|
What does a person think when they hear 'ham radio operator'?
If they're smart, they most likely think a ham radio operator is skilled and knows morse code. SC |
KB9RQZ Says Learning Code is EASY!
|
What does a person think when they hear 'ham radio operator'?
Mark in the Dark, wrote in
: On Mon, 06 Nov 2006 01:16:15 GMT, Slow Code wrote: If they're smart, they most likely think a ham radio operator is skilled and knows morse code. Bull**** You're not a real ham, you don't know CW and you're not skilled. Learn CW! SC |
What does a person think when they hear 'ham radio operator'?
"Slow Code" wrote in message
SC Personally, I think, "Well, I can darn sure be certain that ham is NOT slow idiot!" JS |
What does a person think when they hear 'ham radio operator'?
|
What does a person think when they hear 'ham radio operator'?
|
What does a person think when they hear 'ham radio operator'?
On 8 Nov 2006 04:57:02 -0800, Secwet Woger wrote:
No you only have the beginner's training wheel ham license, dumbass. When you get a more advanced license, you can become as cool as Woger is like this: GLENDALE, WV: The FCC sent a Warning Notice November 9, 1999, to General licensee Roger L. Wiseman, KC8JBO, citing evidence that the licensee had been "deliberately and maliciously interfering with the radio operations of other licensed amateurs" on 20 meters. "This interference has occurred at various times in the last several months and includes broadcasting music and other unidentified transmissions," said a letter from FCC Special Counsel for Amateur Radio Enforcement Riley Hollingsworth. Hollingsworth warned that continued operation of the type described could result in a fine or license revocation proceeding, and he requested that the licensee contact him to discuss the allegations. GLENDALE, WV [UPDATE]: The FCC had written General licensee Roger L. Wiseman, KC8JBO, on March 29, 2000, advising that it had been made aware of "an ongoing personal dispute" between Wiseman and Advanced licensee Steven A. Tunder, N8WGM, that included allegations of interference or jamming on 20 meters. FCC Special Counsel for Amateur Radio Enforcement Riley Hollingsworth cautioned Tunder and Wiseman to review §97.1 of the Amateur Radio rules and "to make certain that whatever disputes that may exist are not carried over to Amateur Radio frequencies." Hollingsworth invited the two licensees to contact him to discuss the matter. Wiseman alleged in a subsequent communication to the ARRL that Tunder had been harassing him and that he had made the FCC aware of it in the first place. Wiseman indicated that he had been in touch with Hollingsworth to clarify the situation. The FCC had sent Wiseman a Warning Notice last November in response to allegations of deliberate and malicious interference on 20 meters. GLENDALE, WV: The FCC requested July 11, 2000, that Roger L. Wiseman, KC8JBO, retake the General examination elements under the supervision of an ARRL-VEC volunteer examiner team. Wiseman must appear for retesting by September 11, 2000, or his license will be canceled. Applicants appearing for re-examination are granted an Amateur Radio license consistent with the elements passed. The FCC had written Wiseman on March 29, 2000, advising that it had been made aware of "an ongoing personal dispute" between Wiseman and another licensee that included allegations of interference or jamming on 20 meters. FCC Special Counsel for Amateur Radio Enforcement Riley Hollingsworth invited the two licensees to contact him to discuss the matter. Additionally, the FCC had sent Wiseman a Warning Notice last November in response to allegations of deliberate and malicious interference on 20 meters. |
What does a person think when they hear 'ham radio operator'?
Lloyd wrote in :
GLENDALE, WV: The FCC requested July 11, 2000, that Roger L. Wiseman, KC8JBO, retake the General examination elements under the supervision of an ARRL-VEC volunteer examiner team. Wiseman must appear for retesting by September 11, 2000, or his license will be canceled. Applicants appearing for re-examination are granted an Amateur Radio license consistent with the elements passed. The FCC had written Wiseman on March 29, 2000, advising that it had been made aware of "an ongoing personal dispute" between Wiseman and another licensee that included allegations of interference or jamming on 20 meters. FCC Special Counsel for Amateur Radio Enforcement Riley Hollingsworth invited the two licensees to contact him to discuss the matter. Additionally, the FCC had sent Wiseman a Warning Notice last November in response to allegations of deliberate and malicious interference on 20 meters. ROFL, I always laugh at that one. I wonder why ol Two-test hasn't been around much. Maybe too much ham radio talk. SC |
What does a person think when they hear 'ham radio operator'?
