In article , Dave Heil
writes:
Dwight Stewart wrote:
"Dave Heil" wrote:
I'm not at all uncomfortable with it,
Dwight. Len has had his say on countless
occasions. He isn't involved with amateur
radio though he knows some hams. He
has no background in amateur radio from
which to make an informed decision
regarding amateur radio testing. (snip)
Dave, I don't have a background in a lot of things (child birth,
international affairs with Belarus, NASA space missions, to name just a
few), but expect to have a voice in those things when I have something to
say and would be darn offended, and very confrontational, if someone told
me
to go away simply because I don't have the proper background. I suspect you
would react the same way if you thought what you had to say was relevant.
Has anyone told Len to go away? Not that I can recall.
Len, on the other hand, has told people things like this (direct quote from a
post of his on Oct 28, 2003
"Shut the hell up, you little USMC feldwebel. Learn to READ English."
(direct quote from Len Anderson - is that the sort of thing that constitutes
civil debate? Should we look to Len Anderson as a role model? )
Pot...kettle...
I'm sorry, I can't agree with your new age "everyone's opinion has
value" when the topic is something in which someone has no background.
Everyone's opinion has value, Dave. But everyone's opinion does not have the
*same* value.
I take it that you believe that your opinions on child birth would be
meaningful or relevant to a woman who has had several children and that
your views on space flights would be found useful to NASA engineers. I
don't happen to think they would be. If you find that you have an
interest in a topic, I'd expect that you'd want to study it, learn a
great deal about it, participate to some degree--in other words, to gain
experience in the field under discussion. I'd expect, for example, that
someone who wants to participate to any meaningful degree in regulating
mining be schooled in mining and that someone who is to particpate in
the regulation of amateur radio be more than casually familiar with
amateur radio. If an individual has no background in a field and
attempted to preach to those actively engaged in that field, I'd not be
at all upset if that individual became "darned offended" or
confrontational. In fact, I'd find it fairly easy to go on with my
life.
Particularly when the inexperienced person deals with opposition to his views
with name calling, insults, factual errors, ethnic slurs, unsolicited emails
containing nudity and other childish behavior.
And, even if it is true that Len "has no background in amateur radio from
which to make an informed decision regarding amateur radio testing," he has
nonetheless successfully managed in spite of that to make a decision about
code testing which is consistent with the decisions of many within the
Amateur Radio Service (people who do have the background you seek).
So? It's like a person who has never tasted ice cream saying that vanilla bean
is 'better' than rocky road. There are plenty of people who will agree with
that statement - and plenty who will disagree.
Well, he'd have to land somewhere on the issue, wouldn't he? He has
also arrived at a conclusion about code testing and about a minimum age
for radio amateurs which is at odds with the decisions reached by many
within the Amateur Radio Service (other people who have a background in
the subject).
He wants morse testing ended. Based
on what special knowledge and
background? (snip)
I didn't know a "special" knowledge or background was required. It
doesn't
take great knowledge, or an indepth background, to see that Morse code is a
declining skill throughout the radio world.
Not in amateur radio, it isn't. Now you see that you and Len share a
common mistaken view. Each of you might have a desire to see it as a
truth but reality doesn't seem to bear it out.
Or to read what the FCC and
others have said about Morse code.
Done that.
Or to think through the issue.
Done that too.
Or to form
an opinion based on any or all of that. Or voice that opinion.
Ditto.
And in my opinion, a Morse code test for an amateur radio license is a good
idea.
For expressing that opinion, Len has unleashed more name calling, insults,
slurs and other childish behavior on me than I can remember.
Which brings us back to an earlier point made by you: that Len's opinion
should carry the same weight as the opinions of radio amateurs. The FCC
has said, on a number of occasions, that they'd wait for a concensus
among radio amateurs. They did not see fit to include SWL's or those
who worked at a military radio station in Japan fifty years ago. That
aside, Len has formed an opinion and has, on countless occasions, voiced
his opinion.
And nobody has stopped him or even tried to. He has flooded FCC with hundreds
of pages of commentary even though he has no interest in becoming a radio
amateur.
(snip) I'm certainly not forced to agree with
his views, to respect his views or to refrain
from sarcasm with regard to his views. (snip)
Of course. Just as Len is not forced to leave the discussion just because
you think he should.
Please point to one occasion in which I've suggested, requested or
demanded that the kindly old gent do so.
I cannot recall any, Dave, even after being told, by Len Anderson:
"Shut the hell up, you little USMC feldwebel. Learn to READ English."
Dave did not respond in kind to Len's remarks, btw.
(snip) Len has participated and participated
and participated. (snip)
More power to him. He has just as much of a right to do so as anyone
else.
Having the right to speak isn't the same as forcing others to listen, to
accept or to give the same weight to an opinion.
In fact, Len becomes less and less credible over time. His behavior here
reduces his credibility.
(snip) He wants to participate and to prevent
others from laughing at him or his ideas. (snip)
Really? I missed that. How has he tried to prevent others from doing
anything?
Go to Google. Select this newsgroup. Enter "Len Anderson". Be prepared
to devote one or more evenings.
Be sure to use the various screen names he's used here, ("nocwtest", "lenof21",
"averyfine", "averyfineman", "lenover21" (all AOL) because most of his posts
don't contain his name. And he doesn't have a callsign.
BTW, he denied the use of at least one screen name ("averyfine") here. Then he
was angry, insulting and abusive when his mistake was pointed out.
(snip) Others are free to participate and may
form their own opinions of LHA's ideas. They are
free to laugh at his ideas, to poke fun of his ideas
and to counter his ideas. (snip)
(snip) I don't like what Len has to say and don't
care for his windy, pontificating and condescending
posts. (snip)
Lets be honest here, Dave. I seriously doubt his lack of a license, or
comments (condescending, outragious, or otherwise), would really bother you
that much if those comments agreed more with your own views.
Really? Have you noticed a single occasion where I've supported the
posts of Bruce?
Game, set, match.
In the end, the
only reason you point to his lack of a license, or try to ridicule his
ideas, is that you don't agree with what he has to say. There's nothing
wrong with that,
You still don't completely understand so again, I urge that Google
search. Len isn't just wrong, he's rude and abrasive. Len claims to
just want civil debate on the issue of code testing. His posts do not
bear that out.
What his posts prove is that what Len really wants is for amateur radio to
either go away or become a high power, multiband version of cb. Every post of
his bears that out.
His interest is not in becoming a radio amateur or helping ham radio. His
interest is just the opposite.
Just my opinion.
73 de Jim, N2EY