| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Service with a smile - not
A condemnation, therefore, of the CBisation taking place
in the UK (and in no small part caused by the M3/CB Fool's Licence)? Modern Cheque Book (CB) rigs contain so much that there is little incentive for the CBer-Masquerading-As-A-Radio-Ham to actually become a Radio Ham - even now there are those who turn up their noses at a radio if it requires the use/construction of a manual ATU. The rigs seem to go on for years, and contain everything that you think, mistakenly, makes for a Radio Ham. The result? That you never have to visit the shop again. No buying of second-hand gear. No buying of the odd component. No buying of ex-govt gear with a view to conversion. All the little shops close down because there are no Radio Hams; there are only CBers of one sort or another who visit a shop once and then never return. Result? The shop closes down or is taken over by stack'em high sell 'em cheap merchants who can never give the value that you used to get from an enthusiasts shop. The CB ethos is like a cancer - feeding off the body of Ham Radio, but then finally destroying it; biting off the hand that feeds; killing the goose with the golden eggs. It is not too late to turn the tide. (Even if a mixed metaphor sings, it should be derailed by pulling out the carpet from underneath?) We can make a start, perhaps, by agitating for the abolishment of the M3/CB Fool's Licence, and for it to be replaced by a form of CB licence. All other licence classes to enforce home construction and, perhaps, the use of CW only for the first year, as an encouragement to tackle successfully a first constructional project. Geoff wrote in message ... That's a bit difficult if you have already purchased the item. Anyway, where else? There is very little choice available within the UK, and purchasing outside the UK may have been done to death in another thread. |
"Ryan Breai, village idiot" ranted in message
... A condemnation, therefore, of the CBisation taking place... normal large quantity of mindless drivel snipped Are you paid by the word? (_!_) |
"Ryan Breai, village idiot" ranted in message
... A condemnation, therefore, of the CBisation taking place... Not only can the village idiot not spell, he cannot post properly. From the relevant part of RFC 1885 - If you are sending a reply to a message or a posting be sure you summarize the original at the top of the message, or include just enough text of the original to give a context. This will make sure readers understand when they start to read your response. Since NetNews, especially, is proliferated by distributing the postings from one host to another, it is possible to see a response to a message before seeing the original. Giving context helps everyone. But do not include the entire original! Geoff |
In message , Ryan Breai
writes It is not too late to turn the tide. (Even if a mixed metaphor sings, it should be derailed by pulling out the carpet from underneath?) We can make a start, perhaps, by agitating for the abolishment of the M3/CB Fool's Licence, and for it to be replaced by a form of CB licence. All other licence classes to enforce home construction and, perhaps, the use of CW only for the first year, as an encouragement to tackle successfully a first constructional project. I agree 1-100% why do we need the bull centred around this soldering iron mentality. I want to communicate with a purpose built set not a bodged up ex mod misfit. If you want to be a ham with a soldering iron OK but I just want to use a radio to talk to people and that's a different kettle of fish. Why do we need the self imposed rules set by the RSGB if we only want to communicate with an out of the box rig. Why do we have to pay to the RSGB to sit some phoney test, is it to keep bad mannered trogs like you in business. If we want to transmit using CW then we learn the code, simple. If we just want to use voice, no problem. All that is needed is the rules for transmitting and radio manners printed in the box. If you break the rules i.e. bad language etc. then you go to jail. What is so special about a radio, is a VHF handheld better than a mobile phone for communication, remember these days there are sat coms that costs less than a HF radio. Coded messages can be sent by SMS. Face it your way is a thing of the past, it's a CB world if you don't like it go home but remember we have the ball. |
A condpart caused by the M3/CB Fool's
Licence)? Modern Cheque etc A very well thought out piece....... --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.542 / Virus Database: 336 - Release Date: 11/18/03 |
The first thing I must say is....grow up, Geoff!
