RadioBanter - View Single Post

February 29th 04, 12:20 AM

(Len Over 21) wrote in message ...
In article , "Jim Hampton"
writes:

I know you love to .... um .... shake things up .... but ... I had my 1st
class radiotelephone license in 1966.

Irrelevant in this newsgroup. Some of the amateurs in here seem to
think an Amateur Extra class license is a "PhD in radio." No other
radio licenses are allowed to figure in...

It's not about licenses.

It's about practical experience...In this regard you ahve ZERO.

I also worked in Electromagnetic Compatibilty testing in 1995.

Another guy in here has you beat...worked as a purchasing agent
for a set-top box maker. High-level knowledge.

If that was my SOLE experience in electronics, your "point" might
be humorous. In this case you're only slinging mud.

EMI testing, Tempest, the whole works is fairly normal work on any
DoD contract. So? You think BPL is equivalent to an EMP?!?

Believe me, even an improperly grounded power
pole can cause problems.

Yes, all those wooden utility poles are real tough radiators...?

No, I am not suggesting "interfering" with an
unlicensed service. I am suggesting asserting the rights of a licensed
service.

OK, plant the flag and claim HF is the sovereign terrortory of hams.

"Hams" are not the only licensed service affected in this matter,
and that point has been made not only by the ARRL, but numerous other
agencies who see this as a threat to THIER licensees.

Too bad YOU can't see that...Or can you? I imagine you CAN, and
the rest of this is just your usual antagonistic trolling.

Mama Dee has interpreted the law and sent down an encyclical that
any ham can do anything as long as they have a LICENSE and "are
authoritized to radiate."

Not quite right, that, but it pleases the machismo of some.

The "machismo" (your favorite adjective of late) is yours,
Lennie...WE know what our responsibilities are.

You rather clearly stated an INTENT to interfere. Intent is not
evidenciary per se, but it doesn't win you any friends in court..

Ahhhhhhhhhhh......Lennie the Lawyer has now rendered HIS verdict!

Unlicensed services may not cause interference and must put up
with interference.

Nooo, not quite and the OET won't buy that by itself, nor would any
courts in most countries, USA included.

Yeeeeesssss...Quite. The FCC has stated this in just so many
words on several occassions, Your Putziness.

Sorry they didn't confer with you before making those assertions.

If all could be summed up that easily, it would be "perfectly legal"
for you to hold a 5 W HT up to the abdomen of a pacemaker wearer
and thumb the PTT switch. Are you licensed by the FCC to
deliberately interfere with anything? I don't think so. We can toss a
coin to see if the pacemaker wearer has an infarc.

"Infarct", Lennie...

Besides...A pacer is not the therapy of choice for a myocardial
infarction. A pacer is placed due to an SA node or other pacer
failure...An ELECTRICAL failure of the heart which may or mayNOT be
due to an MI. An MI is actual damage done to the myocardium, or heart
muscle, usually due to cardiovascular disease or a thrombus of other
etiology, even trauma.

You, and some others, think this is an "amateur vs. the
world" thing. It is not.

I didn't write that. You imagined that in another burst of macho
testosterone, ASSERTING yourself.

No, Your Scumminess, that's EXACTLY what you did. Over and over
and over...

I am beginning to believe you are gay, Lennie...of the feminine
preference. You seem to have a problem with the idea of any exertion
of maleness.

Perhas the reason for your lack of family other than an ex-wife?

Does your geographic territory NEED another beacon? The
pioneering and exploration of HF was pretty much over with when
the USA got into WW2. If you NEED QSLs so much, advertise for
some on the Internet.

Same to ya, Your Putziness...Then you can send them out for your
11 meter "chats" or your Part 15 station. You ARE still designing
that station to join us on HF aren't you, Lennie...?!?! You SAID you
were...(among OTHER lies you've usttered here, of course...)

There will be problems with other services, I can assure you.

Duhhhhhh...no kiddin, huh?

You'll never know, unless your cable provider or garage door
opener manufacturer switch to HF frequencies for thier devices.

Jim, I'm more than well aware of potential interference problems in
radio, all the way from VLF on up into the microwaves. That's where
I've been working for a half century and still keep my hand in.

Hmmmmm..

I wonder how long it will be until you find an endearment for
him, Lennie... We'll see...

I've also had four tours of duty as a juror and understand quite well
what INTENT is. No LLD needed for that.

Ahhhh! Lennie's now an expert in the law becasue he sat on a
JURY!

All the aging olde-tyme hammes in here seem to be ASSERTING
themselves in some adolescent machismo in tuff tawk...and none of
them has demonstrated knowledge-one about the BPL signal levels
or the data protocol or anything else about any BPL system proposed.

Whoa! Your SCUMMINESS! Neither do YOU, it seems, in as much as
you make assinine assertions about BPL and then when asked to pony up
explanations of yoru assertions, make silly "it's my right to NOT
respond" rhetoric!

None of the tuff tawkers seem to know anything yet they all talk like
they are a cross between expert PhDs in EMI and The Terminator
gutturally announcing "Ahl be backkk." [just before driving through
the door of a police station and killing lots of cops]

Don't make fun of Arnold, Lennie...YOU guys elected him!

All that anyone seems to want to do is wait until Newington spoon-feeds
them "what they need to know" and cause a lot of wing-flapping and
squawking. Nobody seems to check the FCC website. Nobody has
gone out to try to find a representative technical document from one of
the proposed BPL systems. All seem to be whistling in the dark while
tiptoeing through the graveyard.

Evidence to the contrary notwithstanding, I am sure that
repeating that to yourself over and over makes you feel warm and
fuzzy, Lennie.

The NPRM is announced as docket number 04-37 and there is one
document (as of Saturdy, 21 Feb 04) on that NPRM. The text of the
NPRM isn't available on the 'web. Perhaps the executives in
Newington have a copy...the general public doesn't have it available.

Thanks for reciting the obvious, Lenno...

None of you KNOW what the characteristics of any proposed BPL
system IS, yet you are all "expert" on it becoming the downfall of HF
for Hams. Will it interfere in general? Probably. Will it have terrible
interference and cancel all the events in the ham playground? Unknown.

What IS known is that damage will occur...it's been proven.
That if allowed to promulgate unrestrained it will do exactly what's
been cited...

Meanwhile, think about how you wing-flappers appear to the guvmint
and the industry, all the while demonstrating near-absolute-zero on
thinking and radiation expertise. Tawkin tuff in here doesn't cut it on
getting rid of it. Tawking tuff doan police your playground. EM
spectrum ain't da 'hood and you guys ain't da onley Boyz in da HF
'hood.

"I am only here to civilly debate the Morse Code test issue"
from "My Anthology Of Newsgroup Lies" by Leonard H. Anderson.

Steve, K4YZ