About Us

June 2nd 04, 05:23 PM

From: (Dave=A0Hall)
On Tue, 1 Jun 2004 14:21:11 -0400,
(Tampa Bay Always Kicks Philthy Azz) wrote:
YOU went off-topic and entered insults to this thread.

Where did I go off topic?

Where didn't you go offtopic is the question.

_
LOL...it has always been you. No matter how many times I redirect your
childlike mannerisms and attention deficit, you are unable to maintain
your original topic of erroneously claiming roger beeps are illegal on
cb. Such an obsession and disorder has you unable to focus on anything
but myself.

You are on those drugs again.

Don't do drugs, Davie, or smoke, or drink, but your repeat invocation of
such illustrtates the fondness you have for such foreign substances.

Try adding to the topic instead of trying to

insult me and maybe you will learn something.

I have learned you that your orignal calim of roger beeps being illegal
on cb is wrong, and it contributed to your breakdown.

Where did I go off-topic?

You did by mentioning a mental health professional, but such would
probably aid you in your dilemma in seeing nothing but the moral fabric
of society crashing in on your depression-filled life and world.

So you categorically deny that the moral

compass of our society has declined in the

last few decades?

My opinion on your off-topic subjects is not pertinent to your gaffes.
Try to remain on topic and stop running from your idiotic claim that
roger beeps are illegal on cb. Were you able to manage to locate any
passage among FCC rules that agrees with your clownish claim that the
FCC holds roger beeps as "amusement devices"? No, you weren't. Were you
able to find anything among the "old" FCC rules that illustrates they
"used" to view roger beeps as illegal as you claimed? Again, NO, you
were not. More bull****, more lies from N3CVJ. Pointing out your lies
and bull**** has you on one hell of an angry personal attack,,,,,as is
to be expected...such behavior shows a shining example of why your type
is the scourge of hammie radio..no communication skill and when a
salient point is made showing your claim is bull****, you can't handle
it and something inside your little bruised ego goes "pop" and you begin
to hurl insults and become personal. You're not an effective
communicator, Davie-son, and you most certainly do not set an example or
abide by the hammie creed.

Ask your buddy Jim in Rochester

He's not my buddy. I don't know anything about the man except that you
can learn proper communication skills from such a person.

if he feels that his neighborhood is as good as

it was 25 years ago.

There are exceptions to all rules, such as the single neighborhood you
selected as your example. To listen to the president, domestic crime has
actually decreased in the country. Assuming the president is telling the
truth, such flies in the face of your claim that society has
"declined". But let's keep with your goofy claim,,,,,since you reside in
such a foul area, you should remove yourself from the problem instead of
redundantly reacting all the time on usenet about your woes and blaming
everyone else (society) for your problems. Of course, if you had the
slightest clue about being "proactive" instead of reactive to your
problesm you wouldn't need look to Frank for support in many of your
childish threads.

Ok then, which are you? a liar or a mental

case? Either you are what you project,

in which case it makes you a sociopath, or you
faked the whole "cartoon character" persona,

Entertaining thoughts to yourself that my usenet name may somehow be a
legal name and "real" to yourself to the point of wondering aloud if the
persona was "faked" or not, illustrates just exactly how far over the
edge you were pushed.

You're kidding right? Do you really take every

word so literally?

I merely reply to the words you present. You must come to comprehend
that it is not my fault nor socities fault that the words you choose to
present are never adequate in retrospect in conveying properly just what
you meant. You have this entertaining need to say what you posted isn't
really what *you* meant,,,illustrating once again, have severe
disabilities in conveying yourself clearly and properly,,,a deficit in
communications.

Maybe that is the crux of your problem.

The problem, as has been satsifactory demonstrated time and time again,
is inside your head and with your poor communicative skills. Blaming me
or society for what ails you is a bonus.

Where did you get the idea that I would be so r
idiculous as to consider the name

"Twistedhed" as a legal name? No one said

anything about that, only about the personality
which you project while using that pseudonym.

Everything you interpret, including my persona, has been shown time
after time to be in the extreme minority.

You've said time and time again that my

diagnoses of your psychological issues is

based on what "you allow us to see".

Not at all,,,,what I have said, is your self-imposed status that somehow
has you suffering from delusions of qualification to judge others, is
based on what I allow *you*,,,,no one else..there is no "us" when any
other hammie speaks of you. There has never been a hammie that has
included you in the word "us" on this group, and for good reason.

The obvious conclusion one would draw from

that statement is that you are deliberately

modifying your behavior on this newsgroup.

You're sinking faster than your twisted psyche can follow.

So I'll ask again, which are you a sociopath or

a liar?

