|
On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 12:43:33 -0500, Dave Hall
wrote in : On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 05:51:39 -0800, Frank Gilliland wrote: On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 10:52:58 -0500, Dave Hall wrote in : snip BTW, there are apparently 1800 overvotes in King County, which makes a legitimate case for contesting the election. This is all you have to write. If there is sufficient evidence of fraud then there should be changes made ana new election conducted, with stricter oversight to prevent the same thing from happening again. If there is sufficient evidence of fraud (and at this point that appears to be the case) then there -should- be changes made. But as far as a new election, why bother when Rossi doesn't even want the job? Now I could support his case except if that was the only issue. But it's not. One problem I have is when Rossi made his 'non-concession' speech he claimed that he didn't want or need the job. So I don't see the point for the state to spend millions of dollars so Rossi can get another chance at a job he doesn't even want. Also, Gregoire has conducted herself professionally; during the hand recount she stated publically that she would accept the result regardless of the victor. OTOH, after the hand recount Rossi has been making an ass of himself just like Gore did in 2000. Even worse -- when he was in the lead by a mere 42 votes he held a victory party, took a Carribean cruise, then came back and announced his transistion team -- without a single complaint about the legitimacy of the results. Now that he's losing by a slightly larger margin, legitimacy is his primary reason for demanding a second election. And when Gregoire went to court to get legitimate votes counted, Rossi whined that the election should not be decided by the courts, yet that's exactly what he's trying to do now and for the very same reason. So circumstances are a little different here than in Ohio. I'll fully support voting reform in this state, but I won't support a hypocrite governor. Hell, even Kerry had the decency to stand down in order to preserve the integrity of the office and his party -- Rossi is just being a crybaby a-la Gore. It sounds like you are letting your personal feeling WRT Rossi cloud your objective conclusion that the vote was tainted. It is irrelevant how any one candidate behaved. What is relevant is that there is a good chance that the person who "won" the election, may not have been the people's true choice. We won't know that unless those discrepancies are resolved. If that's the case then Gore should be in office, not Bush. And while I may not like Bush, I -really- don't like the idea of Gore taking the helm after watching his tantrums during the 2000 election. Same deal with Rossi. And yes, that's just my opinion. |
On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 13:06:43 -0800, Frank Gilliland
wrote: On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 12:43:33 -0500, Dave Hall wrote in : On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 05:51:39 -0800, Frank Gilliland wrote: On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 10:52:58 -0500, Dave Hall wrote in : snip BTW, there are apparently 1800 overvotes in King County, which makes a legitimate case for contesting the election. This is all you have to write. If there is sufficient evidence of fraud then there should be changes made ana new election conducted, with stricter oversight to prevent the same thing from happening again. If there is sufficient evidence of fraud (and at this point that appears to be the case) then there -should- be changes made. But as far as a new election, why bother when Rossi doesn't even want the job? Are you sure his statement that "he doesn't want the job" was not simply an effort (albeit a feeble one) to project the air that he was not as interested as he truly was/is? Now I could support his case except if that was the only issue. But it's not. One problem I have is when Rossi made his 'non-concession' speech he claimed that he didn't want or need the job. So I don't see the point for the state to spend millions of dollars so Rossi can get another chance at a job he doesn't even want. Also, Gregoire has conducted herself professionally; during the hand recount she stated publically that she would accept the result regardless of the victor. OTOH, after the hand recount Rossi has been making an ass of himself just like Gore did in 2000. Even worse -- when he was in the lead by a mere 42 votes he held a victory party, took a Carribean cruise, then came back and announced his transistion team -- without a single complaint about the legitimacy of the results. Now that he's losing by a slightly larger margin, legitimacy is his primary reason for demanding a second election. And when Gregoire went to court to get legitimate votes counted, Rossi whined that the election should not be decided by the courts, yet that's exactly what he's trying to do now and for the very same reason. So circumstances are a little different here than in Ohio. I'll fully support voting reform in this state, but I won't support a hypocrite governor. Hell, even Kerry had the decency to stand down in order to preserve