From: Dave Heil on Mon 21 Nov 2005 09:41

wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Nov 20, 9:25 am


Amateur radio might be operating weak signal UHF SSB with a multi-mode,
multi-band rig. It might be operating 2m FM through a local repeater.
It might be ragchewing on 40m CW. One constant is that you aren't involved.

I don't do any RF transmission in amateur bands, with the
exception of those bands which are shared with other radio
services. Yet I am able to communicate worldwide without
an amateur radio license or using morse code! And 24/7
without worrying about the ionospheric conditions! :-)

Gosh, you sound awfully important and oh, so involved!

Good going, senior.


I was involved in the 1950s. "State" had their
own TTY nodes in the ACAN-STARCOM-DCS worldwide in the 1950s
and 1960s.

Dark ages, Leonard. You were never employed by the U.S. Department of
State, just as you were never in amateur radio.

"Dark ages?!?" At the beginning of the Cold War?

You were never employed by the U.S. Army or the DoD, were you?

Would you like to know the node letters found on
all messages that were relayed by the Army? I have a nice
list. There's also one at the USAER website which covers
Army in Europe history extensively.

I'm not particularly interested.

Of course not. It might hurt your rants about amateurism.

Why do you live in the past?

Tsk, I don't. Jimmy Noserve loves the past, always
bringing up little factoids of amateur radio history
that happened before his time.

"State" never used an RCA Corporation RACES (Random Access
Card Extract System) archival memory storage machine?

It was not used for long. It wasn't seen as practical.

If it "wasn't seen as practical," WHY did State buy it?

Actually 'buy them' since they bought two.

The GM "tank factory" in Michigan bought a half dozen,
got delivered before State's buy order.


How does that make you involved in my employment?

Were you in the Department of State purchasing department?

Did you approve budget purchases?

I don't think so. If you say they were "impractical,"
then you have defrauded the American taxpayer by
having State buy them! Why do you fleece taxpayers?

Department of State
used those to keep track of a months' worth of messages
into/out of DC. You told me they were of no consequence. :-)

They weren't. Their demise was quick. They were supplanted by state of
the art (for the time) Teletype Model 40 gear. That equipement was used
long past its obsolescence. It was phased out in the late 1980's and
early 1990's. How were you involved in my job?

Whoa! Now you are saying you were in some technical or
strategic planning at State? I thought you only worked
at embassies? [most confusing here trying to get a
straight answer]



I'm not dismissing a great big hobby area involving all of electronics.
I'm stating quite accurately that you aren't involved in amateur radio.

So, in your mind electronics does NOT equate with "radio?"

It does not equate with "amateur radio?"

You hams still using spark transmitters? Tsk, forbidden.

Do you consider U.S. amateur radio to be a HOBBY?

I don't think you do. You want enoblement into some kind
of "higher" service to the nation.

In other words, you're a non-factor in either.

Tsk, tsk, I'm closer to a Mersene number insofar as factors
are concerned! BSEG

from:
http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cachedsGm4-HerQJ:wurmbrand.uconn.edu/research/files/Leiden-1999.pdf+mersene+number&hl=en&client=firefox-a

"No large Mersene number was proven to be prime".

Davie, that's WHY they are called "Mersene" numbers.

You didn't know that? Tsk. You had to look it up... :-(


You must be past your prime, Len. :-)

Ha. Ha. Ha. Davie made a funny!


I don't know why it'd bother radio amateurs. I'm sure that you meant
that the Army gave up the use of morse for long haul, point-to-point
bulk relayed message traffic. Otherwise your statement could be seem as
incorrect. Amateur radio isn't about the Army.

Even if the Army gave birth to MARS? :-)

The amateur NTS could take some tips and pointers from the DCS.

But, that's digressing. Amateur radio is about amateurism.

Like the ARRL and their "radiogram" forms so that netties
can look so very "professional" in forwarding "telegrams." :-)


That's lucky for us. Otherwise your already long and irrelevant posts
would just grow longer.

Hey, be happy! This gives you all the more space to tell
your tales about all that important national communications
you did from African countries like Guinea-Bisseau! :-)

You can regale the group with your military exploits in a
"country at war" (Vietnam, 30+ years ago). Did you go
far "in country," Davie?

How about all the space work you did when you said you were
"with NASA there"?


Yep, when something is simple enough, many folks will opt for it rather
than attempting that which is more difficult. Many never go beyond the
easiest license despite the limited privileges it offers.

