| Page 2 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
license renewal
wrote in message oups.com... From: Slow Code on Fri, Aug 18 2006 4:26 pm 2: The passing score for written exams needs to be raised to 85%. Wayyyy too low. 100%! Nothing less... Hey now wait a minute, 85% is probably the absolute best he (SC) could do - thus making that the ceiling! So, if you make it 100% - he too wouldn't be licensed! DAMNED........... that would be a shame. :) L. |
Lennie Confuses His Amateur Radio Rant's for His Marital Bed Again
|
Lennie Confuses His Amateur Radio Rant's for His Marital Bed Again
|
Lennie Confuses His Amateur Radio Rant's for His Marital Bed Againis Amy Fireproof?
|
It's amazing what people will say to try to justify dumbing down Amateur Radio.
Nada Tapu wrote in
: On Fri, 18 Aug 2006 21:07:15 -0500, "wa0kbz" wrote: Glen Don't know if I 100% agree with your code speeds but I do thing the NO Code should be for 1 year and none renewable. I had to take my license in front of the FCC and not so VE who may or may not help you out to get a license. As I am a big VHFer I don't know how these NO Code guys are going to understand beacons. They are all code and most at 10 ~ 20 wpm. I guess the next thing will be, they will want all beacons either digital or voice. YUK! Not up in the GHZ range yet but maybe some day. 73, Bill, WA0KBZ Right on, Bill! Thanks for your thoughts. NT It's funny, and most telling. The no-code hams have everything over 30 MHz, but it's the code hams that are the one's moving ham radio forward and doing anything technical wise. I guess the no-coders are still trying to figure things out. SC |
It's amazing what people will say to try to justify dumbing downAmateur Radio.
Slow Code wrote:
It's funny, and most telling. The no-code hams have everything over 30 MHz, but it's the code hams that are the one's moving ham radio forward and doing anything technical wise. If that's true, it's certainly a change from half a century ago when we HF hams observed the VHF/UHF hams revolutionizing amateur radio with their technical expertise. -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com |
It's amazing what people will say to try to justify dumbing down Amateur Radio.
"Cecil Moore" wrote in message m... Slow Code wrote: It's funny, and most telling. The no-code hams have everything over 30 MHz, but it's the code hams that are the one's moving ham radio forward and doing anything technical wise. If that's true, it's certainly a change from half a century ago when we HF hams observed the VHF/UHF hams revolutionizing amateur radio with their technical expertise. -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com Not at all. As usual, SC is again proving he is a bitter little man. |
It's amazing what people will say to try to justify dumbing down Amateur Radio.
Cecil Moore wrote in
m: Slow Code wrote: It's funny, and most telling. The no-code hams have everything over 30 MHz, but it's the code hams that are the one's moving ham radio forward and doing anything technical wise. If that's true, it's certainly a change from half a century ago when we HF hams observed the VHF/UHF hams revolutionizing amateur radio with their technical expertise. And half a century ago those VHF/UHF hams had passed a code test. They weren't no-coders, they were motivated and did what it took. Today's no-codes aren't motivated and don't want to make an effort, therefore they're probably not going to be motivated to move things forward either. SC |
It's amazing what people will say to try to justify dumbing down Amateur Radio.
On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 00:11:42 GMT, Slow Code spake
thusly: Cecil Moore wrote in om: Slow Code wrote: It's funny, and most telling. The no-code hams have everything over 30 MHz, but it's the code hams that are the one's moving ham radio forward and doing anything technical wise. If that's true, it's certainly a change from half a century ago when we HF hams observed the VHF/UHF hams revolutionizing amateur radio with their technical expertise. And half a century ago those VHF/UHF hams had passed a code test. They weren't no-coders, they were motivated and did what it took. Today's no-codes aren't motivated and don't want to make an effort, therefore they're probably not going to be motivated to move things forward either. Your defamation is well noted. Democracy just sucks, doesn't it? |
It's amazing what people will say to try to justify dumbing downAmateur Radio.
