Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Dave Heil

writes:

Can a morse radiotelegraph circuit introduce error or is it supposedly
free from error of any kind?

It isn't necessarily free of error, Len. Then again, I've not claimed
that it is.

Tsk. More political spin. :-)

Tsk. Poor baby. It isn't spin, much less political :-) :-)

All other modes BUT morse has errors. An absolute. Yet you say
morse "isn't necessarily free of error." :-) A decided qualified non-
statement.

I wrote what I intended to convey. If two morse ops exchange
information for two hours without an error, their communication is error
free.

Anyplace else but in PCTA haven, such antics would be called
"sinning by omission."

If this were anywhere else, nobody would likely be discussing this at
all.

I made no remark about "introducing Swahili dialects." You did.

Your response was equally irrelevant.

Tsk. You tried to introduce "Swahili" in here. I didn't. :-)

No, you didn't. You tap danced all over the place.

I have no interest in educating the rest of the radio world in anything.

Riiiight. All should revere and respect you because you Are.

How does my lack of interest in educating the "world of radio" equate to
a desire to be revered and respected? I'd think I'd merit much more of
that for educating the "rest of the radio world".

All the rest of those radio services that once used morse have
dropped it for communications purposes.

So? What is that supposed to mean for the service which uses it
commonly and regularly?

Tsk. You can't see the relevence, your reverence? :-)

I can't see what isn't there :-)

Morse code just doesn't have all the attributes that lie like urban
myths in the brainwashed minds of hams. It isn't faster than any
other mode, isn't error-free...all it is is a throwback to the pioneer
times of the first radios, far before the existance of anyone in this
newsgroup.

Under certain propagation conditions, CW can outperform RTTY. I've
personally experienced severe multipath echo where a morse circuit was
operating normally while RTTY machines were printing gibberish.

Then there are a number of radio services which never bothered
with any morse code when they began.

Did you have a point?

Yes, I borrowed Amstrong's lance. [nice sharp point at the end]

So, you hadn't any real response.

But, you will then "argue" that "this is amateur radio" as if it was
a haven, shrine, or religious temple for morse code and that all
amateurs MUST test for it...won't you? :-)

As pointed out quite a few times to you, thousands of radio amateurs use
morse daily despite what the "rest of the radio world" decides to do.

Well, isn't that spay-shul? :-)

So...because morse is the distant second-most used mode on HF
by hams, the FCC *must* test for it in order to get an amateur radio
license with HF privileges?

That's right.

Most strange. There is NO other mode allocated to amateurs which
requires a separate pass-fail test for manual operation.

There wasn't any such exam even back when the only two modes in use were
CW and AM phone. So?

Ah, but YOU had to take that morse test to achieve your rank, status,
and privilege...therefore all others must do as you did.

You are particularly thick these days. Others (read newcomers) not only
aren't required to do as I did, they can't possibly.

Incorrect. I was simply pointing out that morse code telegraphy
is the SLOWEST of all modes available to U.S. radio amateurs.

Incorrect. That isn't what you were doing.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. It was very correct. You are incorrect.

Ah, non, non, non, Gaston. You are incorrect.

Since you don't use morse
and aren't a radio amateur, why do you worry about morse throughput?

More tsk. I don't "worry" about it.

Your voluminous output here suggests otherwise.

I KNOW by example of history
of radio and seeing it used, hearing it used, that morse IS the
slowest form of communications allocated to hams for communications
pursposes.

Seeing morse doesn't do much. Hearing it if you can't copy it, does
even less. I've seen voice ops take more time to exchange information
than morse ops, especially in dealing with formal message traffic.

But, you cannot keep on the subject and must always attack
the persons of those who disagree with you. Tsk.

You can't possibly realize how silly the above statement makes you look.

Tsk, tsk. What I said is true. Denial of your own arrogant tactics,
of bullying, doesn't help you...but you keep on denying them even
though all other readers can see it.

Thanks for the giggles, Leonard. You keep describing your own actions
and attributing them to others.

Lacking a few received characters in morse? Why, just fill in the
blanks. Who will know? :-)

One thing for su You won't.

Tsk, tsk. That's any easy thing to prove by recordings at both end
of a bad radio circuit relying on manual morse. :-)

Not if you and guy with like morse skills are at the ends of the
circuit, it won't be easy. :-)

But...mighty macho morsemen think that they are SO spay-shul
that they can claim anything they want to to non-morse persons
and get away with it. :-)

Well ya see, Foghorn, it's like this: A morse op can pretty much do
that with someone like yourself. Anyone with a skill has it all over
someone who lacks that skill. That's a good reason for a guy to develop
as many skills as he can in this life. You seem to be lacking several
of 'em.