There is no call for you to resort to infantile outbursts, such as your gratuitous use of "village idiot" below. You are of the age when you should have left the school playground well behind, and are giving a very poor example for young noviciates of the art to follow. Shame on you. The crucial point in what you quote below is the comma appearing in "top of the message, or include just" in the second line. This shows quite clearly that two disparate options are being discussed. EITHER summarise at the top OR include enough text to give a context. My top posting with quotation beneath satisfies the second option. Geoff wrote in message ... "Ryan Breai, village idiot" ranted in message ... A condemnation, therefore, of the CBisation taking place... Not only can the village idiot not spell, he cannot post properly. From the relevant part of RFC 1885 - If you are sending a reply to a message or a posting be sure you summarize the original at the top of the message, or include just enough text of the original to give a context. This will make sure readers understand when they start to read your response. Since NetNews, especially, is proliferated by distributing the postings from one host to another, it is possible to see a response to a message before seeing the original. Giving context helps everyone. But do not include the entire original! |
Geoff wrote in message
... "Ryan Breai, village idiot" ranted in message ... A condemnation, therefore, of the CBisation taking place... Not only can the village idiot not spell, he cannot post properly. From the relevant part of RFC 1885 - If you are sending a reply to a message or a posting be sure you summarize the original at the top of the message or include just enough text of the original to give a context. This will make sure readers understand when they start to read your response. Since NetNews, especially, is proliferated by distributing the postings from one host to another, it is possible to see a response to a message before seeing the original. Giving context helps everyone. But do not include the entire original! "Ryan Breai" wrote in news:3fc7840c_2@mk-nntp- 1.news.uk.worldonline.com: The first thing I must say is....grow up, Geoff! There is no call for you to resort to infantile outbursts, such as your gratuitous use of "village idiot" below. You are of the age when you should have left the school playground well behind, and are giving a very poor example for young noviciates of the art to follow. Shame on you. The crucial point in what you quote below is the comma appearing in "top of the message, or include just" in the second line. This shows quite clearly that two disparate options are being discussed. EITHER summarise at the top OR include enough text to give a context. My top posting with quotation beneath satisfies the second option. Five points arise from your post: Firstly, I "grew up" years back. Secondly, I was using the term "The Village Idiot" as provided in the newsgroup post header that I read. Given a reasonable newsreader, you should be able to se this yourself but I reproduce it below for your convenience: "Ryan Breai, village idiot" ranted in message ... Third: My comment on spelling: my copy of the O.E.D. does not recognise "CBisation", nor does Websters - anyway, if it was of US origin, it would have been spelt with a "z". Fourth, why shame on me? I am only quoting from what either you call yourself, or what at least one other NG reader called you. Finally, and the real point, perhaps one may interpret the comma in the that you do, but commas are notorious for misinterpretation. That is why legal draughtsmen rarely insert commas. The second sentence of the quoted paragraph of RFC1855, again reproduced below, contains the real meat: This will make sure readers understand when they start to read your response. Will all top posters please note, that this requirement is met by posting below the quoted part. It certainly is not met by top posting. In my view, a top poster is the internet equivalent to somebody who shouts over the person speaking, a heckler. Geoff |
"Geoff" wrote in message
... Geoff wrote in message ... "Ryan Breai, village idiot" ranted in message ... A condemnation, therefore, of the CBisation taking place... Not only can the village idiot not spell, he cannot post properly. From the relevant part of RFC 1885 - If you are sending a reply to a message or a posting be sure you summarize the original at the top of the message or include just enough text of the original to give a context. This will make sure readers understand when they start to read your response. Since NetNews, especially, is proliferated by distributing the postings from one host to another, it is possible to see a response to a message before seeing the original. Giving context helps everyone. But do not include the entire original! "Ryan Breai" wrote in news:3fc7840c_2@mk-nntp- 1.news.uk.worldonline.com: The first thing I must say is....grow up, Geoff! There is no call for you to resort to infantile outbursts, such as your gratuitous use of "village idiot" below. You are of the age when you should have left the school playground well behind, and are giving a very poor example for young noviciates of the art to follow. Shame on you. The crucial point in what you quote below is the comma appearing in "top of the message, or include just" in the second line. This shows quite clearly that two disparate options are being discussed. EITHER summarise at the top OR include enough text to give a context. My top posting with quotation beneath satisfies the second option. Five points arise from your post: Firstly, I "grew up" years back. Secondly, I was using the term "The Village Idiot" as