Slow Code wrote:
And half a century ago those VHF/UHF hams had passed a code test. They weren't no-coders, they were motivated and did what it took. Today's no-codes aren't motivated and don't want to make an effort, therefore they're probably not going to be motivated to move things forward either. Actually, the Technician License was offered with reduced code requirements for hams who were more interested in technical experimentation than in ragchewing. -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com |
It's amazing what people will say to try to justify dumbing down Amateur Radio.
|
It's amazing what people will say to try to justify dumbing down Amateur Radio.
On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 01:08:42 GMT, Slow Code spake
thusly: wrote in oups.com: Cecil Moore wrote: Slow Code wrote: It's funny, and most telling. The no-code hams have everything over 30 MHz, but it's the code hams that are the one's moving ham radio forward and doing anything technical wise. If that's true, it's certainly a change from half a century ago when we HF hams observed the VHF/UHF hams revolutionizing amateur radio with their technical expertise. Uhhhhhhhh...Cecil...??!?! Did you actually make that up, or just quote someone else who is equally ill informed? Most of the people who were "moving forward" half a century ago were ALSO folks who were active on and well known in HF circles... Unless, of course, you're now going to take Lennie's spin and tell us that any / everything reported in QST, CQ, etc, was only "self-serviing rhetoric"...?!?! Try again. Steve, K4YZ Anyone that puts out an argument to keep the code requirement gets teased by Cecil. He loves to throw out some goof-ball counter reply to try to be-little the original argument. Pot, meet kettle. -- (Jim, single dad to Lesleigh [Autistic] 04/20/94) "What, Me Worry?" A. E. Newman Please note: All unsolicited e-mail sent to me may, at my discretion, be posted in this newsgroup verbatim. |
It's amazing what people will say to try to justify dumbing down Amateur Radio.
Slow Code wrote: wrote in ups.com: Anyone that puts out an argument to keep the code requirement gets teased by Cecil. He loves to throw out some goof-ball counter reply to try to be-little the original argument. if you want to stop ham radio being dumbed down you need to turn in your license and BAN the use of CW which has made mindless wrecks of people like yourself I presonal don't advocate that course of action but it is the way stop the dumbing down of radio SC |
It's amazing what people will say to try to justify dumbing down Amateur Radio.
Opus- wrote in
: On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 01:08:42 GMT, Slow Code spake thusly: wrote in roups.com: Cecil Moore wrote: Slow Code wrote: It's funny, and most telling. The no-code hams have everything over 30 MHz, but it's the code hams that are the one's moving ham radio forward and doing anything technical wise. If that's true, it's certainly a change from half a century ago when we HF hams observed the VHF/UHF hams revolutionizing amateur radio with their technical expertise. Uhhhhhhhh...Cecil...??!?! Did you actually make that up, or just quote someone else who is equally ill informed? Most of the people who were "moving forward" half a century ago were ALSO folks who were active on and well known in HF circles... Unless, of course, you're now going to take Lennie's spin and tell us that any / everything reported in QST, CQ, etc, was only "self-serviing rhetoric"...?!?! Try again. Steve, K4YZ Anyone that puts out an argument to keep the code requirement gets teased by Cecil. He loves to throw out some goof-ball counter reply to try to be-little the original argument. Pot, meet kettle. No. All my arguments are good sound arguments. SC |
It's amazing what people will say to try to justify dumbing down Amateur Radio.