And I'll ask again,,,,please present the rules and regs showing the FCC
holds a roger beep as illegal or as a means of amusement. First things
first.
_
Well, gee, davie,,not only have you sealed your reputation as an Extra
who doesn't have a clues at all about rules and regulations pertaining
to cb radio (based on your hysterical claim that roger beeps are
illegal),

A roger beep was classified as an

"amusement device" by the FCC over 20

years ago.

No dice, An Extra should know the current lawas and regulations,
especially for a service he has used many times since the rules you
speak of were enacted. Nevertheless, that was never the issue,,,the
issue was that you maintain the FCC holds the device as a means of
amusement and that such is illegal on cb,,,,,,,,,,only it isn't
true,,its bull**** from an Extra that should know what he is talking
about prior to embarrassing himself with ignorance.

Sorry

Indeed, but beside the point.

but there was no google then, so no, I don't

have a "hard copy" to reference.

Of course you don't.

If that has changed, that's news to me, but I'm

not above admitting if I am wrong.

You have been dancing around the subject. Allow me to remind you that
when I told you such is NOT illegal, you made the statement that "only
those who have a clear understanding of the rules and do not suffer from
problems" know that a roger beep is illegal on cb. Indeed,your problems
have always been illustrated Davie, but thise time, you presented them
on a silver platter to the radio world.

So prove me wrong and provide me

clarification that the FCC has re-thought its

original declaration.

No need to prove you wrong, as EVERYONE except you is aware of the
rules. The burden of proof is always on the claimant, not the inquirer,
although, such is how you would prefer this country to be,,,it ranks
right there with your admitted socialism and anti-privacy stances,,,as
that isn't how things are done in this country.
Your absence of proof of all your claims is most definitely absence of
validity.

So I'll ask again, which are you a sociopath or

a liar?

The accomplished liar is yourself,,,your posts affirm such going all the
way back into the archives,,you have lied about the Phelps, a cber being
busted,

You have never proved that those statements

are anything but the truth. The fact that you

accused me of lying about them does not

prove anything.

But Davie,,,,the continual absence of you providing for proof in ANY of
your claims is all the proof one needs.

The fact that you cannot find any information

about the CBer who got popped for disturbing

the peace, merely reflects on your inability to

access information.

Sure, sure,,,lol,,,,,coupled with the fact that you beg to be taken at
face value with no proof at any time, merely reflects on your inability
to prove anything you have ever said regarding any of your claims,

That you refuse to accept my explanation

regarding an old repeater antenna is not proof

either.

Ahh,,but once again,most in radio, especially licensed hammies, have
ever owned a certain antenna, especially a base antenna, they would
remember it mostly all their lives. The fact that you claimed you had an
antenna, and told another that his antenna "doesn't hold a candle" to
your Phelps Staion master, then your mind goes blank and you reply "What
Phelps" when asked about your Phelps a few years later, is all the proof
one needs to realize you lie all the time. Begging to have your bull****
believed merely because you claim it true is not proof.

_
,,you claimed the FCC maintains the roger beep is a sound effect device
for amusement, but can not cite anything to back up any of your claims.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of

absence.

You keep saying that, but absence of evidence is most certainly the
standard by which an individual is judged in the United States but since
you take issue with so many of the
ways of which the US operates, you should move to a country that
operates under your system of belief, as you are in the radical minority
here and because society doesn't conform to your troubled beliefs, you
claim the country is going down hill. You have issues.
But then again, watching your socialistic mannerisms and elevating
yourself to the position of one qualified to judge others on what you
are given, is all the "evidence" one needs for a sound judgement of
yourself.

The claim was made over 20 years ago. I read
it back then. I can't remember where

specifically. But because I can't bring it forth

now, that makes me an automatic liar in your

book.

Not at all,,,,that you can't bring forth ALL your unsubstantiated claims
make you a liar in everyone's book. When one makes unfounded claims on a
regular basis and has not once provided for any of them when asked, that
person is viewed as a liar, a propagandist at best.

=A0
Not one person can come forward and claim I have wrongfully affronted
them.

What? You're kidding again right? You can't

make a post without attacking someone. I

don't want to hear about "you're only giving it

back". Two wrongs don't make a right, and the
fact that someone might have been critical of

your 5 years ago is not an excuse for you to

leave your civility at the front door every time

you post something now

You're looking in a mirror.

I attack issues, not people

THAT is a crock. You can't separate the

issues from the people. You attack them,

accuse them of having "communications

deficits" (Among other things), and then turn

around and claim that you are only defending

yourself.

Not at all. Many times have I admitted giving back ten times what is
received.