Slow Code wrote: Lloyd wrote in : GLENDALE, WV: The FCC requested July 11, 2000, that Roger L. Wiseman, KC8JBO, retake the General examination elements under the supervision of an ARRL-VEC volunteer examiner team. Wiseman must appear for retesting by September 11, 2000, or his license will be canceled. Applicants appearing for re-examination are granted an Amateur Radio license consistent with the elements passed. The FCC had written Wiseman on March 29, 2000, advising that it had been made aware of "an ongoing personal dispute" between Wiseman and another licensee that included allegations of interference or jamming on 20 meters. FCC Special Counsel for Amateur Radio Enforcement Riley Hollingsworth invited the two licensees to contact him to discuss the matter. Additionally, the FCC had sent Wiseman a Warning Notice last November in response to allegations of deliberate and malicious interference on 20 meters. ROFL, I always laugh at that one. But then you ARE easily amused huh, bright shiny objects seem to capture all your attention. I wonder why ol Two-test hasn't been around much. Maybe too much ham radio talk. "Two-test" Slow **** makes good sentence. Slow **** is so stupid, he rehashes 6 year old bull****. Roger still PASSED his retest and upgraded, something you couldn't do. The letters to both Wiseman and Tunder were a preemptive "warning" that did not allege any activities. That hardly qualifies as a warning in the context of someone having actually done something. The letter with the warning in it ALLEGED interference, and warned of consequences. The retest letter made no reference to interference; in fact gave no reason for requiring the retest. Such a request is part of the Volunteer Examining program. It could have been made for any number of reasons that may have had nothing to do with any of the addressee's actions. An investigation into the VE group that gave the test, would be a good example. Only one letter was a warning referring to interference. But then Republicans aren't noted for telling the truth, are they? |
What does a person think when they hear 'ham radio operator'?
|
What does a person think when they hear 'ham radio operator'?
On 9 Nov 2006 05:02:10 -0800, Not Cocksucker Lloyd Secwet Woger wrote:
Slow Code wrote: Lloyd wrote in : GLENDALE, WV: The FCC requested July 11, 2000, that Roger L. Wiseman, KC8JBO, retake the General examination elements under the supervision of an ARRL-VEC volunteer examiner team. Wiseman must appear for retesting by September 11, 2000, or his license will be canceled. Applicants appearing for re-examination are granted an Amateur Radio license consistent with the elements passed. The FCC had written Wiseman on March 29, 2000, advising that it had been made aware of "an ongoing personal dispute" between Wiseman and another licensee that included allegations of interference or jamming on 20 meters. FCC Special Counsel for Amateur Radio Enforcement Riley Hollingsworth invited the two licensees to contact him to discuss the matter. Additionally, the FCC had sent Wiseman a Warning Notice last November in response to allegations of deliberate and malicious interference on 20 meters. ROFL, I always laugh at that one. ... The retest letter made no reference to interference; in fact gave no reason for requiring the retest. Such a request is part of the Volunteer Examining program. It could have been made for any number of reasons that may have had nothing to do with any of the addressee's actions. An investigation into the VE group that gave the test, would be a good example. ROFL, I always laugh at that reply, because he posts it so much. No other person from the VE group was tested, so we have to assume that the FCC guys were just sitting around the office one day when one of them said, "Hey, guys: Let's retest Roger Wiseman." There was no reason for it at all, of course, and it just happened. |
What does a person think when they hear 'ham radio operator'?
Lloyd wrote in :
On 9 Nov 2006 05:02:10 -0800, Not Cocksucker Lloyd Secwet Woger wrote: Slow Code wrote: Lloyd wrote in : GLENDALE, WV: The FCC requested July 11, 2000, that Roger L. Wiseman, KC8JBO, retake the General examination elements under the supervision of an ARRL-VEC volunteer examiner team. Wiseman must appear for retesting by September 11, 2000, or his license will be canceled. Applicants appearing for re-examination are granted an Amateur Radio license consistent with the elements passed. The FCC had written Wiseman on March 29, 2000, advising that it had been made aware of "an ongoing personal dispute" between Wiseman and another licensee that included allegations of interference or jamming on 20 meters. FCC Special Counsel for Amateur Radio Enforcement Riley Hollingsworth invited the two licensees to contact him to discuss the matter. Additionally, the FCC had sent Wiseman a Warning Notice last November in response to allegations of deliberate and malicious interference on 20 meters. ROFL, I always laugh at that one. ... The retest letter made no reference to interference; in fact gave no reason for requiring the retest. Such a request is part of the Volunteer Examining program. It could have been made for any number of reasons that may have had nothing to do with any of the addressee's actions. An investigation into the VE group that gave the test, would be a good example. ROFL, I always laugh at that reply, because he posts it so much. LOL! Wouldn't it really suck to have to take the General exam twice? Hee Hee Heeeeeeeeeeeeeee!! SC |
What does a person think when they hear 'ham radio operator'?