On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 00:44:42 GMT, Slow Code spake
thusly: Opus- wrote in : On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 01:08:42 GMT, Slow Code spake thusly: wrote in groups.com: Cecil Moore wrote: Slow Code wrote: It's funny, and most telling. The no-code hams have everything over 30 MHz, but it's the code hams that are the one's moving ham radio forward and doing anything technical wise. If that's true, it's certainly a change from half a century ago when we HF hams observed the VHF/UHF hams revolutionizing amateur radio with their technical expertise. Uhhhhhhhh...Cecil...??!?! Did you actually make that up, or just quote someone else who is equally ill informed? Most of the people who were "moving forward" half a century ago were ALSO folks who were active on and well known in HF circles... Unless, of course, you're now going to take Lennie's spin and tell us that any / everything reported in QST, CQ, etc, was only "self-serviing rhetoric"...?!?! Try again. Steve, K4YZ Anyone that puts out an argument to keep the code requirement gets teased by Cecil. He loves to throw out some goof-ball counter reply to try to be-little the original argument. Pot, meet kettle. No. All my arguments are good sound arguments. Oh PuhlEEEZE!!! Spelling Canada with a "K" is a good sound argument? Calling me a "lazy ass" is a good sound argument? Claiming I get a handout is a good sound argument? You have NEVER put out ANY kind of argument at all!!! Why don't you try to cite some source that back up any of your "good sound arguments". Free hint: Hurling insults and innuendo does NOT a "good sound argument" make. Hope this helps. -- (Jim, single dad to Lesleigh [Autistic] 04/20/94) "What, Me Worry?" A. E. Newman Please note: All unsolicited e-mail sent to me may, at my discretion, be posted in this newsgroup verbatim. |
It's amazing what people will say to try to justify dumbing down Amateur Radio.
Opus- wrote in
: On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 00:44:42 GMT, Slow Code spake thusly: Opus- wrote in m: On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 01:08:42 GMT, Slow Code spake thusly: wrote in egroups.com: Cecil Moore wrote: Slow Code wrote: It's funny, and most telling. The no-code hams have everything over 30 MHz, but it's the code hams that are the one's moving ham radio forward and doing anything technical wise. If that's true, it's certainly a change from half a century ago when we HF hams observed the VHF/UHF hams revolutionizing amateur radio with their technical expertise. Uhhhhhhhh...Cecil...??!?! Did you actually make that up, or just quote someone else who is equally ill informed? Most of the people who were "moving forward" half a century ago were ALSO folks who were active on and well known in HF circles... Unless, of course, you're now going to take Lennie's spin and tell us that any / everything reported in QST, CQ, etc, was only "self-serviing rhetoric"...?!?! Try again. Steve, K4YZ Anyone that puts out an argument to keep the code requirement gets teased by Cecil. He loves to throw out some goof-ball counter reply to try to be-little the original argument. Pot, meet kettle. No. All my arguments are good sound arguments. Oh PuhlEEEZE!!! Spelling Canada with a "K" is a good sound argument? Calling me a "lazy ass" is a good sound argument? Claiming I get a handout is a good sound argument? You have NEVER put out ANY kind of argument at all!!! Why don't you try to cite some source that back up any of your "good sound arguments". Free hint: Hurling insults and innuendo does NOT a "good sound argument" make. Hope this helps. I'm sorry Opus, but I refuse to lie. You did get a hand-out, and you're Lazy because you refuse to learn CW to 20wpm, and too lazy to to use it. You don't want to be a good capable communicator in every way. That's just how it is. I'm sorry if the truth seems like an insult. You're right about one thing, I spelled Kanada wrong, I meant to type KKKanaduh. Eh. SC |
It's amazing what people will say to try to justify dumbing down Amateur Radio.
