Dwight Stewart wrote:
"Mike Coslo" wrote:

You know, Dwight, I'm not so sure.
I don't recall Jim ever making an
issue of the issue, except for ommitting
the callsign. (snip)



By omitting the callsign, he made it an issue to be discussed. Were we all
supposed to notice it and say nothing?

Victim mentality, Dwight! You and Jim get into a wizzing contest, and
Kim gets her amusement by reading the posts.

It's really too bad that you cannot avoid it, but I think Kim is right.
That callsign seems to have some irresistable effect on some people. And
you just can't help it. You don't have the power to resist.


What would *you* have him do? I'm
a little confused about what some
people want out of this thread. (snip)



I wouldn't "have him do" anything. There has been no demands made of him
from me. He's free to do what he wants, just as we're free to comment on
what he does.

What do you think of her reasoning
behind getting that callsign? (snip)


As I've stated several times, I don't really care what her reasonings
were. It's simply not my job to judge Kim. I've told Kim what I think, and
that is enough. I don't see any reason to keep repeating myself. And I
certainly don't see any reason to repeat myself over and over through a
several year period as some in this newsgroup have done.


Then it should be a null argument. You should not care why Jim omits
her callsign, and it isn't your job to judge Jim.

Some people might just care what the reasonings are though.

And as for repeating ones self, you shouldn't "have to", but you are.
The power of of that callsign is simply too much to resist.

- Mike KB3EIA -