In , Swan Radioman
wrote:

snip
So what do you think power output of a average legal SSB CB is? 12
Watts?

If you mean the average power output of a legal SSB CB, and based on a
peak-to-average modulation ratio of 3 to 1, I would have to say 4 watts.





-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----

Hell with it all ,LETS go to the FM mode.
No BS about PEP, Just plain power, no linear amp required. No clipping of
the modulation diodes and screwing up the radio. No forward swing or
splatter,
Oh that's right if it sounds good, and does not **** up the radio it
couldn't be a CB radio. Service techs would not like it also as they would
have nothing to do to except to screw them up.

wrote:
jim wrote:

wrote:

Frank Gilliland wrote:


All summed up, a stock CB with SSB has the same range and talk-power as
the same CB using AM with a 100 watt linear -- and it's LEGAL!


True.


as the brits would say, its the twig that matters.....


Yea, I hear you dominate those Limey groups..hehe


going to see manchester united play juventus of italy at giants stadium
31st july. should be a decent match. maybe see tim howard ex metrostars
play in goal. go utd....

They have done it in Europe on CB why not here.
Sounds much better, cuts most of the multi carrier wine out, and all the
other services have done it since the 1940s. I guess we are stuck with the
AM mode, that sucks.
OK, OK I know its wider in the required bandwidth, SO.

: Frank Gilliland wrote:
: I don't think it's a matter of the adjustment of one knob, since people
: seem to get their kicks out of having lots of knobs on their radios. I
: think it's more about the cost of the radios. You can pick up an AM rig
: at any flea market for pennies; but a working SSB rig, new -or- used
: (that hasn't been butchered), will cost you a few bills.

AM vs SSB operation for the average evening arm chair talker (not living
in a congested area) is probably going to be based a lot on simplicity and
fidelity. The reduced bandwidth of an SSB signal is not as plesant to the
ear for some people. Add that with the clarifier knob requirement of SSB
round table group chat and AM remains popular. One must consider the
practical part of radio operation after they've spent the money.

:Modulation percentage & duty cycle.
: Duty cycle is irrelevant since there is no modulation percentage to be
: measured when the radio isn't transmitting.

Hard to have one without the other... all the given examples were of a
transmitted signal.

: I took the peak-to-average modulation ratio from the ARRL handbook (as
: well as several other textbooks). Take up your argument with it's author.

There is no argument, but many reference values are thrown out by various
texts based on many qualifiers. Said qualifiers should probably be
mentioned in various examples. Older texts I've seen often throw out the
20% number.

:[cut and paste a little bit of good theory]
:With 100-percent sine-wave modulation, a transmitter produces 1.5
:units of RF power.

: ...."units"?

Yep, when no specific description is used, units work very well. Kind of
like the unit circle often described in mathematics "with a radius of 1."
Should be rather intuitive to most people...

: The additional 0.5 unit of power is furnished by the
:modulator and is distributed equally between the two sidebands. This AM
:transmitter is compared with an SSB transmitter rated at 0.5 unit of
:peak-envelope power (PEP).

: If the "additional 0.5 unit of power" is distributed equally between the two
: sidebands, don't you mean 0.25 unit for a single sideband?

Same thing isn't it..? wait a minute... you used "unit" Frank... see
how well that works. :-)

:Many of these rec radio cb technical posts fail to mention the source of
:the additional power which is furnished by the modulator.
: I didn't. Read my post again.

No one said you did... though as stated "many" people have.

:Most people prefer to trade the "wasted power" for the simplicity of AM
:operation. Kind of the SUV of radio thing... just lacking the dam cell
:phone planted in your ear as you drive along.

: And I prefer to believe that "most people" are uneducated as to the
: benefits of SSB, which is why I wrote that post.

Many people have SSB mode and prefer the simplicity of AM operation. "Life
is box of chocolatte." Sometimes the technical candy is a hard chew.

:When the RF signal is demodulated in the AM receiver an audio voltage
:develops which is equivalent to the sum of the upper- and lower-sideband
:voltages, in this case 1 unit of voltage. This voltage represents the
:output from a diode detector as normally used for AM reception. Such
:detection is called coherent detection because the voltages of the two
:sidebands are added in the detector.