On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 01:01:03 GMT, Slow Code spake
thusly: Opus- wrote in : On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 00:44:42 GMT, Slow Code spake thusly: Opus- wrote in : On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 01:08:42 GMT, Slow Code spake thusly: wrote in legroups.com: Cecil Moore wrote: Slow Code wrote: It's funny, and most telling. The no-code hams have everything over 30 MHz, but it's the code hams that are the one's moving ham radio forward and doing anything technical wise. If that's true, it's certainly a change from half a century ago when we HF hams observed the VHF/UHF hams revolutionizing amateur radio with their technical expertise. Uhhhhhhhh...Cecil...??!?! Did you actually make that up, or just quote someone else who is equally ill informed? Most of the people who were "moving forward" half a century ago were ALSO folks who were active on and well known in HF circles... Unless, of course, you're now going to take Lennie's spin and tell us that any / everything reported in QST, CQ, etc, was only "self-serviing rhetoric"...?!?! Try again. Steve, K4YZ Anyone that puts out an argument to keep the code requirement gets teased by Cecil. He loves to throw out some goof-ball counter reply to try to be-little the original argument. Pot, meet kettle. No. All my arguments are good sound arguments. Oh PuhlEEEZE!!! Spelling Canada with a "K" is a good sound argument? Calling me a "lazy ass" is a good sound argument? Claiming I get a handout is a good sound argument? You have NEVER put out ANY kind of argument at all!!! Why don't you try to cite some source that back up any of your "good sound arguments". Free hint: Hurling insults and innuendo does NOT a "good sound argument" make. Hope this helps. I'm sorry Opus, but I refuse to lie. You did get a hand-out, and you're Lazy because you refuse to learn CW to 20wpm, and too lazy to to use it. You don't want to be a good capable communicator in every way. That's just how it is. I'm sorry if the truth seems like an insult. You're right about one thing, I spelled Kanada wrong, I meant to type KKKanaduh. Eh. Tell me right now what "handout" I have received. Back up your "good sound arguments" or forever be a PROVEN liar! You have lied and have been caught. You can't wiggle out of it. Once again..you are a proven liar and a fool. You are a disgrace to the amateur radio community. -- (Jim, single dad to Lesleigh [Autistic] 04/20/94) "What, Me Worry?" A. E. Newman Please note: All unsolicited e-mail sent to me may, at my discretion, be posted in this newsgroup verbatim. |
It's amazing what people will say to try to justify dumbing down Amateur Radio.
Opus- wrote in
: On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 01:01:03 GMT, Slow Code spake thusly: Opus- wrote in m: On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 00:44:42 GMT, Slow Code spake thusly: Opus- wrote in m: On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 01:08:42 GMT, Slow Code spake thusly: wrote in glegroups.com: Cecil Moore wrote: Slow Code wrote: It's funny, and most telling. The no-code hams have everything over 30 MHz, but it's the code hams that are the one's moving ham radio forward and doing anything technical wise. If that's true, it's certainly a change from half a century ago when we HF hams observed the VHF/UHF hams revolutionizing amateur radio with their technical expertise. Uhhhhhhhh...Cecil...??!?! Did you actually make that up, or just quote someone else who is equally ill informed? Most of the people who were "moving forward" half a century ago were ALSO folks who were active on and well known in HF circles... Unless, of course, you're now going to take Lennie's spin and tell us that any / everything reported in QST, CQ, etc, was only "self-serviing rhetoric"...?!?! Try again. Steve, K4YZ Anyone that puts out an argument to keep the code requirement gets teased by Cecil. He loves to throw out some goof-ball counter reply to try to be-little the original argument. Pot, meet kettle. No. All my arguments are good sound arguments. Oh PuhlEEEZE!!! Spelling Canada with a "K" is a good sound argument? Calling me a "lazy ass" is a good sound argument? Claiming I get a handout is a good sound argument? You have NEVER put out ANY kind of argument at all!!! Why don't you try to cite some source that back up any of your "good sound arguments". Free hint: Hurling insults and innuendo does NOT a "good sound argument" make. Hope this helps. I'm sorry Opus, but I refuse to lie. You did get a hand-out, and you're Lazy because you refuse to learn CW to 20wpm, and too lazy to to use it. You don't want to be a good capable communicator in every way. That's just how it is. I'm sorry if the truth seems like an insult. You're right about one thing, I spelled Kanada wrong, I meant to type KKKanaduh. Eh. Tell me right now what "handout" I have received. Back up your "good sound arguments" or forever be a PROVEN liar! KKKanadian licenses are all hand-outs now, just like your health care system, but that's not your fault and I don't blame you for it. Still, if you want to be a real ham you might want to get your code speed up so you can communicate with other real hams. We'd love communicating with ya. 73 de Slow Code |
It's amazing what people will say to try to justify dumbing down Amateur Radio.