provided in the newsgroup post header that I read. Given a reasonable newsreader, you should be able to se this yourself but I reproduce it below for your convenience: "Ryan Breai, village idiot" ranted in message ... Third: My comment on spelling: my copy of the O.E.D. does not recognise "CBisation", nor does Websters - anyway, if it was of US origin, it would have been spelt with a "z". Fourth, why shame on me? I am only quoting from what either you call yourself, or what at least one other NG reader called you. Finally, and the real point, perhaps one may interpret the comma in the that you do, but commas are notorious for misinterpretation. That is why legal draughtsmen rarely insert commas. The second sentence of the quoted paragraph of RFC1855, again reproduced below, contains the real meat: This will make sure readers understand when they start to read your response. Will all top posters please note, that this requirement is met by posting below the quoted part. It certainly is not met by top posting. In my view, a top poster is the internet equivalent to somebody who shouts over the person speaking, a heckler. Geoff Come on Geoff, don't make him think for himself, he'll get a headache (or dick ache). -- ;) 73 de Frank Turner-Smith G3VKI - mine's a pint. |
1. You have misrepresented what I posted, and
therefore you are a _LIAR_. I did not post what you said that I posted. I have endeavoured to recreate the correct way in which things were posted, E&OE. 2. It was you who used the term, "village idiot" however you wish to claim that you latterly quoted it. Shame on you. Grow up - by your childish predisposition you demonstrate that you did not, in fact, grow up years ago, as you claimed, but one cannot expect any more from a demonstrable _LIAR_. As I said, Grow up, Geoff. 3. Dictionaries are recorders of history and not prescribers of knowledge. The word, "CBisation" now exists, you have used it; you understand the meaning of it. 4. As to commas being open to misinterpretation, then clearly you have fallen into such a trap, by misinterpreting what you quoted as a proscription of top-posting. 5. "In my view, a top poster is the internet equivalent to somebody who shouts over the person speaking, a heckler." More unnecessary gratuitous remarks. Shame on you, grow up, Geoff. 6." This will make sure readers understand when they start to read your response." Will all bottom posters please note, that this requirement is met by posting the quoted part anywhere. Anybody who is following a thread will not want to be forced to plough through old material again. Anyone who has not been following the thread is ill-advised to select a posting from the middle. However, if he does, the archival material, like all references in any decent publication, is given at the end. Geoff wrote in message ... "Ryan Breai" wrote in news:3fc7840c_2@mk-nntp- 1.news.uk.worldonline.com: The first thing I must say is....grow up, Geoff! There is no call for you to resort to infantile outbursts, such as your gratuitous use of "village idiot" below. You are of the age when you should have left the school playground well behind, and are giving a very poor example for young noviciates of the art to follow. Shame on you. The crucial point in what you quote below is the comma appearing in "top of the message, or include just" in the second line. This shows quite clearly that two disparate options are being discussed. EITHER summarise at the top OR include enough text to give a context. My top posting with quotation beneath satisfies the second option. Geoff wrote in message ... A condemnation, therefore, of the CBisation taking place... Not only can the village idiot not spell, he cannot post properly. From the relevant part of RFC 1885 - If you are sending a reply to a message or a posting be sure you summarize the original at the top of the message or include just enough text of the original to give a context. This will make sure readers understand when they start to read your response. Since NetNews, especially, is proliferated by distributing the postings from one host to another, it is possible to see a response to a message before seeing the original. Giving context helps everyone. But do not include the entire original! Five points arise from your post: Firstly, I "grew up" years back. Secondly, I was using the term "The Village Idiot" as provided in the newsgroup post header that I read. Given a reasonable newsreader, you should be able to se this yourself but I reproduce it below for your convenience: Third: My comment on spelling: my copy of the O.E.D. does not recognise "CBisation", nor does Websters - anyway, if it was of US origin, it would have been spelt with a "z". Fourth, why shame on me? I am only quoting from what either you call yourself, or what at least one other NG reader called you. Finally, and the real point, perhaps one may interpret the comma in the that you do, but commas are notorious for misinterpretation. That is why legal draughtsmen rarely insert commas. The second sentence of the quoted paragraph of RFC1855, again reproduced below, contains the real meat: This will make sure readers understand when they start to read your response. Will all top posters please note, that this requirement is met by posting below the quoted part. It certainly is not met by top posting. In my view, a top poster is the internet equivalent to somebody who shouts over the person speaking, a heckler. |
"Ryan Breai" wrote in message
