From: on Fri 27 May 2005 14:30

wrote:
From: "bb" on Wed,May 25 2005 3:35 pm

wrote:
From: on Mon,May 23 2005 3:57 am



He became a Virtual
military expert without once being IN any branch or working in
any office of the Department of Defense.

I don't claim to be an expert in anything.

Now, now, you are being toooo modest... :-)

You've never been "IN" amateur radio, yet you want to tell us How It
Should Be.

That's simply untrue. :-)

But...one just cannot tell a PCTA Extra anything. :-)

Getting to the heart of the matter, Jimmie feels TERRIBLY "insulted"
when one doesn't like what Jimmie likes.

Not true. You're the one who calls people names, and tells them to shut up
if they don't agree with you.

Tsk, tsk. Someone like that should be removed from this
newsgroup "clubhouse," shouldn't they? :-)

You can begin by removing some 1x2 Extras in here, such
as the one always calling his "opponents" for "Putz."

[he is regularly bringing up old, faded postings from Google as
if to continue to "do battle" on those topics forever and ever]

Gee, Len, you bring up even older and more faded stuff about defunct
ham radio magazines and your experiences of a half-century ago.

Tsk, tsk, tsk, perhaps because I actually DID those things
and you did not? Awwww....

Why is it OK for you to rehash events of 20, 30, 50 years ago, but not
OK for others to remind you of the events of 2 or 3 years past?

Who said "it isn't OK?" Jimmie, you do that all the time
lapsing back to your teenage years and that MIGHTY TEST
for an AMATEUR radio license!

Seems like a double standard on your part.

Awwwww...you seeing double all the time, Jimmie? Yes you
are. Get some medical attention. See Dr. Robeson, both of
him, maybe some of his other alter egos...he has the
"qualifications" to do things. He says.

Jimmie wants NUMBERS? He is regularly giving some sort of
tabulation on the "valid licenses" of radio amateurs in the USA.

No, I'm not. You're mistaken, Len. Wrong again.

They aren't tabulations?!? Are you MAKING THOSE UP?!?!?

The numbers I post here twice a month are those of current, unexpired
FCC amateur licenses held by individuals. That's stated in each post.
The word valid is not used to describe them.

So...where do those NUMBERS come from?

You've claimed that FCC doesn't use the word "expired" to describe
licenses in the grace period, but Part 97 shows that you're wrong on
that.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. There's a GRACE PERIOD, Jimmie. That's in
the regulations. Do you mean each "expired" licensee has to
RETEST? Say goodnight "gracie?" Grazie...

So? You've posted the numbers from hamdata.com without describing how
they are generated.

That's simply untrue, Jimmie.

We are to accept
his NUMBERS as "correct" because Jimmie never makes mistakes. All
others, ESPECIALLY those challenging him, always "make mistakes."

That's just not true, Len.

So...you DO make mistakes?!? Who would have thought that....?

Most folks would accept some website that regularly downloads the
huge FCC amateur database, sorts it, and presents gross totals.

Then why don't you accept the numbers I post?

Tsk. You don't accept www.hamdata.com numbers.

Not Jimmie. He wants "massaged" NUMBERS, showing only the "valid"
licensees..."valid" in HIS viewpoint.

Nope.

The numbers I post come from a website that regularly downloads the
huge FCC amateur database, sorts it, and presents gross totals. All I
do is copy them and post them here.

WHICH website, Jimmie? How can we trust your "honesty"
in anything when you make so many mistakes?

No "massaging".

Your medium is the massage.

Jimmie needs MASSAGING
of those NUMBERS in order to "show us" something...and thus we get
the INTERPRETATIONS of those "valid" numbers.

How? The numbers are what they are.

Tsk, tsk, it's the editorial commentary that you add... :-)

I especially like his "reason" for maintaining the code test for
all amateurs having below-30-MHz operating privileges: "Morse
code is the SECOND-most popular mode on HF, therefore the code
test 'deserves' to remain!"

I'm glad you like it, Len.

That's simply untrue, Jimmie.

It's a really good, valid reason to keep a
test of basic Morse Code skill for an amateur radio license.

It's your bull**** OPINION, Jimmie. NOT a "fact."

It's not an international requirement. It's not something that
the FCC thinks is necessary for amateur license grants. They
keep it in the rules because the PCTA lobbyists from ARRL and
other olde-tymers insist/demand it is "necessary" (because they
HAD to pass it), and because amateur radio isn't that important
to address rules changes right now.

Enjoy the ARS (Archaic Radiotelegraphy Society) in all its
beepery. Keep on recreating the pioneer days in radio that
you were never a part of, poor guy. Hold those ancient
traditions, standards, and practices forever...make sure
nothing is changed and keep on saying to hell with newcomers,
make them work like Jimmie did as a teenager. After all,
wasn't amateur radio created in YOUR image? :-)