"Floyd Sense" wrote in message
...

Gee Ed, I don't even have a dog in this hunt, and read this newsgroup only
in hopes of learning something every now and then. But, your responses
ARE offensive and your comments generally negate any wisdom you bring to
the subject. I'll tell you how I try to keep things civil in one of these
conversations. In every case, I try to respond and conduct myself as if
the other fellows were standing in front of me eye to eye. Most of us
would try to be diplomatic, even to a complete stranger, in that
situation. In some parts of the country, or in another time, doing
otherwise would earn you a punch.

Anyway, I DO know how to filter out your posts and you've certainly earned
your position on that list.

73, Floyd - K8AC




I am surprised that you would favor the person-to-person model, since you
appear to be willing to ignore my two attempts at conciliation and appear to
enjoy remaining in a self-aggreived condition. As you point out, certain
attitudes in certain places can earn you the flat-face award, and you seem
to be a determined candidate.

One of the hallmarks of wisdom is knowing when you are being insulted and
when you are being presented with an uncomfortable reminder of your
condition. As an Extra, do you really think that a ham should be surprised
to find that an arc-discharge luminary, placed in proximity to his rig,
causes RFI? I hold a ham to a slightly higher standard of understanding of
RFI than I would expect of the general populace. RF noise is a very basic
part of the RF communication hobby known as ham radio, so just how low
should the bar be set for understanding of the basics of your hobby? If the
basics are too challenging for you, then perhaps you should either get
smarter or live within a less demanding cohort. And just what electronics
hobbies could those be? CB radio certainly comes to mind; a venue of zero
examinations and largely technically incompetent appliance operators. And
below that, cable TV, where the two big challenges are finding the power
button and a channel.

Your functional competence in communicating within Usenet is also deficient,
as you sent a redundant copy of your post to my personal address. Please try
to learn the difference between replying to a post in a newsgroup and
replying to the poster's address (especially when the poster affords you the
courtesy of a non-spoofed address). I find it amusing that you deem I should
get TWO copies of YOUR post, while you publicly declare that my posts are
unfit for your attention. Further, your declared existence in this group,
that you "read this newsgroup only in hopes of learning something every now
and then", is selfish and parasitic. Usenet is a participatory forum, and
you should try to find satisfaction in contributing as well as in taking.

Finally, I don't know if you intended pithy sarcasm, or simply displayed
further evidence of senility, by signing your missive with a "73". After
insulting my intentions, you close with the generally accepted icon for
"best wishes" or "cheers". Thank you for the complete reversal of your
entire thought process in the space of one line! I must assume that the
closing salutation must have been appended AFTER you took your daily meds.


--
Ed
WB6WSN
El Cajon, CA USA