Why this concern about what the "rest of the radio world" is doing?
Hams aren't required to follow other services.

They don't seem to. They seem to regard amateur radio as having
its own distinct laws of physics, different from other radio.

Not different physics, Leonard. Different methods of operation in
pursuit of different goals. HF amateur communications aren't much like
the old military point-to-point circuits you are familiar with.

They
seem to think that discussion about federal regulations on amateur
radio should be forbidden to non-amateurs!

There is no indication that "they" do that. I, however, note that
you've had ample opportunity (and Lord knows you've taken the
opportunity) to present your ideas. Those ideas are based on your very
limited knowledge of and exposure to amateur radio. I don't think your
ideas are very sound. Take your couple of ideas about amateur radio
regulation and couple them with your litany of insults directed toward
amateur radio operators and toward the ARRL; toss in your unique ability
to grate on folks and maybe you can see why you haven't brought more
people around to your way of thinking.

They seem to think that the First Amendment Rights don't belong
to non-amateur-licensed U.S. citizens.

That seems to be what you believe, though there are loads of your posts
which could be shown to anyone with the stomach to sift through them.
They'd tend to make your statement about the First Amendment ring
hollow.

Tell you what: You settle on a subject and perhaps we can do that...if
you can't keep from launching into personalities.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. YOU jumped into this thread ranting and raving
about "not having an amateur license" in a remark I wrote to Kim.

Here's what Kim wrote:

"However, under dire circumstances when, presumably, a CW net would be
underway with very experienced communicators and would be the fastest,
most
efficient method of communication (hands down, no pun intended). For
once,
this is a thread wherein the real point of CW can be highlighted. CW
may or
may not ALWAYS be the "one mode that gets through when no other will."
But,
it's hard to argue that CW--if clear and done well--is the fastest and
most
efficient mode."

Here's how you responded:

"Kim, you are welcome to hold any belief system you wish, but the
FACT that on-off-keyed "CW" morse IS the slowest communications
mode in use today or in use a half century ago. I've seen it up
close
and personal throughout this whole past half century. It is
evidenciary
in the REST of the radio communications world."

You added gems like:

"It is the EXCEPTIONAL rarity now to find any two morsemen at
each end of a ham radio circuit who can do SUSTAINED "network"
communications by on-off-keyed "CW" morse at 40 WPM for
hours. HOURS. Networks need hours if the number of messages
are great."

and

"Nonsense alive and well only in the imaginative fantasies of mighty
macho morsemen. Real networks don't operate on imagination.
"Error-free" messages don't get relayed through self-glorified
boasting."

and

"Those who want to fantasize that morse is "faster" or "better" will
have to set up a controlled test NOT in morse favor to demonstrate
that alleged fact. Let all those might macho morsemen sustain
20 to 40 WPM continuously for an 8-hour period...and do the
communications with LESS error than any teleprinter circuit."

Those statements demonstrate your lack of knowledge of morse code and of
what good operators can achieve. There are a couple of other paragraphs
dealing with RTTY opeation that lead me to believe that you don't know
all that much about the limitations of radio teletype.

You're a guy who often whines about his First Amendment rights being
trampled. Yet you're complaining that I shouldn't comment on something
you've written which has a number of glaring errors. I have experience
with both RTTY and morse circuits. You have decades-old experience with
RTTY. Your morse experience is pretty much non-existent.

By the way, you seldom limit yourself to "a remark" to anyone.


Your usual diatribe has been noted by all other readers and
recorded at Google message archives.

It surely has and if you like, you can be treated to it again.

TRY to understand that the rest of the radio communications
world does NOT use morse code for communications.

Try coming up with a valid explanation as to why I should concern myself
with that.

No need to expect the impossible. Your royal mind is made up.
It is unchangeable. :-)

So you've conceded that your "rest of the radio world" claim has no real
relevance to amateur radio operators.

Tsk. You ARE seeing things that aren't there...

Incorrect. You've snipped them so they aren't there.

Tsk. You are STILL seeing things that aren't there... :-)

Nope, it doesn't work. They aren't there and I'm not seeing them %)

I'm using the Internet to send these messages. Whether that uses
radio or other means is not an issue.

We'll never know. Your snippage removes any context.

Tsk. I never introduced the communications methods used by
the Internet.

That's a frank admission but why not go all the way: You never
introduced any communications methods used anywhere.

One thing for sure, the Internet doesn't use any
manual morse for communications! :-)

I can't see them. You snipped 'em.

"If thine eye offend thee, cast it out..."

Yeah, if it was mine eye, I'd likely go along with that. In this
instance, it is you attempting to cast out mine eyes.

Very relevant. Why should radio amateurs follow the methods of
unrelated services?