Lardass and 33 year old virgin Lloyd who can't pass 5 wpm code or the General exam once whined: On 9 Nov 2006 05:02:10 -0800, Not Cocksucker Lloyd wrong again, fatty,. imagine that! wrote: Slow Code wrote: Lloyd wrote in : GLENDALE, WV: The FCC requested July 11, 2000, that Roger L. Wiseman, KC8JBO, retake the General examination elements under the supervision of an ARRL-VEC volunteer examiner team. Wiseman must appear for retesting by September 11, 2000, or his license will be canceled. Applicants appearing for re-examination are granted an Amateur Radio license consistent with the elements passed. The FCC had written Wiseman on March 29, 2000, advising that it had been made aware of "an ongoing personal dispute" between Wiseman and another licensee that included allegations of interference or jamming on 20 meters. FCC Special Counsel for Amateur Radio Enforcement Riley Hollingsworth invited the two licensees to contact him to discuss the matter. Additionally, the FCC had sent Wiseman a Warning Notice last November in response to allegations of deliberate and malicious interference on 20 meters. ROFL, I always laugh at that one. ... The retest letter made no reference to interference; in fact gave no reason for requiring the retest. Such a request is part of the Volunteer Examining program. It could have been made for any number of reasons that may have had nothing to do with any of the addressee's actions. An investigation into the VE group that gave the test, would be a good example. ROFL, I always laugh at that reply, because he posts it so much. Then you also laugh at your reflerction of your pig like face in the mirror. Why can't you even pass the General test even once? No other person from the VE group was tested, BWHAHAHAHA Lardass, you'd better go re-read the FCC enforcement actions (in your case you need somebody to re-read it for you), plenty of retests have been given and most either fail or don't show. Roger pased his test and upgraded (something you can't do), so that was a real lousy "sanction", huh? so we have to assume that the FCC guys were just sitting around the office one day when one of them said, "Hey, guys: Let's retest Roger Wiseman." From: http://www.arrl.org NOTE: Issuance by the FCC of a Warning Notice indicates that the FCC has what it believes to be reliable evidence of possible rules infractions and not necessarily that the recipient has violated FCC rules. The FCC has the authority, pursuant to §97.519(d)(2) of the rules to readminister any examination element previously administered by a volunteer examiner. There was no reason for it at all, of course, and it just happened. ------------ July 11, 2000 CERTIFIED MAIL--RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED Mr. Roger L. Wiseman 610 Glen Haven Avenue Glendale, WV 26038-1302 SUBJECT: Amateur Radio license KC8JBO Dear Mr. Wiseman: Pursuant to Section 97.519(d)(2) of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R. Section 97.519(d)(2), the Commission has the authority to re-administer any examination element previously administered by Volunteer Examiners (VE's). The Commission may either administer the examination itself, or under the supervision of a Volunteer Examiner Coordinator (VEC) or VE designated by the Commission. Accordingly, we are requiring you to re-take the General Class Amateur Examination, (Elements 2, 3(A) and 3(B)) under the supervision of an American Radio Relay League Volunteer Examiner Coordinator. This examination must be completed on or before September 11, 2000. The required code speed that you must demonstrate is 5 words per minute. Please be prepared to verify your current address and to present a photo identification. Pursuant to Commission rules, your license will be cancelled if you do not appear for re-examination. You will be granted an Amateur Radio license consistent with the elements you pass upon re-examination. Sincerely, W. Riley Hollingsworth Special Counsel, Amateur Radio Enforcement Bureau ------------------------------ Poor Lardass......................................... |
What does a person think when they hear 'ham radio operator'?
