Mike Coslo wrote:
charlesb wrote:
I don't have any strong preference about the Code / No Code issue, but I
have a well developed opinion about the group of hams who have endlessly
repeated the same tired flamewar crapola for years on this newsgroup, over
the Code / No Code issue.

Less than a dozen "hams" have used this issue as an excuse to turn this
newsgroup into a running flame war that has gone on for years, much to the
detriment of the hobby. People look at this newsgroup to see what hams are
like - and what they see would reflect poorly on any hobby.


Sorry Charles, but that is pretty much the purpose of this newsgroup.
This group is not representative of hams in general, it is a pit for
those of us with the inclination towards argument to play in.

That beats having us out with the general population, no?

- Mike KB3EIA -

Ten years ago, I'd have agreed that nothing on Usenet should
have been confused with "The General Population".

Since about 1995 though, I'm not sure but what Usenet isn't just
exactly The General Population. Or perhaps just close enough
for Government Work.

There are certainly *millions* of people who have read a few
articles in the rec.radio.amateur.* groups in the last 2 or 3
years. And *millions* of people (including most hams that
looked) quickly went on to something not so clearly devoid of
intelligent life. They took with them a very poor image of
Amateur Radio.

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://web.newsguy.com/floyd_davidson
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)