the integrity of the office and his party -- Rossi is just being a crybaby a-la Gore. It sounds like you are letting your personal feeling WRT Rossi cloud your objective conclusion that the vote was tainted. It is irrelevant how any one candidate behaved. What is relevant is that there is a good chance that the person who "won" the election, may not have been the people's true choice. We won't know that unless those discrepancies are resolved. If that's the case then Gore should be in office, not Bush. How do you figure? Bush won all the recounts, both official and unofficial. And while I may not like Bush, I -really- don't like the idea of Gore taking the helm after watching his tantrums during the 2000 election. Same deal with Rossi. And yes, that's just my opinion. I can respect that. But if you are truly interested in reducing or eliminating fraud, you should be demanding further investigation and a new election, on principle alone. Dave "Sandbagger" |
On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 07:09:16 -0500, Dave Hall
wrote in : On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 13:06:43 -0800, Frank Gilliland wrote: On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 12:43:33 -0500, Dave Hall wrote in : On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 05:51:39 -0800, Frank Gilliland wrote: On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 10:52:58 -0500, Dave Hall wrote in : snip BTW, there are apparently 1800 overvotes in King County, which makes a legitimate case for contesting the election. This is all you have to write. If there is sufficient evidence of fraud then there should be changes made ana new election conducted, with stricter oversight to prevent the same thing from happening again. If there is sufficient evidence of fraud (and at this point that appears to be the case) then there -should- be changes made. But as far as a new election, why bother when Rossi doesn't even want the job? Are you sure his statement that "he doesn't want the job" was not simply an effort (albeit a feeble one) to project the air that he was not as interested as he truly was/is? Even worse -- if he -does- want the job then he was lying to the public when he said he didn't. Now I could support his case except if that was the only issue. But it's not. One problem I have is when Rossi made his 'non-concession' speech he claimed that he didn't want or need the job. So I don't see the point for the state to spend millions of dollars so Rossi can get another chance at a job he doesn't even want. Also, Gregoire has conducted herself professionally; during the hand recount she stated publically that she would accept the result regardless of the victor. OTOH, after the hand recount Rossi has been making an ass of himself just like Gore did in 2000. Even worse -- when he was in the lead by a mere 42 votes he held a victory party, took a Carribean cruise, then came back and announced his transistion team -- without a single complaint about the legitimacy of the results. Now that he's losing by a slightly larger margin, legitimacy is his primary reason for demanding a second election. And when Gregoire went to court to get legitimate votes counted, Rossi whined that the election should not be decided by the courts, yet that's exactly what he's trying to do now and for the very same reason. So circumstances are a little different here than in Ohio. I'll fully support voting reform in this state, but I won't support a hypocrite governor. Hell, even Kerry had the decency to stand down in order to preserve the integrity of the office and his party -- Rossi is just being a crybaby a-la Gore. It sounds like you are letting your personal feeling WRT Rossi cloud your objective conclusion that the vote was tainted. It is irrelevant how any one candidate behaved. What is relevant is that there is a good chance that the person who "won" the election, may not have been the people's true choice. We won't know that unless those discrepancies are resolved. If that's the case then Gore should be in office, not Bush. How do you figure? Bush won all the recounts, both official and unofficial. I don't think so, Dave. You'll have to hit Twisty up for the facts about that considering it was his state, not mine. And while I may not like Bush, I -really- don't like the idea of Gore taking the helm after watching his tantrums during the 2000 election. Same deal with Rossi. And yes, that's just my opinion. I can respect that. But if you are truly interested in reducing or eliminating fraud, you should be demanding further investigation and a new election, on principle alone. In Gregoire's speech yesterday (swearing-in ceremony), the first topic she raised was the election. She has already set up an independent panel to investigate the election process and it's faults, and their report is to be used as the foundation for statewide election reform. By the time she finished her speech she had broken the ranks of the Republicans (who began the ceremony holding a childish demonstration of passive-agression) and many were applauding her plans. If she succeeds in the next few years I wouldn't be suprised to see her make a run for the White House -- and win. |
N#CVJ wrote:
Uh... Nooooo. Splatter is the result of a dirty transmitter, Bleed,,splatter,,,,you're wrong, ya' know..a dirty transmitter is but ONE example.............once again you incorrectly claimed that skip does not affect splatter, when it most certainly does. |
Lancer wrote:
OK, but I agreed with that. I said that DX helps the splatter by this: If he's in Florida talking on a bone stock radio, I won't hear him in Los Angeles. Now, if he decides to fire up an amp, I still won't hear him in LA. =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0Now skip rolls in, I can here him without an amp and with an amp, but on the adjacent channel, where the noise was zero, I now have a ton of signals, so the skip didn't help those signals "bounce into" LA? of course it did. Now the adjacent channel has more "splatter" than before, skip didn't help enhance the noise level on my end? =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0La ndshark Ok, skip increased his signal that you hear. Exactly,,it "affected it", which is exactly what I and Shark maintained, to which some took issue with. and skip also increased his splatter that you hear. Again,,,another example of skip affecting the splatter, Touche. But The relation between his signal and his splatter doesn't change. Skip affects splatter. |
|
|
On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 18:39:07 GMT, Lancer wrote:
On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 12:03:43 -0500, (Twistedhed) wrote: Lancer wrote: OK, but I agreed with that. I said that DX helps the splatter by this: If he's in Florida talking on a bone stock radio, I won't hear him in Los Angeles. Now, if he decides to fire up an amp, I still won't hear him in LA. ********Now skip rolls in, I can here him without an amp and with an amp, but on the adjacent channel, where the noise was zero, I now have a ton of signals, so the skip didn't help those signals "bounce into" LA? of course it did. Now the adjacent channel has more "splatter" than before, skip didn't help enhance the noise level on my end? ****************Landshark Ok, skip increased his signal that you hear. Exactly,,it "affected it", which is exactly what I and Shark maintained, to which some took issue with. and skip also increased his splatter that you hear. Again,,,another example of skip affecting the splatter, Touche. Quit clipping my posts apart to fit your needs. That's exactly what he does. He destroys the original context to make it look like you said something that you didn't. He's either a clever troll or a someone who is totally devoid of comprehension abilities. I was trying to point out to Shark that skip will progate the original signal and the splatter equally. Anyone with average intelligence understands this. But I guess some seem to need the exact literal finite details colored in or they grasp the wrong meaning. But The relation between his signal and his splatter doesn't change. Skip affects splatter. No more than the original part of his signal... Do you think that skip effects the splatter component of his signal more that the desirable part of his signal? and it does not effect the realtionship between the two. Right! The relationship between the fundamental signal and the splatter components present will not change with the variation of the DX conditions. They move together harmoniously. Dave "Sandbagger" |
NCVJ wrote:
Yes, you are correct, the DX enables distant splatter boxes to be heard in you local area |
N3CVJ wrote:
Yes, you are correct, the DX enables distant splatter boxes to be heard in you local area No one was talking about extra power or illegal power,,try and remain focused, Davie. |
N3CVJ wrote:
A small sampling of examples illustrating your cognitive and interpretive skills: What do you consider a good price? What do you consider a great price? What do you consider lightning protection? What do consider a bad swr? What do you consider legal power? Just what do you consider tolerance? What do you consider injuy? What do you consider a channel? What do you consider work? What do you consider proper drive? What do you consider old? What do you consider a fact? What do you consider nice? What do you consider a positive contribution? Assuming these are quotes of mine (and considering you recent past penchant for confusing another's quote for one of mine, it's probable that they're not), Its your fault you can't remember your lies and what you posted. Twist: "Still have the Phelps, Dave?" N3CVJ: "WHAT Phelps? I wish I HAD a Stationmaster" Delving into the archives, you made many posts about having a Phelps Stationmaster only a few short years ago. Now,,any normally educated hammie in the world would remember his base stations and antennas, even as a child. The fact that you had no clue what I referred is roof positive you lie. A pattern here is you rambling incoherent, being shown you are wrong, often with your own words, and watching you scramble like a monkey to "explain away" to the world, just what you really meant. your overly simplistic and literal translations fail to account for the reality that those questions are all relative or subjective, depending on the writer's perspective and point of reference. But I'd guess those concepts are beyond your reasoning ability. Dave "Sandbagger" N3CVJ To be fair, your guesses are steeped in ignorance and the refusal to learn. Whether your difficulties originate with confusion concerning subjective or "relative", no one else on the group shares such a dilemma of not grasping what everyone else means. Only you seem to suffer with interpretive skills when others use simplistic terms. After all, only you express great difficulty interpreting each writer's perspective, which is why you have to ask everyone what they mean when they use extremely simplistic terms...your interpretive and communicative skills are shot and not one other person in the group suffers from the "reasoning ability" you invoke responsible for your behavior not comprehending all the writers "perspective" and "point of reference". Everyone else understands what everyone else means with such simple terms as ilustrated above..only you have the underlying issues. |
From: (Lancer)
On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 12:03:43 -0500, (Twistedhed) wrote: Lancer wrote: OK, but I agreed with that. I said that DX helps the splatter by this: If he's in Florida talking on a bone stock radio, I won't hear him in Los Angeles. Now, if he decides to fire up an amp, I still won't hear him in LA. =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0No w skip rolls in, I can here him without an amp and with an amp, but on the adjacent channel, where the noise was zero, I now have a ton of signals, so the skip didn't help those signals "bounce into" LA? of course it did. Now the adjacent channel has more "splatter" than before, skip didn't help enhance the noise level on my end? =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C 2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2= =A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0Landshark Ok, skip increased his signal that you hear. Exactly,,it "affected it", which is exactly what I and Shark maintained, to which some took issue with. _ and skip also increased his splatter that you hear. _ Again,,,another example of skip affecting the splatter, Touche. Quit clipping my posts apart to fit your needs. Deal,,,IF you quit attempting to qualify exactly what I said by adding components and additional words when I never said anything of the sort, I'll stop snipping your posted parts that don't apply to anything I said. I was trying to point out to Shark that skip will progate the original signal and the splatter equally. But The relation between his signal and his splatter doesn't change. Skip affects splatter. No more than the original part of his signal... Skip affects splatter. Do you think that skip effects the splatter component of his signal more that the desirable part of his signal? And it does not effect the realtionship between the two. The mere acknolwedgement of an existing relationship between skip and splatter is proof positive once again of the ONLY thing I said,,,,,,,,"Skip affects splatter". If the splatter components are at a 10% level compared to the level of his signal, then with skip they will still be at that level. Touche... You can make all the comments you want about what you want and clarifications, as they sure as hell don't apply to anything I said,,I emntioned nothing abotu levels, relationships, splatter boxes, etc,,, Now,,,once again,,, here is the bottom line from your post... Ok, skip increased his signal that you hear. and skip also increased his splatter that you hear. ,,let's see that again,,, just to make absolutely certain you aer saying what I said originally.. skip increased his signal that you hear,,, and lastly,, and skip also increases his splatter that you hear. What's the problem? Adding additional clarifications like "relationship", "splatter boxes",etc...has nothing to do with my original statement or its context,,,the words were not mine. All I said is exactly what you repeated above, Trying to invoke terms like "relationship" *after* the fact when I NEVER mentioned such terms, changes the dynamics and context of what I claimed,,,,the exact same thing you claimed above. |
Lancer wrote:
I don't quite understand why this is so hard for him to understand. Im not the having the difficulties you imagine,,you expressed that by introducing new terms and concepts to what I said with each post you made,,,,first you invoked that the "relationship " doesn't change,,,I never said it did,,yet, you are attempting to qualify what I said with words I never used. Again,,your mere acknowledgement that such a relationship exists (between skip and splatter) confirms exactly what I originally said, void of the terms you and Davie tried invoking. If you have a station with a certain amount of splatter on it. Move it a 1,000 miles away, you can now hear him with skip. If the station was local and you move it 1000 miles away and the skip ain't running, you will hear nothing. Note that you are now resorting to hypothetical situations with the word "if" and I used your example only because you mentioned it. Try this: The original disagreement was nothing of what you now are speaking. Davie said skip had no affect on splatter, so this not only automatically discounts any local splatter or bleed in the context of the discussion, but you acknowledged a direct relationship between skip and splatter, regardless how you wish to define it. The components of his signal haven't changed. Add another 100 stations with splatter, and his original components of his signal still haven't changed.. Im not the having difficulties,,you expressed that by introducing new terms and concepts to what I said with each post you made,,,,first you said the "relationship doesn't change",,,I never said it did,,,you're beginning to enter terms I never used, and take issue with them yourself..first it was how the "relationship" betweent the two didn't change, now it's "components". How bizarre. |
