RadioBanter - View Single Post

January 5th 05, 07:16 AM

wrote:
Lenof21 wrote:
In article , "JAMES HAMPTON"
writes:

I've had some interesting conversations off group with a number of
folks
that get involved with flames. For the most part, they simply
deal
back
what they were dealt. I think it might be better if we found
common
ground,
rather than point out differences.

Heh heh...the "common ground" is usually just capitulation to
those
which could use the Latin phrase "Primus Inter Pares" as their
motto.
["First Among Equals"] :-)

Do you see other posters here as equals, Len?

As to license numbers, the regular poster of those

Do you mean me, Len?

You seem to be unable to refer to me by first name or callsign. Why
is
that?

To call you by your given name would be to treat you with dignity
and respect, and we all know Lennie is incapable of that.

To address you by your callsign would be to acknowledge that you
have something he doesn't have...And again, Lennie can't do that.

uses massaged data

What do you mean by "massaged data", Len?

The plain, simple fact is that there is a brief, clear explanation of
the numbers I post - each time they are posted. They are the number
of
*current* FCC amateur licenses held by *individuals*.

Which means that club, military, RACES and other station-only
licenses
are not included. Also, licenses which are expired but in the grace
period are not included.

Only currently-licensed individual amateurs are listed in the totals
I
post.

Simple. Plain English is not to Lennie's liking. For it is by
creative wordsmitihing and deception that he can hide his own failures
and inadequacies. And he has plenty of both.

The rationalizations for using "massaged" data have been and no
doubt will continue to be great. :-)

I don't use "massaged" data. What you see is exactly what the posts
say
it is: the total number of current FCC amateur licenses held by
individuals.

Why do you have a problem with that, Len?
As I said....

73

Steve, K4YZ