Such as long-time amateur radiotelegraphers who've never
ventured behind the front panels of their radios in order
to understand how they worked. :-)

Your clause doesn't address limited privileges. :-)

I didn't have any "clause." I asked a question. Pay attention.

Yes, I am familiar
with those. Their "radio skill" never goes beyond their
key, their ears, or the "official" jargon they've picked
up from older days, those used by older "radio experts."

Do you know any radio telephonists who've never ventured beyond the
front panels of their equipment? Does their skill extend beyond their
microphones? Have they picked up any "official" jargon from older days?
Perhaps your rant was intended only as a slam against anyone who is both
a telegrapher and a radio amateur.

I was addressing - specifically - who I addressed, not
"radio telephonists." You are attempting to misdirect.
The word you should have used is 'radiotelephony.'

NPRM 05-143 is singularly about the telegraphy test. [that's
what this "english teacher" of the thread title was commenting
on] That NPRM has NOTHING to do with radiotelephony, radiodata,
teletypewriter over radio, slow or fast-scan television,
facsimile over radio. The amateur radio license tests have
NO test elements for physically OPERATING any radio, are not
required to have radio equipment AT a license exam site.

The sole manual test for anything at any amateur license exam
is about telegraphy, telegraphy as used on amateur radio (there
is NO landline telegraphy tested), more technically,
radiotelegraphy. As it is NOW, that is.

The written test elements are prepared, both questions and
multiple-choice question answers, by the VEC QPC. Those
cover "radio theory" (actually electronics in general since
there are no exclusive-to-amateur-radio circuits) and
Commission regulations. While some questions pertain to
"radio operating," there is no actual, hands-on, demonstratable
ability to OPERATE any radio, let alone amateur radio. Some in
here as well as in commentary on the NPRM misuse "operating"
to refer almost exclusively to RADIOTELEGRAPHY.

Am I saying that many radio amateurs don't know squat about
radio theory? ABSOLUTELY. I charge that based on MY life
experience in answering, as politely as possible, questions
of rather elementary level on radio theory. I was answering
questions, giving CORRECT answers, as a NON-amateur but also
as a very professional radio-knowledgeable person. All too
many of those questions from radio amateurs chronologically
older than I was were so simplistic, so indicative of a basic
understanding of radio and propagation principles that I
would lump them as less than Novice class amateurs. I could
care less that they might be able to do 40 WPM radiotelegraphy
with "perfect copy" any time. I could care less if they had
earned every possible "radiosport" contest as amateurs. They
were still deficient in a basic understanding of radio theory,
deficient at an elementary level. In a radio activity that
grants BOTH an operator and station license, it showed me
that they couldn't possibly meet the technical regulations
of amateur radio to match their lofty rank-status-privileges
they were granted.


Vic Clark was a silent key before I entered the Foreign Service.

Not my fault. shrug

You told us that you exchanged letters with him.

You told us - many times - you entered employment with the
Department of State. shrug

I have NO proof that the late Vic Clark ever actually saw
my correspondence; such was all typewritten and a "signature"
could have been done by a secretary.

If you wish to make an ISSUE out of that, feel free. I will
have to give in because I never kept that correspondence
and cannot prove it happened.

There! A WEAK POINT! Jump in and make the BIG ISSUE.



Who wrote "I've met people like you, always bragging about..."

It wasn't a brag, Len. After all, you were the one who wrote about
notables coming to my embassy. Oh, that's right--you snipped that part.

I didn't bring up any "notables" until after you did...

What has all that name-dropping to do with amateur radio? :-)

That's what I thought when *you* brought it up.

"I brought it up?" I never worked at any embassy. You have
a time warp condition?



Then again, you aren't likely to know. You aren't a ham and you aren't
an ARRL member.

I'm FAR LESS likely to be an ARRL/NAAR member than a licensed
radio amateur...unless they do some drastic changes to their
public policy.

Every single licensed radio amateur in the United States was
NOT a ham until they passed their first amateur test. Why do
you keep harping on that?

You keep demanding that the only persons who can talk about
amateur radio regulations MUST be a licensed radio amateur?
Why is that? The FCC is NOT a club...it is a radio regulating
agency...for ALL civil radio. The FCC is NOT a fraternal
organization, was never chartered to be one.

The "National Association for Amateur Radio" (nee' ARRL) is
the "club." Even so, their membership is only one of every
five U.S. amateur radio licensees. Why aren't there more?
The percentages of membership have never become greater than
a quarter of all licensees.

Your blatant problem is some weird self-righteous elitism
wherein you claim that no one licensed can "know" anything
about amateur radio. That's just a plain, simple lie.
Were it true then there would be NO newcomers to amateur
radio licensing because they would not know enough to pass
any test!

What nightly footsteps are in evidence and why would they be yellow?

Inquire of REAL USMC veterans about "yellow footsteps."

Why?

Refer to the message exchange between K4YZ and Frank Gilliland,
a REAL USMC veteran. It has been going on in here quite
recently. You haven't seen it? You are not paying attention,
are not aware and informed.

You haven't been following the expose' of the self-renowned
Amateur Extra now dubbed Dudly the Imposter.

Oh, I know that you've found another insulting name for someone.

If that is an insult, then it is MILD in comparison to the
insults he has hurled to many others over his years in here.

If you wish to elevate a fraudulent "veteran" to some lofty
status of "superiority," then you are no better, perhaps
lesser than that sorry excuse for a former military person.



So that'd be unlike any real march on Washington, where all were united
in a common goal. In the Civil Rights march, were more than half of the
marchers *against* civil rights for blacks?

Elimination of the morse code test in amateur radio regulations
is NOWHERE NEAR THE humanitarian level of EQUAL rights for non-
whites.

Is a "march on Washington" ONLY about civil rights in your
mind? Try the "Bonus March" of 1933, April 29 starting
date. Participants even camped out on the Mall for days.
The U.S. Army was ordered to herd them.

Are you trying to "herd in" protesters? Do you fancy yourself
to be in authority? You aren't. You were NEVER in the
U.S. Army. You don't even know what I am referring to...
even though it is a shameful bit of history of the USA.

It's been only four months
since the release of NPRM 05-143 (on July 19, 2005) but in
the 11 month official period of WT Docket 98-143 on
Restructuring, that garnered only about 2200 filings.

And? What percentage of radio amateurs filed? What percentage of the
general public filed?

Ask Joe Speroni. Rightsell calls him the "unofficial
statistician of amateur radio." What did Speroni do about
that "English department" filing wherein the English
teacher stated outright she had NO activity in amateur
radio and was NOT going to get an amateur license. Speroni
counted her for "support" of his "statistics." What of all
those law students filing, 18 in all. None of them are
licensees and none say they are going to get a license.

You love Rightsell, don't you? You get on my case because
I filed a Reply to Comments of his "two-year-olds" filing.



You aren't wrapped very tight.

True, I am (at time of writing) sitting in shirtsleeves,
the office window open, temperature gauge at the corner
of the radio clock displaying 71.3 degrees F.
If you mean that remark as an insult, then it has fallen
flat before the message got here. Please do not litter.

I meant it as a statement of that which is evident, but I don't blame
you for wanting to snip that which illustrated my point.

Explain a colloquial quip as being "evident."

Explain why I am supposed to "accept" an insult which
demeans my intelligence and/or emotional stability.

Or is this the usual Morseman Extra Double Standard wherein
Morsemen can make insults and be acceptible, but others
may not?



"Profiles" work two ways, indeed in many ways. Yours
can, and has been done (in part) several times.

Was that the one you plagiarized from Jim's work?

PARODY is perfectly acceptible.

I've NEVER been guilty of plagiarism, nor did I engage in any.



What's it to you?

You really can't answer a plain, simple, direct question...


Then why do YOU insist that all radio amateurs "love" the
specific things YOU "love?"

I do not.

Tsk, tsk, you DO! See little gems of an accusatory nature
such as I should have obtained an amateur radio license
before accepting professional radio employment!

There's more, but you will try to get out such charges. :-)

Your motivation is at question there.

Your understanding of logic is at question here.

No, MOTIVATION. You try to personalize all opinions, then
you generate false "reasons" why all must do as you
specify, including liking what you like.

What MOTIVATES you to behave in such a manner?

What MOTIVATES you to get all hot and bothered about ONE
Reply to Comments of Robert Rightsell and NOT say anything
about my other, earlier Replies to Comments?

YOUR motivation is highly suspect.



Does Palomar know about you? Does Schmidt help you?

I'll let you think some more about another question you
did not answer... :-)

What were you telling me about your not having to respond to questions? :-)

Did Schmidt help you in amateur astronomy?

That's a plain, simple, direct question.



I have not obtained any amateur radio license, true...

Precisely!

"Precisely" what? Is amateur radio a forbidden subject to anyone
without a federal license in amateur radio?!?

Why do you wish to forbid any discussion?

Why do you wish to heckle others who do not have opinions
equal to yours?