Tsk. Then why do radio amateurs require all the formalism of
"correct" methods, "correct" jargon, even the "official radiogram"
forms sold by the ARRL? :-)

Why are you concerned?

Tsk, tsk...all the play-acting the professional in amateur comms
as if deviation from that would mean loss of a job! :-)

That's the kind of thing for which you are well known.

Tsk...with role models like the archtypical PCTA extra, who would
want to be "involved" in amateur radio? :-)

Lots of folks want to and do. You haven't and won't.

Define the numerical quantity in "lots." :-)

Don't make DEMANDS, Leonard.

Tsk. Look at the published numbers from the FCC databasee. You
will find that the non-morse-test licensees have grown far more than
all the morse-tested licensee numbers...and that continues to grow.

You asked who would want to be involved in amateur radio. Apparently
those folks would. Apparently you don't. Was that your point?

You don't accept that any more than a "renowned historian" in here
accepts it.

I don't accept that Technician Class licensees want to be in amateur
radio? You're silly.

You must defend your imperial territory of rank/status/
privilege via passing a 20 WPM morse test.

I defend my rank/status/privilege by passing the highest class amateur
radio license available. It gives me *all* U.S. amateur radio
privileges.


I know all about the fun in amateur radio. I know quite a bit about the
fun in usenet.

Tsk. Not demonstrated in here.

That it isn't evident to you is quite believable.

Not really. I just took a look at amateur radio. I didn't see you.

Wow! One glance and his imperiousness sees ALL!

Superhuman. [gods of radio are like that...]

One glance through the RAC database shows that there is no Leonard H.
Anderson at your address, licensed as a radio amateur. It really is
that easy.

Tsk. Still trying to forbid First Amendment Rights to U.S. citizens,
aren't you?

Maybe you'll take a little time from your busy schedule to explain just
how you feel that your rights have been abridged. I'd be really
interested in reading it.

Ave, Imperator!

Is it? You've written and written and written and written. I've not
attempted to prevent you from doing so at any time. I have often
ridiculed you and laughed at you. I intend to continue doing so.

I didn't expect you to do anything else. :-)

Then you won't be disappointed.

Sociopaths usually use that rationale to excuse their behavior.

Well, good for them.

According to "Dave," one can't have ANY "interest in radio" without
getting an amateur radio license! :-)

You've been corrected on this one a number of times. You persist in
writing the same thing. It is a lie.

Tsk. I've not been "corrected." "Dave" tried to back-track from what
he originally wrote that anyone having an "interest" in radio would or
should get an amateur radio license first. :-)

Would you like a good googling, Leonard?

Apparently some of the old State Department so-called "diplomacy"
had rubbed off since "Dave" doesn't admit to errors he openly made.
"Dave" always explains that "Dave" is "correct" in whatever he does.

You seem to have some trouble making up your mind on the issue. There
is an archived record on the subject.

I have no problem at all on eliminating morse code testing. I advocate
its elimination.

That's great. Now back to this "You are a god"/"You are no god" issue;
how do you feel about that?

I have no problem at all on recognizing bullies and sociopaths....

There seems to be some difference of opinion on that issue.


Quite correct. I took a 20 wpm morse exam. It isn't possible for you
take it.

Incorrect. I could still take a COMMERCIAL radiotelegraphy license
test for 20 WPM.

When did COMMERCIAL radiotelegraphy license come into the discussion?
Are you planning to ship out? I thought you were discussing those being
forced to do as I did. I don't have a COMMERCIAL radiotelegraph
license.
Are you getting enough sleep, Len?

I have NO desire to do so, but the USA allows
that option.

So, its pretty much like your efforts toward obtaining an amateur radio
license, huh?

I took and passed written exams for the Novice, General,
Advanced and Extra.

Are you expecting to be a guest of honor at the Kennedy Center
for doing so?

It'd be nice, but it really isn't necessary.

It is no longer possible for you to do so.

Ave, Imperator! [old Roman statement roughly translatable to
"no s**t?!" ]

I'm happy that you have understood.

No exams are given for two of those classes. Exams very different from
those taken by me are now being used to test for both the General and
Amateur Extra.

...therefore YOU are a "superior" ham.

Wrong conclusion, Leonard. Therefore, you can't take the.

But, it is impossible to get you to admit to an error.

I'd first have to make one.

Gods of radio NEVER make errors. They even say so... :-)

It is really more simple than that. All that's necessary is to
demonstrate that one of your statements contains an error.

Try to play with your Orion some more. Seriously, not trivially.
Can't have a god of radio use equipment trivially. :-)

Irrelevant.

No, I'm being oscarlevant. :-)

Oh--It's the booze and heroin talking? Well, you're just like him
except for the wit...and the fact that he has been dead for some time.

Dave K8MN