_
, until initiated. If defending a
position I present must encompass the attack of another by illustrating
their initial attacks, so be it.

Your definition of an "initial attack" is

somewhat incredulous.

And pales in comparison to your definition of self-interpretation, state
of society, absence of proof, rules of the FCC, and self-annointed
qualifications.

_
I don't mind getting down in the mud

Of course not, that's been your intention from

day one. You need it to feed your enormous

appetite for attention.

You are the one making all the posts personal and about myself as
opposed to an issue,,,it is what alerted the radio world to your
communications deficit,,,in addition to your flip-flopping and lying
about cbers and your position regarding such, depending on your mood for
the day.

_
You are the one defending N8's disgusitng felonious crimes while
attacking others for the "crime" of speaking about freebanding.

Freebanding IS a crime.

Talking about it isn't, something your defict has yet to overcome.

A federal crime.

If that were so, all who have received an NAL would have a criminal rap
sheet,,,lol,,but alas,,they don't. Care to elaborate,? Tell me genius,
is a federal crime the same thing as a felony? g

And it remains so, despite your 5 year attempt
to deflect from that original topic. You are a

practicing criminal. You can't deal with the

reality of that claim so you deflect, obfuscate

the truth, and go on the offensive by attacking

the harbingers of that truth in an attempt to

tarnish the message by knocking down the

messengers.

Message? LMAO,,,WHAT message?
Misinterpreting your reactive calling of names is a message is more of
waht ails you. That you choose to defend one who blatantly gets busted
by the FCC for jamming a repeater and who was convicted of child abuse (
a FELONY) while railing against one who chooses to speak of a topic you
can not only handle, but are unable to properly define, illustrates your
ignorance, hypocrisy, and skewered radical view that are shared by none
except yourself and N8WWM and KC8LDO.

But, truth be told, even if you do manage to

silence the speakers of truth, you are STILL a

practicing criminal whether or not anyone else

knows it or not.

On the contrary,,I'm not the one that has made countless accusations
based on nothing more than ignorance,,,you are.

I speak the truth. If the truth insults you, it's not
my problem and further reflective of your own

psychological issues.

If one speaks the truth, one has no problem providing for suc. You have
provided for nothing, except more lipservice.

_
Such what makes you
a lid and a detriment to hammie radio. You're part of what is strangling
the hobby.

Care to elaborate on just what is "strangling"

the ham radio hobby?

You are. You are part of the problem, Elaborating will just cornfuse you
further,

_

If that is true, then you must be a real

wing-ding

on the air.

That you worry (putting it mildly) about all you can not control,
producing extreme and profound inner feelings of impotence that manifest
in your attacks on usenet as a means of venting your frustrations with
myself and "society as a whole", has nothing to do with myself,
actually.

That you felt this important enough to make

yet a second response to indicates the depth

of your obsession.

It wasn't a second response, it was a first response to a thread you
have hacked.

_
A shining example. I can say, when referring to "us", that my views are
much more in line with the average cber than your own.

Once again, you cannot possible know what

the "Average CBer's" views are.

Sure I can. The fact that I was a regular contributor for over a year to
a subscription-only monthly Sporadic Waves whose topic was cb,
illustrates just that. Publishers only print what is advantageous to
their bottom line, especially with a for-profit 'zine such as Sporadic.
If you need an education on how the business operates, that is no
surprise, but feel free to profess more ignorance on that of which you
do not know.

You a just a simpleton living in a make believe
world.

I'm not the one that sees the sky falling or society failing me, or
feels I am the lone voice in a society whose "moral fabric" is
degenerating and against me, or one who blames others and society for
all not comprehended ...*you* are.

Dave

"Sandbagger"

N3CVJ

http://home.ptd.net/~n3cvj

June 2nd 04, 06:46 PM

On Wed, 2 Jun 2004 12:23:35 -0400,
(Tampa Bay Always Kicks Philthy Azz) wrote:

I have learned you that your orignal calim of roger beeps being illegal
on cb is wrong, and it contributed to your breakdown.

You have yet to provide a specific passage in FCC part 95 which
permits a roger beep.

Whether or not the FCC now considers a roger beep to be for amusement
or entertainment purposes is a matter for speculation until the FCC
rules specifically.

I'm telling you what I saw 20 years ago, when the FCC lumped together
a whole batch of birdies, echo's, "beeps", and other "toys" and
declared that their use was deemed to be "for entertainment purposes"
and as such were not allowed under part 95. Furthermore they also
added that the addition of such devices to existing radios would void
type acceptance.

So you categorically deny that the moral
compass of our society has declined in the
last few decades?

My opinion on your off-topic subjects is not pertinent to your gaffes.

