Silent Night
and he would have argued that cow's only bark at the moon and chastize me
for not upgrading my herd. He is just mad because he knows that I am privy
to info that he doesn't get until they knock on his door. Thanks for
noticing his position, as out of line, though.

"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.
> >
> >
>
>