Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Dave Heil

writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , "Carl R. Stevenson"
writes:

"N2EY" wrote in message
. com...
"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in message
...
"N2EY" wrote in message
...

What I wrote was precisely relevant.

Radio gods have the irritating habit of stating that only THEIR
viewpoints are "relevant." :-)

Why, you've habitually dismissed the viewpoints of others with a brusque
"irrelevant" and have stubbornly clung to your own views. Does that
mean that you're a radio god? :-)

You wrote of someone's having not
been alive when something took place. I pointed out that you weren't
alive during some of the things which you've pontificated on in this
venue.

Now, now, Kolonel...you're busy trying to divert attention to someone
else by saying you are "relevant" and anyone disbelieving such a
godlike statement is "irrelevant."

Not at all, Mr. Bluster. I wrote nothing about MY being relevant. You
chastised another for making a statement about something which took
place in the distant past. You make similar statements quite
frequently.

You are worse than the other whiny PCTAs who want to "win" old
arguments that they LOST in here.

Which old arguments were lost? Why are you attempting diversion just
after trying to paint another's comments as a diversion. Do you ever
practice what you preach? :-) :-)

Try reading a BOOK on the REST of the world of radio instead of what
if spoon-fed you by the little publisher in Newington.

"YOU have NO authority to call anyone anything, demean them,
make fun of them, or anything else...yet YOU continue to do so.
That indicates the perversity of your control-freak psychosis."

--Leonard H. Anderson

...and you still don't have any of that authority, divine radio god.

But somehow--maybe you view it as manifest destiny--you have such
authority. You're pathetic.

What the hell are you prattling about?

...about a whiny radio god (yourself) getting all hot and bothered
by negative criticsm and not being able to argue any subject without
attempting misdirection into personalities.

You're all about misdirection and personalties, Len. Your bluster isn't
going to accomplish much.

Did you have a point?

Yes. But, like Reverend Jim, you can't accept it even though everyone
else (except fellow PCTAs) can see it for what it is. :-)

Everyone else? We haven't heard from everyone else. Are you claiming
*chortle* prescience?

You certainly wrote a large number of diversionary words to cover your
gaffe. There was no boom of Japanese ham gear in the 1960's. Is it
clear now?

Again, you refuse to accept what was happening in the markets for
amateur radio equipment.

I refuse to accept your claim because it is incorrect. You don't know
what you're talking about.

The Japanese companies were already IN the ham radio marketplace
in the USA then and they've occupied the prime position ever since.

There were a very few Japanese transmitters and receivers in the very
late 1960s. There was no boom of Japanese equipment in the 1960's. The
Japanese weren't even in the "prime position" in the mid-1970's.

Why no, Len, not as a school boy. I certainly have more governmental
communications experience during the cold war.

Any more tales of wondrous radio pioneering from the International
Cashew Nut exporting capital of the world? :-)

Why? Are you folks in the International Nut capital of the world in the
market for more? :-) :-)

No doubt you were awarded an Intelligence Star for your James Bomb
duties getting the goods on nearby commies in other countries. :-)

Then again, you wouldn't be in a position to know anything about it. :-)

It doesn't take a regulator to truthfully state that you weren't
involved and are not involved in amateur radio.

You mean NOT LICENSED. That's ALL you can claim. :-)

I mean "not involved". You have nothing to do with amateur radio.

Keep up with that "charge," big radio god. It seems about the only
valid statement you can make.

Don't tell me what I am to amateur radio.

No problem. You do that constantly about yourself. :-)

Actually I haven't done much of that here but I'd be entitled to do so.
I am, after all, a licensed radio amateur. I'm a part of amateur radio.
You, on the other hand... :-)

I'm a licensed ham and have been for decades.

Which only proves that you've been able to renew that license
periodically and within the legal time. :-)

I've passed four different written exams and morse exams at three
speeds. I took and passed all the exams they had, Len. You've not even
attempted the most basic, despite your "decades-long interest".

You should also describe the stamping on your hide from the FDA.

You write some pretty peculiar things.

You, quite truthfully are not involved at all in amateur radio.

Well then, HAM RADIO magazine made some dreadful errors in
personnel, did it? :-)

How long has it been since there was such a magazine? Yes, I agree that
HAM RADIO magazine made at least one dreadful error in personnel.

You ought to bring up outright charges of fraud and misrepresentation.
Psycho pSteve does that periodically. Of course, he can't understand
any of the article's technical things so he just says they are "forgeries."

I don't know about fraud but you've certainly been guilty of
misrepresentation here on a number of occasions.

You aren't a judge of what hams do or have done.