In other words, you plead the 5th. A wise choice. For if you were to
disagree with me, it would prove beyond any doubt that you are truly
oblivious to life outside your little fantasy world. And of course
your ego would never allow you to agree with me, so you say nothing.

Ask your buddy Jim in Rochester

He's not my buddy.

I guess there aren't too many who are.....

if he feels that his neighborhood is as good as
it was 25 years ago.

There are exceptions to all rules, such as the single neighborhood you
selected as your example.

Look around. It's more the rule than the exception.

To listen to the president, domestic crime has
actually decreased in the country.

Crime is only one facet of the whole picture. Lessening of the crime
rate may also be indicative of better law enforcement activities.

Look into how many people no longer consider other people's rights or
who lack simply courtesy, and you'll see a bigger picture.

Entertaining thoughts to yourself that my usenet name may somehow be a
legal name and "real" to yourself to the point of wondering aloud if the
persona was "faked" or not, illustrates just exactly how far over the
edge you were pushed.

You're kidding right? Do you really take every
word so literally?

I merely reply to the words you present. You must come to comprehend
that it is not my fault nor socities fault that the words you choose to
present are never adequate in retrospect in conveying properly just what
you meant.

I'm sure there was nobody else who is reading this thread who didn't
understand what I was implying (And they are more than welcome to
chime in if I'm wrong). That you again, are the lone standout
underscores your inability to comprehend simple language.

Everything you interpret, including my persona, has been shown time
after time to be in the extreme minority.

Shown by whom? There has yet to be a case where anyone has spoken up
and supported you. You claim to speak for the "majority", but we have
only your word as evidence.

The obvious conclusion one would draw from
that statement is that you are deliberately
modifying your behavior on this newsgroup.

You're sinking faster than your twisted psyche can follow.

I'll take that as an admission of guilt. A little longer and you might
be able to confront your problems. As they say, admitting you have a
problem is the first step toward resolution.

So I'll ask again, which are you a sociopath or
a liar?

A roger beep was classified as an

"amusement device" by the FCC over 20

years ago.

No dice, An Extra should know the current lawas and regulations,

Of the amateur radio service. This is CB remember........

the FCC holds the device as a means of
amusement and that such is illegal on cb,,,,,,,,,,only it isn't
true,,its bull**** from an Extra that should know what he is talking
about prior to embarrassing himself with ignorance.

Prove it.

So prove me wrong and provide me
clarification that the FCC has re-thought its
original declaration.

No need to prove you wrong, as EVERYONE except you is aware of the
rules.

Nowhere in the rules does it say that roger beeps are legal. The fact
that they are not included on the vast majority of legitimate radios
further supports that notion.

Specifically, 95.413 subpart a6 specifically addresses devices used
for amusement or entertainment. A roger beep could be classified as
such, since it is not addressed anywhere else.

95.412 subpart b also defines permissible tones, and defines them as
"only when the signal is used to make contact or to continue
communications". They further clarify the intent by mentioning
selective call units.

If there was a passage in the rules which read something like:" A
single tone, signalling the end of transmission is permissible", then
it would be a different story. But there isn't such a passage. So you
have nothing to stand on when you make the claim that roger beeps are
legal.

The burden of proof is always on the claimant, not the inquirer

And you claim that R.B.'s are legal without any evidence to back it
up, so I'm waiting for you to prove it.

it ranks
right there with your admitted socialism

Provide me the quote where I've admitted to being a socialist. You are
so far off the mark on that one, that it's laughable, even for you.

and anti-privacy stances,

If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear........

So I'll ask again, which are you a sociopath or

a liar?

The accomplished liar is yourself

Says you. You who have failed to prove any of your claims. And as you
are ripe to say, the poof is on the claimant. You claim I'm a liar,
but cannot prove it. What does that make you?

You have never proved that those statements
are anything but the truth. The fact that you
accused me of lying about them does not
prove anything.

But Davie,,,,the continual absence of you providing for proof in ANY of
your claims is all the proof one needs.

I don't have to prove anything. You are the one who claims I am lying.
Provide the evidence that I am lying. Because you simply refuse to
believe it is not "proof" of a lie.

The fact that you cannot find any information
about the CBer who got popped for disturbing
the peace, merely reflects on your inability to
access information.

Sure, sure,,,lol,,,,,coupled with the fact that you beg to be taken at
face value with no proof at any time.

Why not? You do it all the time. You have yet to substantiate any
claim that you've made.

Ahh,,but once again,most in radio, especially licensed hammies, have
ever owned a certain antenna, especially a base antenna, they would
remember it mostly all their lives.