: Holy Smoked Oysters, Skip! That's called "envelope detection" and has
: nothing to do with sidebands! And the "coherer detector" was an ancient
: method of detection
: that was used long before tubes, even before galena crystals! It used iron
: filings that magnetized and 'cohered' to each other under modulated RF currents,
: changing the overall resistance with the modulation. You are WAY, WAY out in
: yonder pasture with THAT one, Skip.

For the example, compare the described coherent detection to envelope
detection. In the classic example are they not similar..?

:When the RF signal is demodulated in the SSB receiver, an audio voltage
:of 0.7 unit develops which is equivalent to the transmitted
:upper-sideband signal. If a broadband noise level is chosen as 0.1 unit
:of voltage per 6 kc bandwidth, the AM bandwidth, the same noise level is
:equal to 0.07 unit of voltage per 3 kc bandwidth, the SSB bandwidth.

: A bit obtuse, but ok....

The actual word you should have used is "accurate."

:These values represent the same noise power level per kc of bandwidth,

: Wrong. Noise voltage level is NOT noise power level, the latter being the sum of
: all the noise within the bandwidth. Narrowing the bandwidth does not reduce the
: noise voltage level but it DOES reduce the noise power level, and it does so in
: direct proportion to the bandwidth. IOW, cut the bandwidth in half and you cut
: the noise power level in half.
: snip faulty explanation based on your lack of understanding

Convenient that you cut out the entire example... no one wrote that
noise voltage is noise power... notice the word "represent" Frank.

Also notice the example has values worked through to demonstrate the
signal intelligibility. Are any of those values or the end result
summary wrong Frank..?

The desciption and the summary are accurate.

How about you plugging in a similar example and going through it here on
the news group.

: Overmodulation is next week's lesson.

Let's get this one done first...

skipp
http://sonic.ucdavis.edu

In , Skipp has regular no decafe fake stuff
wrote:

: Frank Gilliland wrote:
: I don't think it's a matter of the adjustment of one knob, since people
: seem to get their kicks out of having lots of knobs on their radios. I
: think it's more about the cost of the radios. You can pick up an AM rig
: at any flea market for pennies; but a working SSB rig, new -or- used
: (that hasn't been butchered), will cost you a few bills.

AM vs SSB operation for the average evening arm chair talker (not living
in a congested area) is probably going to be based a lot on simplicity and
fidelity. The reduced bandwidth of an SSB signal is not as plesant to the
ear for some people.

SSB has the same audio bandwidth as AM, but SSB has less noise. For fidelity,
SSB has AM beat.

Add that with the clarifier knob requirement of SSB
round table group chat and AM remains popular.

I haven't had to move my clarifier in quite a while, mainly because most of the
people I talk to are using radios that haven't been modified.

One must consider the
practical part of radio operation after they've spent the money.

:Modulation percentage & duty cycle.
: Duty cycle is irrelevant since there is no modulation percentage to be
: measured when the radio isn't transmitting.

Hard to have one without the other... all the given examples were of a
transmitted signal.

Duty cycle is the ratio of transmit time to receive time. Modulation percentage
doesn't use receive time as a factor.

: I took the peak-to-average modulation ratio from the ARRL handbook (as
: well as several other textbooks). Take up your argument with it's author.

There is no argument, but many reference values are thrown out by various
texts based on many qualifiers. Said qualifiers should probably be
mentioned in various examples. Older texts I've seen often throw out the
20% number.

Power microphones, audio processors, modulation limiters... things that change
the peak-to-average modulation ratio... all will be discussed soon.

:[cut and paste a little bit of good theory]
:With 100-percent sine-wave modulation, a transmitter produces 1.5
:units of RF power.

: ...."units"?

Yep, when no specific description is used, units work very well. Kind of
like the unit circle often described in mathematics "with a radius of 1."
Should be rather intuitive to most people...

You might have said that the carrier power is the base unit.

: The additional 0.5 unit of power is furnished by the
:modulator and is distributed equally between the two sidebands. This AM
:transmitter is compared with an SSB transmitter rated at 0.5 unit of
:peak-envelope power (PEP).

: If the "additional 0.5 unit of power" is distributed equally between the two
: sidebands, don't you mean 0.25 unit for a single sideband?

Same thing isn't it..?

That depends: what's one half of 0.5?

wait a minute... you used "unit" Frank... see
how well that works. :-)

:Many of these rec radio cb technical posts fail to mention the source of
:the additional power which is furnished by the modulator.
: I didn't. Read my post again.

