"Al Klein" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 01:46:40 GMT, Opus- wrote:

You also have to believe that a bunch of beeps on the speaker is real
exciting.

Or that a bunch of lit pixels on the screen is.

What a shame that we all have to agree on how to be a ham. Oh, wait -- we
don't.

Effective right now, everything legal that anybody wants to do for their
personal enter-ham-tainment (don't try to look it up) is OK with me.

On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 20:53:59 -0700, "Sal M. Onella"
spake thusly:


"Al Klein" wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 01:46:40 GMT, Opus- wrote:

You also have to believe that a bunch of beeps on the speaker is real
exciting.

Or that a bunch of lit pixels on the screen is.

What a shame that we all have to agree on how to be a ham. Oh, wait -- we
don't.

Effective right now, everything legal that anybody wants to do for their
personal enter-ham-tainment (don't try to look it up) is OK with me.

Works for me.
--

(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.

Opus- wrote:
On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 08:40:15 -0400, Al Klein
spake thusly:


On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 01:46:40 GMT, Opus- wrote:


You also have to believe that a bunch of beeps on the speaker is real
exciting.

Or that a bunch of lit pixels on the screen is.


Nice strawman. The pixels form a full complete picture. Beeps are just
beeps. One dimensional. That they form a recognizable pattern does not
make them more. Humans are highly visual creatures. I have listened to
code for years. Being able to make out a few letters does nothing for
me.

It's just plain dull.


Then do what most people do with dull stuff. They blow it off!

Say good night, Gracie.

On Fri, 29 Sep 2006 11:18:30 -0400, Dave wrote:

[piggybacking]
Opus- wrote:
On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 08:40:15 -0400, Al Klein
spake thusly:
On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 01:46:40 GMT, Opus- wrote:

You also have to believe that a bunch of beeps on the speaker is real
exciting.

Or that a bunch of lit pixels on the screen is.

Nice strawman. The pixels form a full complete picture. Beeps are just
beeps.

And speech is just noise if you don't understand it.

One dimensional. That they form a recognizable pattern does not
make them more. Humans are highly visual creatures.

Which is why it was said, for many centuries, I suppose, that it's
speech that separates us from the animals. (We're a lot less visually
oriented than a lot of other species.)

I have listened to
code for years. Being able to make out a few letters does nothing for
me.

I have listened to Turkish for years. Being able to make out a few
words does nothing for me.

But there are a lot of Turks who feel otherwise.

Your insularity is showing.

Al Klein wrote:
On Fri, 29 Sep 2006 11:18:30 -0400, Dave wrote:

[piggybacking]
Opus- wrote:
On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 08:40:15 -0400, Al Klein
spake thusly:
On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 01:46:40 GMT, Opus- wrote:

You also have to believe that a bunch of beeps on the speaker is real
exciting.

Or that a bunch of lit pixels on the screen is.

Nice strawman. The pixels form a full complete picture. Beeps are just
beeps.

And speech is just noise if you don't understand it.
your point?

wrote in :

On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 23:22:24 GMT, Slow Code wrote:



Mark,
If ever there was proof of the dangers of dumbing down ham radio, you're
it.
nope you are looking at the glare on pc you are dumbing down of ham
radio you and all those that worship cw


No Markie, being able to communicate is good. Can you say, "is good"?

SC

On Fri, 29 Sep 2006 19:57:18 -0400, Al Klein
spake thusly:

On Fri, 29 Sep 2006 11:18:30 -0400, Dave wrote:

[piggybacking]
Opus- wrote:
On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 08:40:15 -0400, Al Klein
spake thusly:
On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 01:46:40 GMT, Opus- wrote:

You also have to believe that a bunch of beeps on the speaker is real
exciting.

Or that a bunch of lit pixels on the screen is.

Nice strawman. The pixels form a full complete picture. Beeps are just
beeps.

And speech is just noise if you don't understand it.

Speech has infection. You can say the same sentence 10 different ways
and it can have 10 different meanings depending on the emotion invoked
in the speech. You know....the HUMAN element.

One dimensional. That they form a recognizable pattern does not
make them more. Humans are highly visual creatures.

Which is why it was said, for many centuries, I suppose, that it's
speech that separates us from the animals. (We're a lot less visually
oriented than a lot of other species.)

See above.

I have listened to
code for years. Being able to make out a few letters does nothing for
me.

I have listened to Turkish for years. Being able to make out a few
words does nothing for me.

But there are a lot of Turks who feel otherwise.

Bet you can easily tell what kind of a mood the speaker is in just by
his tone. I don't speak Ukrainian but I sure knew when my grandmother
was mad at me.

Your insularity is showing.

Not insularity...humanity.
--

(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.

On Sat, 30 Sep 2006 00:36:29 GMT, Slow Code spake
thusly:

wrote in :

On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 23:22:24 GMT, Slow Code wrote:



Mark,
If ever there was proof of the dangers of dumbing down ham radio, you're
it.
nope you are looking at the glare on pc you are dumbing down of ham
radio you and all those that worship cw


No Markie, being able to communicate is good. Can you say, "is good"?

And communicating with human emotion as opposed to emotionless beeps
is better.
--

(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.

Tom wrote:
I am interested in the MFJ 464 and was wondering what you all thought of
it. I've been wanting to get back into CW this winter and thought this
might help. Is there any other brand reader out there that is any good?
Thanks for your help.

There are loads of free softwares that will do that plus all the other
usual modes. No need to waste money on that, unless you have no
computer and sound card. Like the others say, most code readers
are not that great, and there is little difference from a standalone
box,
or just soundcard software. The brain is a much better reader.
I'd use it if you actually want to learn or improve CW skills.
If I were to use the puter, I'd rather work PSK or whatever.. It's
much more robust that using a puter for CW work.
MK

"Opus-" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 30 Sep 2006 00:36:29 GMT, Slow Code spake
thusly:

wrote in :

On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 23:22:24 GMT, Slow Code wrote:



Mark,
If ever there was proof of the dangers of dumbing down ham radio, you're
it.
nope you are looking at the glare on pc you are dumbing down of ham
radio you and all those that worship cw


No Markie, being able to communicate is good. Can you say, "is good"?

And communicating with human emotion as opposed to emotionless beeps
is better.
--

(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.

==

Opus, none of my concern, but I have a five dollar bill that says Mark will
somehow stick his unasked-for comments into this topic. Just as I did. But
rest assured I will post just this one comment whereas Mark will post ad
infinatum.