That is your assumption. A flawed one though. You base your proof on a
flawed assumption. No wonder you'd never become a scientist.

,,you claimed the FCC maintains the roger beep is a sound effect device
for amusement, but can not cite anything to back up any of your claims.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of
absence.

You keep saying that, but absence of evidence is most certainly the
standard by which an individual is judged in the United States

This is not a criminal trial. Although you should be sitting at the
defendant's bench.

Not at all,,,,that you can't bring forth ALL your unsubstantiated claims
make you a liar in everyone's book. When one makes unfounded claims on a
regular basis and has not once provided for any of them when asked, that
person is viewed as a liar, a propagandist at best.

Then by your own definition, you are a liar, since you have thus far
failed to back up most of the claims that you have made in the past.
Like the military group that you ran from when Frank called your
bluff.

Not at all. Many times have I admitted giving back ten times what is
received.

More signs of sociopathic behavior.

And pales in comparison to your definition of self-interpretation, state
of society, absence of proof, rules of the FCC, and self-annointed
qualifications.

Careful, you might blow a fuse.

I don't mind getting down in the mud

Of course not, that's been your intention from
day one. You need it to feed your enormous
appetite for attention.

You are the one making all the posts personal and about myself as
opposed to an issue,

You started that. A long time ago.

You are the one defending N8's disgusitng felonious crimes while
attacking others for the "crime" of speaking about freebanding.

When have I defended Doug's "criminal" activities?

Freebanding IS a crime.

Talking about it isn't,

Why talk about something you aren't allowed to engage in? That's
nothing more than doubletalk.

A federal crime.

If that were so, all who have received an NAL would have a criminal rap
sheet,,,lol,,but alas,,they don't.

They will once convicted. The rest are simply playing Russian Roulette
with the time clock.

. That you choose to defend one who blatantly gets busted
by the FCC for jamming a repeater and who was convicted of child abuse (
a FELONY)

When?

while railing against one who chooses to speak of a topic you
can not only handle, but are unable to properly define, illustrates your
ignorance, hypocrisy, and skewered radical view that are shared by none
except yourself and N8WWM and KC8LDO.

Why should the crimes of one, excuse the crimes of another?

On the contrary,,I'm not the one that has made countless accusations
based on nothing more than ignorance.

You mean like those countless claims that I'm a liar?

I speak the truth. If the truth insults you, it's not
my problem and further reflective of your own
psychological issues.

If one speaks the truth, one has no problem providing for suc. You have
provided for nothing, except more lipservice.

Much like you. You expect everyone here to take your word at face
value, while demanding irrefutable proof from anyone else? There's a
word for that......... Yea, that's it! Hypocrite

That you felt this important enough to make
yet a second response to indicates the depth
of your obsession.

It wasn't a second response, it was a first response to a thread you
have hacked.

That's funny coming from a WebTV used who hasn't even mastered the
simplest of quoting techniques.

Once again, you cannot possible know what

the "Average CBer's" views are.

Sure I can. The fact that I was a regular contributor for over a year to
a subscription-only monthly Sporadic Waves whose topic was cb,
illustrates just that.

What, that you appeal to other bootlegger criminals? Is that supposed
to legitimize your activities and your anti-social mindset?

Publishers only print what is advantageous to
their bottom line, especially with a for-profit 'zine such as Sporadic.

Guy's who publish porn say the same thing. But is it something
reflective of wholesome societal behavior?

It's time to put you back in your box. I've fed your attention for far
longer than you've deserved. I'm sure you'll want the last word, your
ego demands it, but that's it from me.

Dave
"Sandbagger"
http://home.ptd.net/~n3cvj

June 3rd 04, 07:29 PM

From: (Dave=A0Hall)
On Wed, 2 Jun 2004 12:23:35 -0400,
(Tampa Bay Always Kicks Philthy Azz) wrote:
I have learned you that your orignal calim of roger beeps being illegal
on cb is wrong, and it contributed to your breakdown.

You have yet to provide a specific passage in

FCC part 95 which permits a roger beep.

Incorrect. You have yet to provide a passage that makes it illegal. It
was your claim.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
FM Broadcast band as we know it going away?	Robert Hovland	Broadcasting	36	October 9th 13 07:36 PM
FCC: Broadband Power Line Systems	Paul	Policy	0	January 10th 05 05:41 PM
magic band and baby monitors	PDRUNEN	Homebrew	8	July 22nd 04 01:19 AM
Muilti band quad with a single loop?	tj	Antenna	2	July 21st 04 07:24 PM
keyclown radio dealers busted in spokane WA and walcott IW	I Am Not George	CB	1	April 17th 04 07:50 PM

Menu

About Us