No one said you did... though as stated "many" people have.

Then how is it relevant to this discussion?

:Most people prefer to trade the "wasted power" for the simplicity of AM
:operation. Kind of the SUV of radio thing... just lacking the dam cell
:phone planted in your ear as you drive along.

: And I prefer to believe that "most people" are uneducated as to the
: benefits of SSB, which is why I wrote that post.

Many people have SSB mode and prefer the simplicity of AM operation. "Life
is box of chocolatte." Sometimes the technical candy is a hard chew.

I didn't say they are Gumps, I said they are uneducated about the benefits of
SSB. And I should rephrase that: "Many CBers are UNDER-educated about the
benefits of SSB."

:When the RF signal is demodulated in the AM receiver an audio voltage
:develops which is equivalent to the sum of the upper- and lower-sideband
:voltages, in this case 1 unit of voltage. This voltage represents the
:output from a diode detector as normally used for AM reception. Such
:detection is called coherent detection because the voltages of the two
:sidebands are added in the detector.

: Holy Smoked Oysters, Skip! That's called "envelope detection" and has
: nothing to do with sidebands! And the "coherer detector" was an ancient
: method of detection
: that was used long before tubes, even before galena crystals! It used iron
: filings that magnetized and 'cohered' to each other under modulated RF currents,
: changing the overall resistance with the modulation. You are WAY, WAY out in
: yonder pasture with THAT one, Skip.

For the example, compare the described coherent detection to envelope
detection. In the classic example are they not similar..?

No, they aren't similar at all, because I have never heard of a detection scheme
where the "voltages of the two sidebands are added in the detector". Care to
reference that one?

Time for another lesson: You can look at AM in two ways. One way is in the
frequency domain, with a carrier of constant amplitude and the modulation
carried in the sidebands. The other way is in the amplitude domain, in which the
carrier varies in amplitude according to the modulation (which is where the term
"Amplitude Modulation" originated). Envelope detection works in the amplitude
domain by passing the rectified RF or IF signal through a low-pass filter. And
in case you didn't notice, a diode detector blocks half the modulation power!

:When the RF signal is demodulated in the SSB receiver, an audio voltage
:of 0.7 unit develops which is equivalent to the transmitted
:upper-sideband signal. If a broadband noise level is chosen as 0.1 unit
:of voltage per 6 kc bandwidth, the AM bandwidth, the same noise level is
:equal to 0.07 unit of voltage per 3 kc bandwidth, the SSB bandwidth.

: A bit obtuse, but ok....

The actual word you should have used is "accurate."

The description is accurate in fact but not in reason.

:These values represent the same noise power level per kc of bandwidth,

: Wrong. Noise voltage level is NOT noise power level, the latter being the sum of
: all the noise within the bandwidth. Narrowing the bandwidth does not reduce the
: noise voltage level but it DOES reduce the noise power level, and it does so in
: direct proportion to the bandwidth. IOW, cut the bandwidth in half and you cut
: the noise power level in half.
: snip faulty explanation based on your lack of understanding

Convenient that you cut out the entire example... no one wrote that
noise voltage is noise power... notice the word "represent" Frank.

All right, if you really want:

These values represent the same noise power level per kc of bandwidth,
that is, 0.12 divided by 6 is equal to 0.072 divided by 3.

Where did you get the values of 0.12 and 0.072? Regardless,

0.12 / 6 = 0.02
0.072 / 3 = 0.024
0.02 0.024

The s/n ratio
for the AM system is 20 log s/n in terms of voltage, or 20 dB. For the
SSB system the s/n ratio is also 20 dB.

Again, where did you get your values of 0.12 and 0.072?

Time for ANOTHER lesson: The intelligibility of an audio signal is defined by
the signal-to-noise ratio of the audio, which is done by measuring the POWER of
the signal and noise, NOT just their voltage. Why? Because sound requires POWER.
Simple, huh? Also, when determining the S/N ratio at the RF input of a receiver,
the signal and noise are measured as VOLTAGE because the input impedance is
common to both.

Therefore the 0.5 power unit of
rated PEP for the SSB transmitter produces the same signal
intelligibility as the 1 power unit of rated carrier power for the AM
transmitter .