Slow Code wrote: Wouldn't it really suck to have to take the General exam twice? Hee Hee Heeeeeeeeeeeeeee!! Lardass Lloyd N0VFP can't even pass the test ONCE! BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! |
What does a person think when they hear 'ham radio operator'?
|
What does a person think when they hear 'ham radio operator'?
On 9 Nov 2006 05:02:10 -0800, Not Cocksucker Lloyd Secwet Woger plagiarized:
: "Two-test" Slow **** makes good sentence. Slow **** is so stupid, he : rehashes 6 year old bull****. Roger still PASSED his retest and : upgraded, something you couldn't do. : : The letters to both Wiseman and Tunder were a preemptive "warning" : that did not allege any activities. That hardly qualifies as a warning : in the context of someone having actually done something. : : The letter with the warning in it ALLEGED interference, and warned of : consequences. : : The retest letter made no reference to interference; in fact gave no : reason for requiring the retest. Such a request is part of the : Volunteer Examining program. It could have been made for any number of : reasons that may have had nothing to do with any of the addressee's : actions. An investigation into the VE group that gave the test, would : be a good example. Oh my! Another plagiarism by Woger. Who would've thought? Here's the relevant part of the original post, as archived by Google (for the whole post, see http://tinyurl.com/ynxoam): | From: (LRod) | Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc | Subject: 14.313 Jamming.K9BSD, N9PGE, and KK9G. | Message-ID: | ... | Read everything closely. There were three letters sent. | | The letters to both Wiseman and Tunder were a preemptive "warning" | that did not allege any activities. That hardly qualifies as a warning | in the context of someone having actually done something. | | The letter with the warning in it ALLEGED interference, and warned of | consequences. | | The retest letter made no reference to interference; in fact gave no | reason for requiring the retest. Such a request is part of the | Volunteer Examining program. It could have been made for any number of | reasons that may have had nothing to do with any of the addressee's | actions. An investigation into the VE group that gave the test, would | be a good example. | | Only one letter was a warning referring to interference. | | So, yes; if you are going to tell it, tell it straight. | | | LRod | | Master Woodbutcher and seasoned termite | | Shamelessly whoring my website since 1999 | | http://www.woodbutcher.net Woger's ho? ==================== "Plagiarize, Let no one else's work evade your eyes, Remember why the good Lord made your eyes, So don't shade your eyes, But plagiarize, plagiarize, plagiarize" -- Tom Leherer, the Lobachevsky song |
What does a person think when they hear 'ham radio operator'?
Saggytits Stan Lawson Lee whined: On 9 Nov 2006 05:02:10 -0800, Not Cocksucker Lloyd wrong again, ****tard didn't plagiarize: : "Two-test" Slow **** makes good sentence. Slow **** is so stupid, he : rehashes 6 year old bull****. Roger still PASSED his retest and : upgraded, something you couldn't do. : : The letters to both Wiseman and Tunder were a preemptive "warning" : that did not allege any activities. That hardly qualifies as a warning : in the context of someone having actually done something. : : The letter with the warning in it ALLEGED interference, and warned of : consequences. : : The retest letter made no reference to interference; in fact gave no : reason for requiring the retest. Such a request is part of the : Volunteer Examining program. It could have been made for any number of : reasons that may have had nothing to do with any of the addressee's : actions. An investigation into the VE group that gave the test, would : be a good example. Oh my! Another Oh, my, the pot calling the kettle black cut and paste FROM any physics websites lately, ****tard? | From: (LRod) | Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc | Subject: 14.313 Jamming.K9BSD, N9PGE, and KK9G. | Message-ID: | ... | Read everything closely. There were three letters sent. | | The letters to both Wiseman and Tunder were a preemptive "warning" | that did not allege any activities. That hardly qualifies as a warning | in the context of someone having actually done something. | | The letter with the warning in it ALLEGED interference, and warned of | consequences. | | The retest letter made no reference to interference; in fact gave no | reason for requiring the retest. Such a request is part of the | Volunteer Examining program. It could have been made for any number of | reasons that may have had nothing to do with any of the addressee's | actions. An investigation into the VE group that gave the test, would | be a good example. | | Only one letter was a warning referring to interference. | | So, yes; if you are going to tell it, tell it straight. | | | LRod | | Master Woodbutcher and seasoned termite | | Shamelessly whoring my website since 1999 | | http://www.woodbutcher.net Woger's ho? That would be you, bitch boy from Plano, Texas! "****UP Lee" geography idiot and imbecile ****s up as usual when he thinks Marshall County, Alabama and Marshall County, West Virginia are the same place in message : " Then what is at http://www.geocities.com/skywarncanwarn/ doodle brain? It sure looks like the Marshall County ARES, and it even has a place to send email." |
What does a person think when they hear "retested ham radio operator'?
