View Single Post
  #56   Report Post  
Old December 30th 06, 10:50 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
[email protected] N2EY@AOL.COM is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 877
Default Code Free "It's part of the dumbing down of America," according to CDC

wrote:
From: on Sat, Dec 30 2006 3:42 am
wrote:
wrote:


Last night I did a quick copy of the
All-Time Posters on RRAP and here is what they had for 28
Dec 06:


-me- 6,191


No, Len, that number is way too low.


Google provided it. I just copied the numbers that Google
put up of the TOP TEN. shrug


It's inaccurate. You did not interrogate Google correctly, and so the
number you gave is much lower than the actual number.

If you can't be accurate, why should anyone trust you?

says the Top Ten listing is "wrong."


Nope.

I'm saying *you* are giving a number that is very inaccurate. 6,191 is
a lot less than 10,993.

That's a NEW
territory of criticsm for him! :-)


"Criticsm"?

The WORST I can be accused of is being incomplete. :-)


In error is more like it.

cribs license class totals from the AH0A website
and implies they are "his" since he NEVER shows the origin
of his data. shrug


No, that is not correct.

The totals I post every two weeks do not come from AH0A.

I have posted my source here. You are either too lazy or too
incompetent to find it ;-)

If your ability to count *your own postings* results in a number that
is so inaccurate, why should anyone trust your counts of other things?


If I had "counted my own postings" I would have done so and
listed all my 'handles' (screennames). :-)


But you didn't. That means you intentionally posted a number that was
too low.

Some would say you tried to deceive us.

If your ability to represent your own history of posting to rrap is so
error-filled, why should anyone trust your recounting of other history?


Jim, would you mind tallying up all of your postings under all of your
screen names?

Thanks a bunch.


Brian, you're asking the impossible! :-)


Not impossible at all. Just unlikely.