"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
hlink.net...
"Bert Craig" wrote:

I hate to say it, Jim, but this is one
of those intangibles that fall under
the catagory of "if you don't get it,
I can't explain it to you."

Kim's got it, but doesn't like it. I
can respect that. Bill's got it too,
but doesn't appear to want to let
on that he's got it. (Broken record
mode: But the FCC..., but the
FCC..., but the FCC...) Dwight?
No comment.


Excuse me, Bert. Before you continue discussing whether I "get"
something
or not, read back over what I've actually said and notice that absolutely
none of it had anything whatsoever to do with the separate issue raised by
Jim. We were talking about license testing. My comments had to do with
license testing. Jim changed the subject to license denial based on other
grounds. I've made no comments on that subject.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

No Dwight, I will not excuse you. The discussion I was engaged in w/Bill,
K2UNK, concerned the "character" aspect of Morse code testing. (i.e.
demonstrating self-discipline by studying for and passing Element 1 for
increased privileges, regardless whether one plans on actually using CW OTA
or not.)

As for discussing whether or not you "get it," again...no comment. No
comment means no comment. You were only included because you were one of
three that commented re. the subject. I do notice that this is not the first
(or tenth, for that matter) time you've joined into a thread, (or a branch
thereof) pulled the subject in a different direction, and then whined about
a response by claiming that what you said had nothing to do with a
"separate" issue. Well Dwight, the above is the issue that Bill, JEP, Kim,
Jim, and I were discussing. Get it yet?

73 de Bert'
WA2SI