Your "1 power unit of rated carrier power" doesn't carry any intelligence. But I
know what you are trying to say, and you're still wrong. Your detection-adder
scheme doesn't work here because, even if such a detector existed, the RF noise
would be detected by the same process, negating the effect you are claiming
actually occurs.

In summary it can be stated that, under ideal propagating conditions but
in the presence of broadband noise,

....which is a contradition in terms...

an SSB signal and an AM signal provide
equal s/n ratios at the receiver if the total sideband power contained in
each of the signals is equal.

Only with your sideband-adding detector.

This means that, to perform under these
conditions as well as an SSB transmitter of given PEP rating, an AM
transmitter requires twice that figure in carrier power rating.

Even if that were true (and it isn't), SSB is still more efficient than AM.

Also notice the example has values worked through to demonstrate the
signal intelligibility. Are any of those values or the end result
summary wrong Frank..?

Your values are not "worked through". It's like you pulled them out of thin air.
Where did you get your values of 0.12 and 0.072?

The desciption and the summary are accurate.

How about you plugging in a similar example and going through it here on
the news group.

How about you learning the concepts before making invalid examples? How about
assigning proper labels to your arbitrary values instead of generic "units"? How
about not skipping steps to hide your mathematical mistakes?

: Overmodulation is next week's lesson.

Let's get this one done first...

As far as I'm concerned, it's done. The only problem here is that you don't
fully understand the concepts involved. Demonstrate that you have learned
something and I'll move on.





-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----

In , Skipp
wrote:

: Frank Gilliland wrote:
: SSB has the same audio bandwidth as AM, but SSB has less noise. For fidelity,
: SSB has AM beat.

I and others would probably disagree. But to each his own. My AM bandwidth is not the same as my SSB bandwidth. For the
most part, regular AM bandwidth is wider than SSB.

Good grief.... The audio bandwidth (for CB) is the same -- 0.3 to 3 KHz. The RF
bandwidth of AM is more than twice the witch of SSB because it covers from 3 KHz
below to 3 KHz above the carrier, and therefore picks up more than twice the
noise as SSB.

: Add that with the clarifier knob requirement of SSB
:round table group chat and AM remains popular.

: I haven't had to move my clarifier in quite a while, mainly because most of the
: people I talk to are using radios that haven't been modified.

No two unmodified radios are on the same exact frequency. Given a group of stock radios, some will be either side of
the assumed channel center.

You don't need the radios to be on the -same exact- frequency, just really
close. And the DEVIATION from that center frequency in an unmodified radio isn't
significant as long as the radio has been properly aligned and maintained. Ever
hear of a 'bell curve'? You and Tnom should get together and form a study group
on that subject. And if you -really- want to pick some nits, you two should also
study some things about temperature compensated crystal oscillators (TCXO's),
PLL frequency synthesis using dual-modulus prescalers, the frequency response of
the human ear and it's variation between different people, the psychology of
sensory perception, etc.

: Duty cycle is the ratio of transmit time to receive time. Modulation percentage
: doesn't use receive time as a factor.

It's more than than just Tx and Rx times...

But receive time has NOTHING to do with modulation percentage! Is that so hard
to understand? Sheesh....!

: Power microphones, audio processors, modulation limiters... things that change
: the peak-to-average modulation ratio... all will be discussed soon.

Opinions will vary quite a bit...

Opinions are like assholes -- everyone has one and they all stink. I don't plan
on discussing opinions. Just facts. And when people have the -facts- they can
make their -own- opinions based on the -facts- instead of relying upon the
uneducated opinions of some wannabe-tech keyclowns.

:: ...."units"?
:
:Yep, when no specific description is used, units work very well. Kind of
:like the unit circle often described in mathematics "with a radius of 1."
:Should be rather intuitive to most people...

: You might have said that the carrier power is the base unit.

But I did not...

No you didn't. At least we agree on something!

::Many of these rec radio cb technical posts fail to mention the source of
::the additional power which is furnished by the modulator.
:: I didn't. Read my post again.
:
:No one said you did... though as stated "many" people have.
: Then how is it relevant to this discussion?

You want to get the information out... might as well lay the proper foundation.

Nice thought, but you didn't build anything on that foundation!