Real hams sometimes contain unsafe amounts of Escherichia coli
O157:H7. Be careful of infecting others when spouting off in here.

Nice dodge.

You are not a regulator.

Neither are YOU, big radio god.

I have no need to be. I'm quite happy to be active as a licensed radio
amateur. I'm one-for-two. You're oh-for-two.

Now tell us, great big four-decade experienced AMATEUR radio god,
what have YOU ever done to "advance amateur radio?!?"

No, I don't believe I will, Len.

I don't believe you CAN. :-)

I'm sure it'd be something like your line about Steve: You wouldn't be
capable of understanding. :-)

Show us your patents, your marvelous discoveries, all your
important technical contributions.

Still have your patent fetish?

Never had any "fetish." But, I DO have a patent in radio.

It sure seems like a fetish. I can Google up a number of occasions
where you bring up the existence of your patent while asking others, "Do
YOU have a patent"?

You've had FORTY YEARS of amateurism
and all you can come up with is trying to put down folks in an amateur
newsgroup?!?

Folks? Well, there's you.

You don't hesitate one bit to put down ANYONE who doesn't worship
your statements or ideals. That's clearly evident in this newsgroup
and available on Google.

I don't require worship, nor do my ideals. That's another
misrepresentation on your part. That is clearly evident without a trip
to Google.

Then again, you aren't a ham. You're just a groupie.

"Ham is the butchered meat of swine."

Then you're in the wrong newsgroup.

I'm just advocating the elimination of the morse code test for ANY
US radio license examination.

You've never "just" advocated. You've always done the things of which
you frequently accuse others. You want a minimum age requirement for
entry into amateur radio. When others have argued that no age limit is
needed, you've come close to apoplexy and the capital letters fly as
you've typed "CHILDREN" As to the elimination of morse testing: What's
it to you?

You've got it wrong, Len. I have a license and have had it for decades.

You get a nice gold star for renewing your license periodically.

Other than that, what can you claim?

I can and do claim that 1) you don't hold such a license 2) you aren't a
part of amateur radio 3) that your credibility here on the code test
issue is almost non-existent.

I make contacts via amateur radio daily.

I make contacts with switches and relays. Break those contacts, too.

I'll bet you could break anything.

Daily. :-)

I'm a participant in amateur radio.

Well, that proves the radio god's "validity." One can't get IN amateur
radio without ALREADY being IN amateur radio. Know the morse code.
Worship morse code. It is the key to GREATNESS!

One can get in quite easily. You haven't taken the first step toward
obtaining an amateur radio license of any class. You can't blame others
for your own inertia.

I don't issue catcalls from the sidelines.

You have a "license" to catcall from inside the lines?

I'm in the game, not on the sidelines. I'll be happy to dish out all
the catcalls you can handle.

Of course you do. "Authority" from the US government!

Not from the sidelines. If you'd develop a more positive outlook, you
could be one of our cheerleaders.

Your license grant "authorizes" you to be a horse's ass to anyone not
in league with your godlike opinions, statements, and general personal
insults.

Which simply makes you an unlicensed horse's ass.

No problem. Everyone sees that.

Everyone? You have an ARRL study guide in your pocket?

Get a better life.

I'm quite happy with this one, Len. Yours seems to be a little lacking
in light of your ham radio envy.

What "envy?"

You know. Your envy.

I'm just advocating the elimination of the morse code test for radio
license examinations.

Naw. You know in your heart of hearts that it just isn't so.

You seem to think that anyone doing that is committing some kind of
heresy or blasphemy.

Not at all. I don't think you know the first thing about it.

You seem to think that ALL in this newsgroup MUST have a valid
amateur radio license to participate. You don't have any validity in
that demand so all you do is attempt individual personal insults.

I don't think that at all. You've commented here for years. You've
dropped road apples of insults on numerous individuals who don't happen
to agree with you. Then you get sore when the insults come your way.
You tell others about how tough newsgroups can be but you, the little
old pirhana, can't take it.

You are still under the misconception that a valid amateur radio license
is required to participate in here.

You are still under the misconception about what I believe.

This newsgroup isn't "ham radio." It is supposed to be about talking
policy matters for that. In the United States all us citizens have the
absolute RIGHT to free speech under our Constitution. You won't
accept that, thus you are acting unconstitutionally.

More road apples. I'd give you some oats but you're the wrong end.
The constitution does not require my silence or force any deference
toward your views. It does not prohibit my laughing at you or my
sarcasm directed toward you. You may unwrap the flag and stand down
from your soapbox.

Radio gods are like that. Mere earthly laws don't apply to them.

You can't even make up your mind if I'm a god or not.

Dave K8MN