From: (Dave=A0Hall)
On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 18:39:07 GMT, Lancer wrote: On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 12:03:43 -0500, (Twistedhed) wrote: Lancer wrote: OK, but I agreed with that. I said that DX helps the splatter by this: If he's in Florida talking on a bone stock radio, I won't hear him in Los Angeles. Now, if he decides to fire up an amp, I still won't hear him in LA. =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0Now skip rolls in, I can here him without an amp and with an amp, but on the adjacent channel, where the noise was zero, I now have a ton of signals, so the skip didn't help those signals "bounce into" LA? of course it did. Now the adjacent channel has more "splatter" than before, skip didn't help enhance the noise level on my end? =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0La ndshark Ok, skip increased his signal that you hear. Exactly,,it "affected it", which is exactly what I and Shark maintained, to which some took issue with. and skip also increased his splatter that you hear. Again,,,another example of skip affecting the splatter, Touche. Quit clipping my posts apart to fit your needs. (That's exactly what he does. He destroys the original context to make it look like you said something that you didn't) Now now Davie,,,,you are once again permitting your lack of personal control over your emotions dictate your topics again...your lack of education conerning communication etiquette and skill always manifests in your posts when you disagree with someone. You never learned how to debate and attack the topic or subject,,you attack the poster.....illustrative of your ignorance. Just for the record, he most certainly ackowldged the realtionship between skip and splatter. He's either a clever troll or a someone who is totally devoid of comprehension abilities. LOL,,you are the one needing to ask everyone else what they mean when they use sixth grade terminology on a repeat and ongoing basis. (I was trying to point out to Shark that skip will progate the original signal and the splatter equally.) Funny,,,,here you are trying to make a point that you apparently think Shark took issue with,,,,he didn;t,,and neither did I. Anyone with average intelligence understands this. But I guess some seem to need the exact literal finite details colored in or they grasp the wrong meaning. Expressed superbly by the illustration of your posting history littered with redundant questions of "What did you mean by...". Only you have this difficulty and your posting history shows such, Projecting your character flaws onto another won't make it so. But The relation between his signal and his splatter doesn't change. Skip affects splatter. (No more than the original part of his signal... Do you think that skip effects the splatter component of his signal more that the desirable part of his signal? and it does not effect the realtionship between the two.) Right! The relationship between the fundamental signal and the splatter components present will not change with the variation of the DX conditions. They move together harmoniously. Try and get lucid again, if you can muster the courage, Once again, you aer talking to yourself. No one made such a claim that splatter changes dx conditions, which is why you taking issue with yourself is such a gift. Dave "Sandbagger" N3CVJ |
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 11:06:29 -0500, (Twistedhed)
wrote: From: (Lancer) On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 12:03:43 -0500, (Twistedhed) wrote: Lancer wrote: OK, but I agreed with that. I said that DX helps the splatter by this: If he's in Florida talking on a bone stock radio, I won't hear him in Los Angeles. Now, if he decides to fire up an amp, I still won't hear him in LA. ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*Now skip rolls in, I can here him without an amp and with an amp, but on the adjacent channel, where the noise was zero, I now have a ton of signals, so the skip didn't help those signals "bounce into" LA? of course it did. Now the adjacent channel has more "splatter" than before, skip didn't help enhance the noise level on my end? ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*à ‚Â*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*Landshark Ok, skip increased his signal that you hear. Exactly,,it "affected it", which is exactly what I and Shark maintained, to which some took issue with. _ and skip also increased his splatter that you hear. _ Again,,,another example of skip affecting the splatter, Touche. Quit clipping my posts apart to fit your needs. Deal,,,IF you quit attempting to qualify exactly what I said by adding components and additional words when I never said anything of the sort, I'll stop snipping your posted parts that don't apply to anything I said. I was trying to point out to Shark that skip will progate the original signal and the splatter equally. But The relation between his signal and his splatter doesn't change. Skip affects splatter. No more than the original part of his signal... Skip affects splatter. Do you think that skip effects the splatter component of his signal more that the desirable part of his signal? And it does not effect the realtionship between the two. The mere acknolwedgement of an existing relationship between skip and splatter is proof positive once again of the ONLY thing I said,,,,,,,,"Skip affects splatter". If the splatter components are at a 10% level compared to the level of his signal, then with skip they will still be at that level. Touche... You can make all the comments you want about what you want and clarifications, as they sure as hell don't apply to anything I said,,I emntioned nothing abotu levels, relationships, splatter boxes, etc,,, Now,,,once again,,, here is the bottom line from your post... Ok, skip increased his signal that you hear. and skip also increased his splatter that you hear. ,,let's see that again,,, just to make absolutely certain you aer saying what I said originally.. skip increased his signal that you hear,,, and lastly,, and skip also increases his splatter that you hear. What's the problem? Adding additional clarifications like "relationship", "splatter boxes",etc...has nothing to do with my original statement or its context,,,the words were not mine. All I said is exactly what you repeated above, Trying to invoke terms like "relationship" *after* the fact when I NEVER mentioned such terms, changes the dynamics and context of what I claimed,,,,the exact same thing you claimed above. Forget it Twist, all you want to do is make damn sure that Dave never proves you wrong. If you want to keep twisting stuff around to make yourself look better, feel free. But ya know what? Dave proved you wrong this time. Have a nice day... |
ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*
ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*à ‚Â*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ* WTF is that, Twist!? :D |
N3CVJ wrote:
At this point, it's best to just leave it go. Agreed,,the Phelps issue is haunting you almost as bad as your self-professed skills and knowledge regarding your status as an extra that a roger beep is illegal and going over 70 MPH makes one a federal criminal. Guys like Landshark, understand what the topic is and will understand a good explanation. That's almost as rich as what follows, as Shark and I said the exact same thing concerning DX. You arr suffering a great deal on this aubject. N3CVJ, in all his self-projecting glory wrote: Twist, on the other hand, gets hung up on certain overly literal semantics, Now that is rich, especially in light of the fact that your posting history is littered with expressed difficulties getting hung up over semantics..... N3CVJ wrote: What do you consider a good price? What do you consider a great price? What do you consider lightning protection? What do consider a bad swr? What do you consider legal power? Just what do you consider tolerance? What do you consider injury? What do you consider a channel? What do you consider work? What do you consider proper drive? What do you consider old? What do you consider a fact? What do you consider nice? What do you consider a positive contribution? Man,,I looove Fridays! Have a great weekend, davie, and try not to permit me to lord over your thoughts and actions in my absence...unless, of course, it's to take more of my scholarly posts and have them interpreted to you by one of these educated colleagues of which you speak. |
Lancer wrote:
Forget it Twist, all you want You say "forget it", but go on to add your 2 cents.... to do is make damn sure that Dave never proves you wrong. No such animal. I can care less who posts what. If it's wrong, I will say so, regardles who it is. Try not letting who posts what cloud your judgement over *what* is posted. If you want to keep twisting stuff around to make yourself look better, feel free. Only you *and* N3CVJ tried adding words to my claim that were never said by me...THAT is twisting. But ya know what? Dave proved you wrong this time. Have a nice day... And that's the beauty of usenet...diagreeing without getting personal. Try and explain that to the one who "proved wrong" my claim that "Skip affects splatter". Whether you can admit or not, that was my claim, cut and dry. |
|
On 14 Jan 2005 16:43:30 GMT, Steveo
wrote: ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ* ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*à ‚Â*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ* WTF is that, Twist!? :D He's "tagging" posts again........ Dave "Sandbagger" |
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 10:42:55 -0500, (Twistedhed)
wrote: N3CVJ wrote: Yes, you are correct, the DX enables distant splatter boxes to be heard in you local area No one was talking about extra power or illegal power,, I was. That was the original point of this whole thread. try and remain focused, Davie. You should follow your own advice. Dave "Sandbagger" |