Your motivation in all that activity is suspect.



I had been attempting to levitate. Then I tried to invent anti-
gravity. No success. Something is holding me down...

Have you decided to use that line over and over until someone thinks it
is a) original to you or b) funny?

a. It IS original.

b. The stand-up comic (who paid me to write material for him) found
it was funny to his audience.

c. I have more...but they are wasted on this audience.


Sorry, you're thinking of Val Germann. He's been an unmodified
Tech for over three years. [my micro-fiber jacket isn't
tattered, you've got the wrong guy...]

You're wearing a jacket in 73 degree temperatures?

Tsk. Never said that. You've connected disparate parts
in an attempt to demean another. Not nice.

Around you one may have to wear a "full metal jacket."

:-)


You are not a member.

I am not a member of the FCC. Neither are you. shrug



Just how big is that "lodge hall" you tried to write about?

It is big enough to hold well over 600,000 members.

United States amateur radio is NOT a "Lodge." That you think
so is not a definition nor a legality of existance.

The FCC is NOT a fraternal organization nor a fraternal order
governor.


You DO have such difficulty with the written word, don't
you? Tsk, tsk. Work on comprehension rather that strict,
obedient literalism. This isn't an English Composition
high school class.

I realized that when I found that there isn't a competent instructor on
hand.

Joe Speroni thinks differently.


Ever hear of Phil Amidon? He retired from NBC West Coast
Headquarters years ago. He'd already started a small
business selling iron powder toroid cores and other little
kits on sale in many radio-electronics parts stores
nationwide. Bigger corporation bought his company.

Yep. They don't make anything. They re-package and sell products made
by another firm.

Are you sure it isn't BILL Amidon? :-) Why no "correction?" :-)

Amidon is/was a licensed radio amateur; I don't know if
he is SK or not. Amidon ads have been in QST for over two
decades. Hams who actually build radio things should be
familiar with the name.

Does this mean you are dissing a fellow radio amateur? Tsk.



Yep, extreme literalism. "Back of the bus" kind of bigotry.

That's incorrect. The seating on the bus is open. You haven't boarded.

Then why do you keep trying to shut the door?

Your "motivation" seems one of self-righteous bigotry, allowing
that "door" open to only those you deem desireable.


Tell me, do you hang around VE exam sessions, questioning
those who enter the door whether they are "upgrading" or
are newbies? Do you act like a Dill sergeant with the
newbies? Chew them out, don't permit them to speak until
spoken to? I get the distinct feeling you do that. :-)

You aren't yet a newbie. :-)

Ohm my, there you go again. Nobody can talk in any venue
without YOUR approval?


Morse code is alive but unwell...

See, this is what I mean when I say that you make frequent factual
errors. I invite you to tune your Icom receiver to the low ends of the
bands 160-10m this coming weekend.

Why? I have no personal interest in morse code and no interest
in amateur radio contesting. Invitation denied.

One can listen OUTSIDE the amateur radio bands and NOT hear
much radiotelegraphy. Hardly a beep to be heard...still lots
of SSB and AM voice, data (TORs mostly), international
broadcasting, standard time signals. Not much morse code.

Let's see...your "stock answer" will be the imperative that
"this is an amateur radio forum and that's all that can be
talked about?"

... dwelling only in the musculeminds...

Musculeminds? What's a muscule? Is that like your miscue on "missle"?
Your noggin must be "musculebound".

Ohm my, I made a typo, a Freudian slip confusing "miniscule"
with "muscle." :-)


You aren't wrapped too tight.

Now now, you are making an allusion to lack of intelligence
and/or emotional stability again, aren't you? :-)


Actually, Len, statistics say that I should be at least a couple of
decades from being done.

Let's say this: You sure as hell aren't rare or medium!

I was rare from Sierra Leone, but not as rare as from Guinea-Bissau.

But you sure aren't well done either. "Steak tartare." :-)

Reflect on the old saying, "there are lies, damn lies, and
statistics." All are connected as equals. :-)

I will be reading your SK notice in the ARRL/NAAR newsletter.

The actuarial tables say that you're likely to be wrong.

We'll see... :-)

The League
doesn't publish Silent Key notices in a newsletter. They're published
in QST.

Just today I peeked at the ARRL home page, the one obtained
by accessing www.arrl.org. Just below half of the items of
news is "Former ARRL HQ Staffer Paul R. Shafer, KB1BE, SK."

The ARRL web page is NOT the pages of QST.


I will think back on you then.

I guess you told me.

Right on, senior! :-)