::Most people prefer to trade the "wasted power" for the simplicity of AM
::operation. Kind of the SUV of radio thing... just lacking the dam cell
::phone planted in your ear as you drive along.
:
:: And I prefer to believe that "most people" are uneducated as to the
:: benefits of SSB, which is why I wrote that post.
:
:Many people have SSB mode and prefer the simplicity of AM operation. "Life
:is box of chocolatte." Sometimes the technical candy is a hard chew.

: I didn't say they are Gumps, I said they are uneducated about the benefits of
: SSB. And I should rephrase that: "Many CBers are UNDER-educated about the
: benefits of SSB."

No one mentioned Forest Gumps... just playing devils advocate, one should compare the benefits with the trade offs.

And the person that is making such a comparison should have all the facts
available, such as the power and efficiency benefits of SSB over AM. Gee, we
agree on something else!

: No, they aren't similar at all, because I have never heard of a detection scheme
: where the "voltages of the two sidebands are added in the detector". Care to
: reference that one?

su
http://dj4br.virtualave.net/ssb3e.htm

Next time you plagiarize a ham you better verify his 'facts' first -- here is a
site that does an excellent job of explaining 'coherent detection':

http://www.qsl.net/dj7hs/ccwtheo.htm

BTW, did you notice where he talked about SSB and how the frequency of the
reinserted carrier "may be in error by 100 cycles or more without serious loss
of intelligibility"? That kinda puts the crimp on your "same exact frequency"
complaint.

: Time for another lesson: You can look at AM in two ways. One way is in the
: frequency domain, with a carrier of constant amplitude and the modulation
: carried in the sidebands. The other way is in the amplitude domain, in which the
: carrier varies in amplitude according to the modulation (which is where the term
: "Amplitude Modulation" originated). Envelope detection works in the amplitude
: domain by passing the rectified RF or IF signal through a low-pass filter. And
: in case you didn't notice, a diode detector blocks half the modulation power!

Depends on the detector type... there are more than single diode detectors, even for AM operation.

When was the last time you saw a full-wave AM detector?

: All right, if you really want:

:These values represent the same noise power level per kc of bandwidth,
:that is, 0.12 divided by 6 is equal to 0.072 divided by 3.

: Where did you get the values of 0.12 and 0.072? Regardless,

: 0.12 / 6 = 0.02
: 0.072 / 3 = 0.024
: 0.02 0.024

http://dj4br.virtualave.net/ssb3e.htm

God damn, Skip, how dumb can you be? You just copy the stuff without any
comprehension of what it means? His figures of 0.12 and 0.072 are just typos;
they are supposed to be 0.1 squared and 0.07 squared:

0.1^2 = 0.01
0.01 / 6 = 0.00167

0.07^2 = 0.0049
0.0049 / 3 = 0.00163

And they STILL aren't equal because his 'arbitrary' level of noise voltage
wasn't picked arbitrarily -- it was cooked and rounded from the intended result!
Didn't I suggest a long time ago that you should quit relying solely on the
internet for your education? I'm pretty sure I did....

: The s/n ratio
:for the AM system is 20 log s/n in terms of voltage, or 20 dB. For the
:SSB system the s/n ratio is also 20 dB.

: Again, where did you get your values of 0.12 and 0.072?

http://dj4br.virtualave.net/ssb3e.htm

: Time for ANOTHER lesson: The intelligibility of an audio signal is defined by
: the signal-to-noise ratio of the audio, which is done by measuring the POWER of
: the signal and noise, NOT just their voltage. Why? Because sound requires POWER.
: Simple, huh? Also, when determining the S/N ratio at the RF input of a receiver,
: the signal and noise are measured as VOLTAGE because the input impedance is
: common to both.

http://dj4br.virtualave.net/ssb3e.htm

"Electronic Communication" by Shrader, McGraw-Hill
"Applied Electronic Comminucation" by Kellejian, SRA
http://www.epanorama.net/documents/a...oisetypes.html
http://www.laidback.org/~daveg/acade...tml/comms.html
http://www.isr.umd.edu/CAAR/papers/m...ysis/model.pdf

Try again, Skip.

: Therefore the 0.5 power unit of
:rated PEP for the SSB transmitter produces the same signal
:intelligibility as the 1 power unit of rated carrier power for the AM
:transmitter .