|
|
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 10:57:17 -0500, (Twistedhed)
wrote: that doing over 70 mph makes one a federal criminal, Not that I care or anything, but to avoid further embarrassment at once again confusing me with another, I'd suggest you recheck your obsession with personal searches. I never made that claim. Dave "Sandbagger" |
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 12:02:18 -0500, (Twistedhed)
wrote: From: (Steveo) ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ƚÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ* ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ƚÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ* ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ* WTF is that, Twist!? :D _ ÂÂÂ*ÂÂYou mean you don't know? Email me,,,webtv is foolproof when quoting certain posters and only certain usenet access services leave such marks. Call it internet fingerprints. Like this? |
Lancer wrote:
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 12:02:18 -0500, (Twistedhed) wrote: From: (Steveo) ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ƚÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ* ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ƚÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ* ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ƚÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ* WTF is that, Twist!? :D _ ÂÂÂ*ÂÂYou mean you don't know? Email me,,,webtv is foolproof when quoting certain posters and only certain usenet access services leave such marks. Call it internet fingerprints. Like this? Is  Chinese for Lancer? :) |
On 14 Jan 2005 18:03:40 GMT, Steveo
wrote: Lancer wrote: On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 12:02:18 -0500, (Twistedhed) wrote: From: (Steveo) ÂÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂÂ*ƚÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂÂ* *ÂÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂÂ*ƚÂÂÂ* ÂÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂÂ*ƚÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂÂ* *ÂÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂÂ*ƚÂÂÂ* ÂÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂÂ*ƚÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂÂ* *ÂÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂÂ*ƚÂÂÂ* WTF is that, Twist!? :D _ ÂÂÂÂ*ÂÂYou mean you don't know? Email me,,,webtv is foolproof when quoting certain posters and only certain usenet access services leave such marks. Call it internet fingerprints. Like this? Is  Chinese for Lancer? :) Not working today Steve? |
On 14 Jan 2005 18:03:40 GMT, Steveo
wrote: Lancer wrote: On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 12:02:18 -0500, (Twistedhed) wrote: From: (Steveo) ÂÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂÂ*ƚÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂÂ* *ÂÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂÂ*ƚÂÂÂ* ÂÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂÂ*ƚÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂÂ* *ÂÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂÂ*ƚÂÂÂ* ÂÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂÂ*ƚÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂÂ* *ÂÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂÂ*ƚÂÂÂ* WTF is that, Twist!? :D _ ÂÂÂÂ*ÂÂYou mean you don't know? Email me,,,webtv is foolproof when quoting certain posters and only certain usenet access services leave such marks. Call it internet fingerprints. Like this? Is  Chinese for Lancer? :) I don't think so, Chinese have all those wacked out characters.. Where one letter means a word.. |
Lancer wrote:
On 14 Jan 2005 18:03:40 GMT, Steveo wrote: Lancer wrote: On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 12:02:18 -0500, (Twistedhed) wrote: From: (Steveo) ÂÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂÂ*ƚÂÂÂ*ƚÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂÂ* Â* Â*ÂÂÂÂ* ÂÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂÂ*ƚÂÂÂ*ƚÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂÂ* Â* Â*ÂÂÂÂ* ÂÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂÂ*ƚÂÂÂ*ƚÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂÂ* Â* Â*ÂÂÂÂ* WTF is that, Twist!? :D _ ÂÂÂÂ*ÂÂYou mean you don't know? Email me, ,,webtv is foolproof when quoting certain posters and only certain usenet access services leave such marks. Call it internet fingerprints. Like this? Is  Chinese for Lancer? :) Not working today Steve? Working in the office. |
On 14 Jan 2005 18:11:33 GMT, Steveo