On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 00:18:15 GMT, Slow Code spake
thusly: Opus- wrote in : On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 01:01:03 GMT, Slow Code spake thusly: Opus- wrote in : On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 00:44:42 GMT, Slow Code spake thusly: Opus- wrote in om: On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 01:08:42 GMT, Slow Code spake thusly: wrote in oglegroups.com: Cecil Moore wrote: Slow Code wrote: It's funny, and most telling. The no-code hams have everything over 30 MHz, but it's the code hams that are the one's moving ham radio forward and doing anything technical wise. If that's true, it's certainly a change from half a century ago when we HF hams observed the VHF/UHF hams revolutionizing amateur radio with their technical expertise. Uhhhhhhhh...Cecil...??!?! Did you actually make that up, or just quote someone else who is equally ill informed? Most of the people who were "moving forward" half a century ago were ALSO folks who were active on and well known in HF circles... Unless, of course, you're now going to take Lennie's spin and tell us that any / everything reported in QST, CQ, etc, was only "self-serviing rhetoric"...?!?! Try again. Steve, K4YZ Anyone that puts out an argument to keep the code requirement gets teased by Cecil. He loves to throw out some goof-ball counter reply to try to be-little the original argument. Pot, meet kettle. No. All my arguments are good sound arguments. Oh PuhlEEEZE!!! Spelling Canada with a "K" is a good sound argument? Calling me a "lazy ass" is a good sound argument? Claiming I get a handout is a good sound argument? You have NEVER put out ANY kind of argument at all!!! Why don't you try to cite some source that back up any of your "good sound arguments". Free hint: Hurling insults and innuendo does NOT a "good sound argument" make. Hope this helps. I'm sorry Opus, but I refuse to lie. You did get a hand-out, and you're Lazy because you refuse to learn CW to 20wpm, and too lazy to to use it. You don't want to be a good capable communicator in every way. That's just how it is. I'm sorry if the truth seems like an insult. You're right about one thing, I spelled Kanada wrong, I meant to type KKKanaduh. Eh. Tell me right now what "handout" I have received. Back up your "good sound arguments" or forever be a PROVEN liar! KKKanadian licenses are all hand-outs now, just like your health care system, but that's not your fault and I don't blame you for it. Still, if you want to be a real ham you might want to get your code speed up so you can communicate with other real hams. We'd love communicating with ya. Your blunt refusal to back up anything you claim simply proves to the world what kind of loser you are. Can you deduct your mortgage interest from your income tax? You can? Nice handout because I can't. Welcome to the killfile, you pathetic little turd, along with the rest of the little trolls hiding under bridges. You're depriving a village somewhere of an idiot. -- (Jim, single dad to Lesleigh [Autistic] 04/20/94) "What, Me Worry?" A. E. Newman Please note: All unsolicited e-mail sent to me may, at my discretion, be posted in this newsgroup verbatim. |
It's amazing what people will say to try to justify dumbing down Amateur Radio.
Opus- wrote:
On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 01:01:03 GMT, Slow Code spake thusly: Opus- wrote in : On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 00:44:42 GMT, Slow Code spake thusly: Opus- wrote in : On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 01:08:42 GMT, Slow Code spake thusly: wrote in legroups.com: Cecil Moore wrote: Slow Code wrote: It's funny, and most telling. The no-code hams have everything over 30 MHz, but it's the code hams that are the one's moving ham radio forward and doing anything technical wise. If that's true, it's certainly a change from half a century ago when we HF hams observed the VHF/UHF hams revolutionizing amateur radio with their technical expertise. Uhhhhhhhh...Cecil...??!?! Did you actually make that up, or just quote someone else who is equally ill informed? Most of the people who were "moving forward" half a century ago were ALSO folks who were active on and well known in HF circles... Unless, of course, you're now going to take Lennie's spin and tell us that any / everything reported in QST, CQ, etc, was only "self-serviing rhetoric"...?!?! Try again. Steve, K4YZ Anyone that puts out an argument to keep the code requirement gets teased by Cecil. He loves to throw out some goof-ball counter reply to try to be-little the original argument. Pot, meet kettle. No. All my arguments are good sound arguments. Oh PuhlEEEZE!!! Spelling Canada with a "K" is a good sound argument? Calling me a "lazy ass" is a good sound argument? Claiming I get a handout is a good sound argument? You have NEVER put out ANY kind of argument at all!!! Why don't you try to cite some source that back up any of your "good sound arguments". Free hint: Hurling insults and innuendo does NOT a "good sound argument" make. Hope this helps. I'm sorry Opus, but I refuse to lie. You did get a hand-out, and you're Lazy because you refuse to learn CW to 20wpm, and too lazy to to use it. "Slow Code" does not know what code speed "Opus" can do. He simply *assumes*. Note that we do not know "Slow Code's" code speed, either. You don't want to be a good capable communicator in every way. That's just how it is. I'm sorry if the truth seems like an insult. You're right about one thing, I spelled Kanada wrong, I meant to type KKKanaduh. Eh. Xenophobic attack rather than reasoned argument. Tell me right now what "handout" I have received. Back up your "good sound arguments" or forever be a PROVEN liar! You have lied and have been caught. You can't wiggle out of it. Once again..you are a proven liar and a fool. You are a disgrace to the amateur radio community. Opus, you are making a simple but common logical mistake: You are taking "Slow Code" seriously. |
It's amazing what people will say to try to justify dumbing down Amateur Radio.