: Your "1 power unit of rated carrier power" doesn't carry any intelligence. But I
: know what you are trying to say, and you're still wrong. Your detection-adder
: scheme doesn't work here because, even if such a detector existed, the RF noise
: would be detected by the same process, negating the effect you are claiming
: actually occurs.

http://dj4br.virtualave.net/ssb3e.htm

Well, let's see... If the sidebands are added in the detector, then so is the
broadband noise with each sideband. So you have twice the noise bandwidth, and
therefore twice the noise power. above references, but if those are too
complicated try this one:

http://www.geocities.com/w4jbm/noise.html

:In summary it can be stated that, under ideal propagating conditions but
:in the presence of broadband noise,

: ...which is a contradition in terms...

http://dj4br.virtualave.net/ssb3e.htm

That's right, blame it on the person you plagiarized.

: an SSB signal and an AM signal provide
:equal s/n ratios at the receiver if the total sideband power contained in
:each of the signals is equal.

: Only with your sideband-adding detector.

: This means that, to perform under these
:conditions as well as an SSB transmitter of given PEP rating, an AM
:transmitter requires twice that figure in carrier power rating.

: Even if that were true (and it isn't), SSB is still more efficient than AM.

No one disputes SSB being more efficient, just less practical for the average real world CB radio operator.
http://dj4br.virtualave.net/ssb3e.htm

http://dj4br.virtualave.net/ssb4e.htm

:Also notice the example has values worked through to demonstrate the
:signal intelligibility. Are any of those values or the end result
:summary wrong Frank..?

: Your values are not "worked through". It's like you pulled them out of thin air.
: Where did you get your values of 0.12 and 0.072?

http://dj4br.virtualave.net/ssb3e.htm

:The desciption and the summary are accurate.
:
:How about you plugging in a similar example and going through it here on
:the news group.

: How about you learning the concepts before making invalid examples? How about
: assigning proper labels to your arbitrary values instead of generic "units"? How
: about not skipping steps to hide your mathematical mistakes?

http://dj4br.virtualave.net/ssb3e.htm

Now you are just being lazy.

:: Overmodulation is next week's lesson.
:
:Let's get this one done first...

: As far as I'm concerned, it's done. The only problem here is that you don't
: fully understand the concepts involved. Demonstrate that you have learned
: something and I'll move on.

http://dj4br.virtualave.net/ssb3e.htm

I like the example description shown, have a look and get back to us with
what ever gets your motor sideways... you might also cc the author if you
have specific questions about his statements.

You might do that yourself to notify him of his mistakes in both theory and
mathematical notation. Then spend a few hours at your public library reading
some -qualified- material on these subjects. You might start with the ARRL's
"Radio Amateur's Handbook", which disagrees in every topic you have referenced
from your source.





-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----

In , Frank is a bitter man
wrote:


Frankie,

It used to be a lot of fun to pull your chain, but like Michael Savage,
you are now mostly a bitter mean jackass. So I'm done having a bit of fun
jacking you up... Your ratings are way down... back to O'Riley on Fox.

maybe next time...
skipp

What a cop-out! I disprove your BS, and instead of opening your mind (and a few
books) to the facts, you run away with your tail between your legs and call me a
"bitter mean jackass". Why? I didn't use any name-calling -- I didn't even call
you 'Skippy' in this thread! But you turn and call me a "bitter mean jackass"
because I point out that your technical information is seriously faulty? Well,
kiss my ass, Skippy! BTW, you never did reply to my last post in our previous
exchange. Remember this one?

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...40news.cet.com

Just like the last time, you have proven that you know far less about radio than
you claim. And just like the last time, you are backing away using the "I don't
care" attitude. Go away, Skippy. Go try and impress your amp-gods, because you
aren't impressing anyone here.





-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----

IP Daily, more then once, wrote:


Skipp, Landshark, and a few of the other turd burglars from the group have
a question for you regarding your changing of your name,nic email every
post, god knows it bothers them when I do it.


The difference is, Skipp gives a place for him to be contacted,
not pretending he is who is he isn't.

While this isn't on every post, it's on enough for a legal ID:

cheers
skipp
http://sonic.ucdavis.edu


Try clicking the link...

I thought we had to ID every 10 minutes...
:-)
s.

: Scott Unit 69 wrote:
: The difference is, Skipp gives a place for him to be contacted,
: not pretending he is who is he isn't.
: While this isn't on every post, it's on enough for a legal ID:

: cheers
: skipp
: http://sonic.ucdavis.edu
: Try clicking the link...