wrote: Lancer wrote: On 14 Jan 2005 18:03:40 GMT, Steveo wrote: Lancer wrote: On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 12:02:18 -0500, (Twistedhed) wrote: From: (Steveo) ÂÂÂÂÂ*Ãà †â€™ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ÂÂ*Ãà ¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ÂÂ*Ãâ↚¬ šÃ‚ÂÂÂ*Âà ƒÆ’‚ÂÂÂ*ÂÃâ⠂¬Å¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â*ÂÂà ‚ ÂÂ* * ÂÂÂÂÂ*Ãà †â€™ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ÂÂ*Ãà ¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ÂÂ*Ãâ↚¬ šÃ‚ÂÂÂ*Âà ƒÆ’‚ÂÂÂ*ÂÃâ⠂¬Å¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â*ÂÂà ‚ ÂÂ* * ÂÂÂÂÂ*Ãà †â€™ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ÂÂ*Ãà ¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ÂÂ*Ãâ↚¬ šÃ‚ÂÂÂ*Âà ƒÆ’‚ÂÂÂ*ÂÃâ⠂¬Å¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â*ÂÂà ‚ ÂÂ* * WTF is that, Twist!? :D _ ÂÂÂÂÂ*ÃÆ ’‚ÂYou mean you don't know? Email me, ,,webtv is foolproof when quoting certain posters and only certain usenet access services leave such marks. Call it internet fingerprints. Like this? Is  Chinese for Lancer? :) Not working today Steve? Working in the office. Bad day for working in the office here, nice and sunny..supposed to get cold this weekend... |
Lancer wrote:
Not working today Steve? Working in the office. Bad day for working in the office here, nice and sunny..supposed to get cold this weekend... More strange weather up here..67 degrees yesterday 20 today, with a brisk wind chill..brrrrr Good day to be inside! |
"Steveo" wrote in message ... Lancer wrote: On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 12:02:18 -0500, (Twistedhed) wrote: From: (Steveo) Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ, WTF is that, Twist!? :D _ Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ,You mean you don't know? Email me,,,webtv is foolproof when quoting certain posters and only certain usenet access services leave such marks. Call it internet fingerprints. Like this? Is Ãfâ?sÃ, Chinese for Lancer? :) It's "code" ;) LOL!! Landshark -- My bad..the camera is mightier than the blowhard(s)..in most respects. |
"Steveo" wrote in message ... Lancer wrote: Not working today Steve? Working in the office. Bad day for working in the office here, nice and sunny..supposed to get cold this weekend... More strange weather up here..67 degrees yesterday 20 today, with a brisk wind chill..brrrrr Good day to be inside! Finally stopped raining & snowing, but still cold for this time of the year. Landshark -- __ o /' ) /' ( , __/' ) .' `; o _.-~~~~' ``---..__ .' ; _.--' b) LANDSHARK ``--...____. .' ( _. )). `-._ `\|\|\|\|)-.....___.- `-. __...--'-.'. `---......____...---`.___.'----... .' `.; `-` ` |
"Landshark" wrote:
"Steveo" wrote in message More strange weather up here..67 degrees yesterday 20 today, with a brisk wind chill..brrrrr Good day to be inside! Finally stopped raining & snowing, but still cold for this time of the year. Landshark Let it snow, let it snow, let it snow! :D |
"Landshark" wrote:
"Steveo" wrote in message ... Lancer wrote: On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 12:02:18 -0500, (Twistedhed) wrote: From: (Steveo) Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ, WTF is that, Twist!? :D _ Ãfâ?sÃ, Ãfâ?sÃ,You mean you don't know? Email me,,,webtv is foolproof when quoting certain posters and only certain usenet access services leave such marks. Call it internet fingerprints. Like this? Is Ãfâ?sÃ, Chinese for Lancer? :) It's "code" ;) LOL!! Landshark Usenet code..what's next!? |
Lancer wrote:
On 15 Jan 2005 15:49:54 GMT, Steveo wrote: "Landshark" wrote: "Steveo" wrote in message More strange weather up here..67 degrees yesterday 20 today, with a brisk wind chill..brrrrr Good day to be inside! Finally stopped raining & snowing, but still cold for this time of the year. Landshark Let it snow, let it snow, let it snow! :D Wish it would do that down here.. I'm tired of looking at a brown lawn.. Same here, the floods washed all the snow away.. |
tomz wrote:
What improvements would you like to have done to your CB? Would you want more range? Would you want more privacy? Would you want exclusive use channels? I WOULD INSTALL A ****** FILTER TO KEEP THE CHIMP-NIGS OFF. |
Steveo wrote:
tomz wrote: What improvements would you like to have done to your CB? Would you want more range? Would you want more privacy? Would you want exclusive use channels? I WOULD INSTALL A ****** FILTER TO KEEP THE CHIMP-NIGS OFF. A good start would be for you to stop posting on anything but your natural newsgroup. -- The Best in Message Board Discussions http://www.comicboards.org/religion ----------------- Bush is re-elected, fly the flag upside down! xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx *********xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx *********xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx *********xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx *********xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
"Steveo" wrote in message ... Lancer wrote: On 15 Jan 2005 15:49:54 GMT, Steveo wrote: "Landshark" wrote: "Steveo" wrote in message More strange weather up here..67 degrees yesterday 20 today, with a brisk wind chill..brrrrr Good day to be inside! Finally stopped raining & snowing, but still cold for this time of the year. Landshark Let it snow, let it snow, let it snow! :D Wish it would do that down here.. I'm tired of looking at a brown lawn.. Same here, the floods washed all the snow away.. A little fog this morning, but bright & sunny in the afternoon. Wife & kids doing yard work, while I'm getting dinner ready and prepping the hot tub for this evening. Landshark -- My bad..the camera is mightier than the blowhard(s)..in most respects. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:25 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com