|
It's amazing what people will say to try to justify dumbing down Amateur Radio.
|
It's amazing what people will say to try to justify dumbing down Amateur Radio.
Opus- wrote in
: On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 00:18:15 GMT, Slow Code spake thusly: Opus- wrote in m: On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 01:01:03 GMT, Slow Code spake thusly: Opus- wrote in m: On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 00:44:42 GMT, Slow Code spake thusly: Opus- wrote in news:iovli2lg2oiscbvcg0ej0eq723cpithf94@4ax. com: On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 01:08:42 GMT, Slow Code spake thusly: wrote in ooglegroups.com: Cecil Moore wrote: Slow Code wrote: It's funny, and most telling. The no-code hams have everything over 30 MHz, but it's the code hams that are the one's moving ham radio forward and doing anything technical wise. If that's true, it's certainly a change from half a century ago when we HF hams observed the VHF/UHF hams revolutionizing amateur radio with their technical expertise. Uhhhhhhhh...Cecil...??!?! Did you actually make that up, or just quote someone else who is equally ill informed? Most of the people who were "moving forward" half a century ago were ALSO folks who were active on and well known in HF circles... Unless, of course, you're now going to take Lennie's spin and tell us that any / everything reported in QST, CQ, etc, was only "self-serviing rhetoric"...?!?! Try again. Steve, K4YZ Anyone that puts out an argument to keep the code requirement gets teased by Cecil. He loves to throw out some goof-ball counter reply to try to be-little the original argument. Pot, meet kettle. No. All my arguments are good sound arguments. Oh PuhlEEEZE!!! Spelling Canada with a "K" is a good sound argument? Calling me a "lazy ass" is a good sound argument? Claiming I get a handout is a good sound argument? You have NEVER put out ANY kind of argument at all!!! Why don't you try to cite some source that back up any of your "good sound arguments". Free hint: Hurling insults and innuendo does NOT a "good sound argument" make. Hope this helps. I'm sorry Opus, but I refuse to lie. You did get a hand-out, and you're Lazy because you refuse to learn CW to 20wpm, and too lazy to to use it. You don't want to be a good capable communicator in every way. That's just how it is. I'm sorry if the truth seems like an insult. You're right about one thing, I spelled Kanada wrong, I meant to type KKKanaduh. Eh. Tell me right now what "handout" I have received. Back up your "good sound arguments" or forever be a PROVEN liar! KKKanadian licenses are all hand-outs now, just like your health care system, but that's not your fault and I don't blame you for it. Still, if you want to be a real ham you might want to get your code speed up so you can communicate with other real hams. We'd love communicating with ya. Your blunt refusal to back up anything you claim simply proves to the world what kind of loser you are. Can you deduct your mortgage interest from your income tax? You can? Nice handout because I can't. Welcome to the killfile, you pathetic little turd, along with the rest of the little trolls hiding under bridges. He's upset because he knows CW makes a real ham, and he can't cut it. That's OK, I encouraged him to try to learn CW while I could before I ended up in the killfile. NEXT! SC |
It's amazing what people will say to try to justify dumbing down Amateur Radio.
|
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:10 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com