In article ,
Mike wrote:

In article
,
Telamon wrote:

Yeah, an opinion based on "stacking the deck" to favor your opinion. You
set up a circumstance that was not a part of the discussion, which was
listening at home or in the car.

WTF are you talking about? Listening to AM in a car or at home - at
night - is definitely different from listening to AM in a car or at home
- during the day! Either sucks during a thunderstorm. FM is better
in all of these scenarios.

WTF indeed. Read the thread. Did I write day time and night time was the
same? Noooo.

Since you won't or can't I'll explain one last time for your greater
than average comprehension needs. The discussion was about home and car
AMBCB listening and you added listening in an office building. The
thread is about IBOC (read the subject line). I state that IBOC is not
an improvement and David thinks it is. We both write about scenarios
about listening in a car. Then you jump in sniping the thread about
listening in an office building. You were just introducing new thoughts
that were a little discontinuous to what was being discussed.

You were the one claiming that local AM had no problems at night!

Yes, I understand that also. That's why I'd rather see it move to FM
than to "digital AM".

Make it move? Make what move? I think the idea is to add channels or
streams while the current stations keep what they have maintaining the
status quo.

Where did I say "make it move". I said I'd rather see it move to FM
than to "digital AM", for all of the above reasons!

Reading is *so* fundamental.

You have a real comprehension problem about what you wrote so here you
go from a few lines above.

"That's why I'd rather see it move to FM than to "digital AM".

And now going back through the thread to see what you previously wrote
and sniped I see you mean the program material.

So basically you don't know how to snip appropriately either.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California