Jim, Jim, Jim...

Message click
Block Sender click
Yes click

A dose of 'Troll-Be-Gone' works almost every time.

--
73 de Bert
WA2SI

"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Len Over 21) writes:

In article ,
PAMNO
(Rev. Jim puts on his Evangelistic robes for
a hellfire-and-brimstone Sermon On The Antenna Mount which is
really a nasty old Troll for his series of shouting and hollering in the
disguise of a "polite" reply) writes:

"You can't have "meaningful exchanges" when you soil the
communications environment with personal attacks of any kind
on those who do not agree with you."

In article ,

(Len Over 21) writes:

After you've lived and experienced a few eras in anything, you'll
find lots and lots of "experts" in that anything, who either "know
all about (from reading a book or seeing a movie)" or are some-
how so gifted in their relative youth that they are divine
messengers sent to enlighten all the hoi polloi and the koi.
:-)

Gee, Len, that's interesting....

You mean like someone who's never held any class of amateur license, nor
been
involved in radio regulation in any way, yet loudly and repeatedly
proclaims
what changes should be made to the amateur radio regulations?

Poor baby.

Why didn't you answer the question, Len?

Got your ego all in a dither because you aren't the
"renowned historian" and truthsayer in all things amateur?

Nope. That's not me at all. It does, however, describe the behavior of
certain
other people who post here.

Well, heck yes and gosh darn, Rev. Jim are all upset again.

Who is "Rev. Jim"? The only one I know is a character on the classic
comedy
series "Taxi".

This could be the start of REAL truthtelling in reply which would last
(probably) months and result in long, long, "refutations" that Rev.
Jim
never ever tells any untruth and speaks with the voice of the gods.

"You can't have "meaningful exchanges" when you soil the
communications environment with personal attacks of any kind
on those who do not agree with you."

Or someone who has never been directly invoved in the raising of
children,
yet
proclaims what they can and cannot do at various ages - even to the
point of
not allowing them to be amateur radio operators before a certain age?

Yup, Rev. Jim, the "renowned pediatrician" has to voice an old, bitter
"cause" of his left over from 6 years ago. :-)

[see last item in my Comments on docket 98-143...which the teen
avenger was Hot and Heavy in denunciation of...(still in the ECFS
under 13 Jan 99 filing date)]

In those Reply Comments, you proposed a minumum age requirement of 14
years for
any class of US amateur license, even sthough such a requirement has never
existed in the USA. You gave no evidence of how the lack of such a
requirement
has had a negative effect on amateur radio or any other radio service, yet
you
wanted such a requirement (which would not affect you, of course) created.

Here's a few simple, direct questions, Len. In fact, I'll direct them to
the
entire group:

1) Should there be an age requirement for an amateur license?

2) If so, what should the requirement be for the various ages?

3) If so, why should there be such an age requirement?

Or someone who has never really learned or used Morse Code, yet loudly
and
repeatedly denies its usefulness - even to the point of denying its
historical importance?

Rev. Jim got his BP up over 200/100 again on manual telegraphy.

Who? You cannot be referring to me, because I find Morse Code
radiotelegraphy
to be a relaxing experience.

Tsk, tsk, tsk...then manufactures a falsehood that I "denied its
historical importance." In any other venue that would be a LIE. :-)

For something to be a lie it must be untrue.

And how do you know that the person I referred to is you?

In the first days of ALL radio, the ONLY way to use it for any sort
of communication was by on-off keying telegraphy. That first demo
of radio was in 1896, in Italy and in Russia. The telegraphy codes
used were the "morse code" (presumably with some local country
variants for some characters, unknown to exact details). The first
Morse-Vail Telegraph (commercial) service was in 1844 or 52 years
before the first radio-as-communications medium demonstration.

There's no question that "morse code" has historical significance.
It does. But, the first radio demo was 108 years ago...roughly five
generations in the past.

That's all true.

And what's also true is that the person referred to in the preceding post
denies and distorts the role Morse Code radiotelegraphy has played since
those
early days. Such as its role in World War 2 radio communications. Or its
role
in maritime communications well into the 1990s. Or its widespread use by
radio
amateurs.

Some would call that "lying by omission". ;-)

Today, the only real use of manual
telegraphy codes is in amateur radio where its advocates go on
angry benders of denunciation of anyone who even frowns on its
"usefulness."

"benders"?

"You can't have "meaningful exchanges" when you soil the
communications environment with personal attacks of any kind
on those who do not agree with you."

All the other radio services just dropped "morse" as
being too slow, too error-prone, and requiring comm specialists
at each end that weren't useful anymore.

Only the last reason is true. Other services wanted to dispose of the need
for
and cost of skilled operators.

But amateur radio is largely *about* skilled radio operation.

Or someone who claims a desire for "civil discussion", yet will not
carry on
a
civil discussion with someone of differing opinions, and instead refers
to
the
other parties by ad-hominem insults to their age, work, gender, license
class,
education, name, ethnicity, and military service?

I should "show respect" for those self-empowered paragons of pride
who insist (to the point of angry jumping up and down) that all must
respect those olde-tyme manual radio telegraphers?

How do you know the person described is you, Len?

You don't have to "respect" anyone. But someone who can discuss in a civil
manner - without name calling or ad-hominem insults - earns the respect of
almost everyone, including those who disagree.

For example, I have great respect for K2UNK, Bill Sohl, even though we
disagree
on almost all amateur radio policy matters. I cannot recall a single
instance
where Bill made fun of anoter's age, work, gender, license class,
education,
name, ethnicity, and/or military service.

That's "civil debate".

Because
telegraphy is Their Favorite and all should honor Their favorite?

Wow, ol' Rev. Jim really got cooking on his Hellfire-And-Brimstone
denunciation of all who don't Believe in the True God of Radio, Morse!

Tsk, tsk, tsk. Hell Hath No Fury Like A Telegrapher Scorned! :-)

Uh, Rev. Jim, send me your TS Card. I'll punch it. Save everyone
all the time and trouble of reading your raving of madness.

You DO know what a "TS Card" is, don't you? No? Tsk, tsk, an
old military service term-phrase. You weren't IN the military, were
you? Tsk, tsk. You did NOT work any military comms or even any
civilian comms, did you? No? Tsk, tsk.

Gosh, golly, and heckanddarn, all this fuss and Fury over some
NATO phonetic alphabet that went in force in the NATO militaries
of 1955 and was the forerunner of such adoption worldwide. Even
in the ICAO...whose working air carriers were, in the majority, in
NATO-member countries back in the mid-1950s. :-)


"You can't have "meaningful exchanges" when you soil the
communications environment with personal attacks of any kind
on those who do not agree with you."

There's a very wise bit of advice that says a person should treat others
as
they wish to be treated.