Twice Tested General lied: On 9 Nov 2006 05:02:10 -0800, Not Cocksucker Lloyd wrong again, fatty,. imagine that! wrote: Slow Code wrote: GLENDALE, WV: The FCC requested July 11, 2000, that Roger L. Wiseman, KC8JBO, retake the General examination elements under the supervision of an ARRL-VEC volunteer examiner team. Wiseman must appear for retesting by September 11, 2000, or his license will be canceled. Applicants appearing for re-examination are granted an Amateur Radio license consistent with the elements passed. The FCC had written Wiseman on March 29, 2000, advising that it had been made aware of "an ongoing personal dispute" between Wiseman and another licensee that included allegations of interference or jamming on 20 meters. FCC Special Counsel for Amateur Radio Enforcement Riley Hollingsworth invited the two licensees to contact him to discuss the matter. Additionally, the FCC had sent Wiseman a Warning Notice last November in response to allegations of deliberate and malicious interference on 20 meters. ROFL, I always laugh at that one. ... The retest letter made no reference to interference; in fact gave no reason for requiring the retest. Such a request is part of the Volunteer Examining program. It could have been made for any number of reasons that may have had nothing to do with any of the addressee's actions. An investigation into the VE group that gave the test, would be a good example. ROFL, I always laugh at that reply, because he posts it so much. Then you also laugh at your reflerction of your pig like face in the mirror. Why can't you even pass the General test even once? It has always been a hoot to watch him twist that to suit his lies. The letter sent specifically states, "an ongoing personal dispute between Wiseman and another licensee that included allegations of interference or jamming on 20 meters." Un-Wiseman, take NOTE once and for all; The letter does NOT imply that you were being retested for, as you say, "any number of reasons". It specifically states, "allegations of interference or jamming on 20 meters" and dance as you try, you cannot change the meaning of the text. It is no secret you did this, Un-Wiseman. You simply make yourself look even more foolish than you already are by continually lying about the letter, thus allowing us poke to the soft spot in Baby Wiseman's little head so we can hear him squeal. Nice dancing, though. |
What does a person think when they hear 'ham radio operator'?
"Not Cocksucker Lloyd" wrote in
ups.com: Lardass and 33 year old virgin Lloyd who can't pass 5 wpm code or the General exam once whined: On 9 Nov 2006 05:02:10 -0800, Not Cocksucker Lloyd wrong again, fatty,. imagine that! wrote: Slow Code wrote: Lloyd wrote in : GLENDALE, WV: The FCC requested July 11, 2000, that Roger L. Wisema n, KC8JBO, retake the General examination elements under the supervisi on of an ARRL-VEC volunteer examiner team. Wiseman must appear for retest ing by September 11, 2000, or his license will be canceled. Applicants appearing for re-examination are granted an Amateur Radio license consistent with the elements passed. The FCC had written Wiseman on March 29, 2000, advising that it had been made aware of "an ongoing personal dispute" between Wiseman and another licensee that included allegations of interference or jamming on 20 meters. FCC Special Co unsel for Amateur Radio Enforcement Riley Hollingsworth invited the two licensees to contact him to discuss the matter. Additionally, the F CC had sent Wiseman a Warning Notice last November in response to allegations of deliberate and malicious interference on 20 meters. ROFL, I always laugh at that one. ... The retest letter made no reference to interference; in fact gave no reason for requiring the retest. Such a request is part of the Volunteer Examining program. It could have been made for any number of reasons that may have had nothing to do with any of the addressee's actions. An investigation into the VE group that gave the test, would be a good example. ROFL, I always laugh at that reply, because he posts it so much. Then you also laugh at your reflerction of your pig like face in the mirror. Why can't you even pass the General test even once? He might be like Mark in the Dark and is hoping to get one of those new fangled welfare licenses the FCC is talking about. SC |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:28 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com