On 9/2/25 09:32, Tom Elam wrote:
On 9/1/2025 1:09 PM, -hh wrote:
On 9/1/25 10:58, Tom Elam wrote:
On 9/1/2025 9:57 AM, -hh wrote:
On 8/31/25 22:16, Tom Elam wrote:
On 8/24/2025 11:23 PM, Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-24 20:11, Tom Elam wrote:
Alan Baker no-show.
Not interested, Asshole.
So, lost interest in racing, eh? Thought so, actions speak louder
than words. Asshole.
Of course, Elam has actual *proof* that the only reason is
disinterest...right?
I've not bothered being a stalker, but the last I recall in public
comments was there was a need to obtain a new medical clearance.
What proof does Tommy have that that requirement's been checked off?
-hh
Let's look at evidence from SCCBC points-earning racing dates:
https://www.sccbc.net/racers/club-championship/
Does that website detail which drivers are qualified to drive?
Because when not, citing it is irreverent.
I don't think the claimed but not proven health issue is real
or if true the only cause of this 2021-2025 record.
Did anyone claim that it was the *only* factor? Cite, please.
Plus you've claimed to be worth over $2M without proof...right?
So how are your claims any different in terms of credibility?
As I recall the health issue was claimed in 2024, and he entered on
one weekend. Alan has not refuted my claim that he has lost interest,
or it's personal financial issues.
Because as we all know, one never can get sick twice! /s
On the financial angle I note that Alan's LinkedIn page still shows
that he is "Full Time" at Digital Financial BUT is also actively
soliciting part-time contract work. His head shot is even tagged
"Open to Work".
So what? You've had out-of-date webpages online yourself.
So just what date-stamp proof do you have that this webpage is still
current, and therefore of any relevance?
(Alan, you put this out there. Anyone on LinkedIn can see it. You are
pretty desperate for work even though you have a "Full Time" job.)
I also have in the past seen public evidence that Alan was severely
behind on certain debts, but promised Alan I would never disclose the
details.
Oh, so you've never had any debt yourself? Merely making the
suggestion means you've stooped into the unethical in your trolling
attempts.
This is not out of date info.
But how do you actually know that?
You don't. You've failed ... again.
Due to lack of funds I was a month overdue on a Sears credit card about
60 years ago. Since then paid a little interest on credit cards when I
let the pay date slip by. Happy?
Net worth is ... Happy?
Still unsubstantiated, which was my point: readers have no idea by how
much you're lying.
You can log onto LinkedIn and see for yourself. But don't waste your
time. The file name on the posted image is "Screenshot 2025-09-01 105121.jpg", the default name given by Windows Snipping Tool. Happy?
Nope, because I was noting that the actual publication date of the page
is what's important to know if it is close to current or not, not when
you happened to stalk by and screen-capp'ed it.
The lesson is that the web is full of old, stale pages, so just because
a webpage is online today doesn't mean that it was also published today.
For temporal relevance, you need *publication* date, not today's date.
Plus in the meantime, you've still not determined anything on if medical clearances have been satisfied either.
-hh
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)