On Mar 3, 10:20�am, "K4YZ" wrote:
On Mar 2, 9:54?pm, "
wrote:
From: on Fri, Mar 2 2007 3:05 am
On Feb 28, 3:22 pm, "K4YZ" wrote:
QRZ is laden with all sorts of brand new licensees, yet none of
them are the "right out of the box 6 years ago" Leonard H Anderson.

*7* years, Steve. January 19, 2000. ;-)

Oh, my, Jimmie Noserve has made that a "holiday" event?

* * Nope.

* * We just keep it out there to remind everyone what a lying dweeb
you are, Lennie.

Steve,

Who is "we"?

I was simply reminding you that it has been more than
*7* years since Len wrote that he was "going for Extra right
out of the box." He also wrote a few months back that
he could pass the Extra with or without a Morse Code test,
but he never made good on that boast.

Also, what is the point of calling someone names like
"lying dweeb" and "Lennie"? All it does is bring you
down to their level of childish behavior.

* * Or inept...But does it really matter?

Len has since written that his "Extra right out of the box"
statement was merely a "throwaway comment" and was
"taken out of context".

Like I said...he's gonna be a no-show.

Well, maybe. And maybe not. Time will tell.

So will William, an arrow, and an apple...

Most liars like him usually are.

If he does what he said he'd do back then,
he wouldn't be a liar or a no-show, right?

* * *Point taken and rightly so.

Well, there you have it. Why call someone a liar
if they can prove you wrong by their own actions?

*Far be it for Lennie to actually DO
what he says he's going to do.

Maybe. Anyone with sense knows that.

Something beyond 1930s state of the art, I hope.

Well, let's see......

In the 1930s, radio amateurs were using Morse Code,
AM voice, and SSB voice modes, plus some forms
of radio control of model aircraft. They were using MF,
HF, and VHF. All of that still goes on today.

What rig should he buy for CASH?

How about an Icom IC-7800? ?Yaesu FT-2000D?
IC-756PROIII? ?FT-DX9000? ?Kenwood TS-2000?
Yaesu FT DX 9000MP?

* * *How about "Nun Of The Above"...?!?!

That's "none of the above", Steve.

* * *All of those radios require a federal license to operate other
than to just turn on an listen to or admire the blinking lights.

* * *You don't have a federal license that allows you to use any of
them in the intended manner.

* * (BTW: *Please don't waste our time with tales of your
"professional" licensure...Your GROL is useless for Amateur
applications as it does not grant station privileges or authorize a
callsign)

What antenna?

How about a tower-mounted rotatable Log-Periodic?

* * Not allowed in your neighborhood, Lennie.

Actually, Steve, you don't know that.

One of the most common TV antennas is a log
periodic. With some modification, one could
be used for VHF/UHF amateur radio communication.

Not that I'm recommending it, but it *could* be done.

On a U S Tower HDX-5106MDPL?

A Bencher Inc. "Skyhawk 3X10"? A Butternut HF9V?

* * *Just numbers copied out of a catalog to you, Your Putziness.

What's with the namecalling, Steve?

The products named could possibly be used. Recall too
that Len has referred to an alleged "northern house"
which is not the Lanark Street address. Perhaps the
"northern house" has more land around it.

CC&Rs?

Gasp! I have to get one of those?!? I don't
have any! ?HORRORS!

* * No...You don't.

* * But you have a zoning code which still won't let you erect that
Log periodic on your block.

All depends what sort of LP is meant.

btw, "CC&R" means "Codes, Covenants and Restrictions".
It's a pretty safe bet that there are detailed building codes
for Len's Lanark Street property, and that putting up a
tower requires a building permit at the very least. There may
also be maximum height regulations, etc.

There's also the fact that the antenna must not extend over adjacent
properties without permission of the owners.

Operating procedures?

ABSOLUTELY! By-the-Book Letter-Perfect as it was
in the 1930s so shall it be today!!!

Commit just ONE slight infraction and I would be
EXCOMMUNICATED!!! Stripped of all licenses and
radios by Riley H. himself!!!

**You have to HAVE a license to be stripped of, Lennie.

* *And if you're using "1930's" procedures, you'll sound like an
idiot on 21st century Amateur Radio...

What is this fascination with the "1930s", anyway?

If something works well, why change it?

I am told that in the 1930s, people answered the telephone
"Hello", same as today. Hams in those days called CQ,
gave their own callsigns last when calling, used Q signals,
RST, etc. - same as today. The common "QWERTY"
keyboard arrangement of 2007 was in common use in the
1930s on mechanical typewriters and teleprinters.

So in many ways, we are all still using "1930s"
procedures today. Nothing wrong with that, either.

Vanity call?

*VANITY* CALL?!?!? Oh, my...

Can't use "N2EY" or "K4YZ" or "K8MN"...those VANITY
calls are TAKEN!!!

Actually, N2EY and K8MN are not vanity callsigns. K4YZ
and WK3C are vanity callsigns.

If someone looks up a callsign on qrz.com, then requests
'detailed information', the FCC database codes are
displayed. The codes tell things like which radio service
the call is assigned to, type of station (club, individual, etc.)
and whether the call is a vanity call or not.

N2EY is not a vanity call. Neither is K8MN. Both were
sequentially issued decades ago.

Think about it.

* * *Eight Days...No Lennie...No surprises there..................

Is that the best way to greet a possible newcomer, Steve?

---

It's clear that the rules change has resulted in a lot of
applications, which increases the processing time.

It's way too early to see long-term trends based on
short-term results. That's just common sense.

For example, back on Feb 22, 2007, the last day before
the rules changes, there were 654,680 current unexpired
FCC-issued amateur radio licenses held by individuals.
Of those, 324,326 (49.54%) were Technician or
Tech Plus class licenses (293,508 and 30,818, respectively).

As of March 3, 2007, yesterday, there were 654,551
current unexpired FCC-issued amateur radio licenses
held by individuals. That's a *decrease* of 129.

Of those 654,551 hams on March 3,
323,026 (49.35%) were Technician or
Tech Plus class licenses (292,598 and 30,428, respectively).

Does that mean the changes have failed to cause growth?
I don't think so - I think it's simply too early to tell.

Whether Len is part of that or not really isn't clear
yet. Perhaps he is, perhaps he's not, and
simply trying to get a reaction.

Len has already admitted that he puts intentional
errors in his postings in order to get a response.

Do you really *want* Len to get an amateur license,
Steve?

73 de Jim, N2EY