... 1. You have misrepresented what I posted, and therefore you are a _LIAR_. I did not post what you said that I posted. I have endeavoured to recreate the correct way in which things were posted, E&OE. 2. It was you who used the term, "village idiot" however you wish to claim that you latterly quoted it. Shame on you. Grow up - by your childish predisposition you demonstrate that you did not, in fact, grow up years ago, as you claimed, but one cannot expect any more from a demonstrable _LIAR_. crap snipped You're wasting your time, Geoff. This bloke is such a retard that he can't even work out that the reason he can't see the original is because the poster (me) is in his kill file. He won't see this post either, so if you respond he'll probably accuse you of talking to yourself! -- ;) 73 de Frank Turner-Smith G3VKI - mine's a pint. |
Geoff wrote in message ... "Ryan Breai" wrote in news:3fc7840c_2@mk-nntp- 1.news.uk.worldonline.com: The first thing I must say is....grow up, Geoff! There is no call for you to resort to infantile outbursts, such as your gratuitous use of "village idiot" below. You are of the age when you should have left the school playground well behind, and are giving a very poor example for young noviciates of the art to follow. Shame on you. The crucial point in what you quote below is the comma appearing in "top of the message, or include just" in the second line. This shows quite clearly that two disparate options are being discussed. EITHER summarise at the top OR include enough text to give a context. My top posting with quotation beneath satisfies the second option. Geoff wrote in message ... A condemnation, therefore, of the CBisation taking place... Not only can the village idiot not spell, he cannot post properly. From the relevant part of RFC 1885 - If you are sending a reply to a message or a posting be sure you summarize the original at the top of the message or include just enough text of the original to give a context. This will make sure readers understand when they start to read your response. Since NetNews, especially, is proliferated by distributing the postings from one host to another, it is possible to see a response to a message before seeing the original. Giving context helps everyone. But do not include the entire original! Five points arise from your post: Firstly, I "grew up" years back. Secondly, I was using the term "The Village Idiot" as provided in the newsgroup post header that I read. Given a reasonable newsreader, you should be able to se this yourself but I reproduce it below for your convenience: Third: My comment on spelling: my copy of the O.E.D. does not recognise "CBisation", nor does Websters - anyway, if it was of US origin, it would have been spelt with a "z". Fourth, why shame on me? I am only quoting from what either you call yourself, or what at least one other NG reader called you. Finally, and the real point, perhaps one may interpret the comma in the that you do, but commas are notorious for misinterpretation. That is why legal draughtsmen rarely insert commas. The second sentence of the quoted paragraph of RFC1855, again reproduced below, contains the real meat: This will make sure readers understand when they start to read your response. Will all top posters please note, that this requirement is met by posting below the quoted part. It certainly is not met by top posting. In my view, a top poster is the internet equivalent to somebody who shouts over the person speaking, a heckler. "Ryan Breai" wrote in : 1. You have misrepresented what I posted, and therefore you are a _LIAR_. I did not post what you said that I posted. I have endeavoured to recreate the correct way in which things were posted, E&OE. 2. It was you who used the term, "village idiot" however you wish to claim that you latterly quoted it. Shame on you. Grow up - by your childish predisposition you demonstrate that you did not, in fact, grow up years ago, as you claimed, but one cannot expect any more from a demonstrable _LIAR_. As I said, Grow up, Geoff. 3. Dictionaries are recorders of history and not prescribers of knowledge. The word, "CBisation" now exists, you have used it; you understand the meaning of it. 4. As to commas being open to misinterpretation, then clearly you have fallen into such a trap, by misinterpreting what you quoted as a proscription of top-posting. 5. "In my view, a top poster is the internet equivalent to somebody who shouts over the person speaking, a heckler." More unnecessary gratuitous remarks. Shame on you, grow up, Geoff. 6." This will make sure readers understand when they start to read your response." Will all bottom posters please note, that this requirement is met by posting the quoted part anywhere. Anybody who is following a thread will not want to be forced to plough through old material again. Anyone who has not been following the thread is ill-advised to select a posting from the middle. However, if he does, the archival material, like all references in any decent publication, is given at the end. Aw, who is now getting uppity, have I hit on the truth? Lets examine your points in order: 1 No I have not misrepresented what you have said. The only change that I have made in your news post is in the posting order, I have "de top posted them", placing the contributions in chronological order, which, like the rest, is a matter of record. My local news server retains posts for a period of time, unadulterated with the exception of adding the R-lines, as do news servers all over the world. I do not lie, the facts speak for themselves. 2 As I said, the term "Village Idiot" appears alongside your pseudonym in an internet address as already described. If you care to check, the net time of this predates my post by some hours. Again, a matter of record, I do not lie, the facts speak for themselves. 3 The definition of a dictionary: A book dealing with the individual words of a language (or certain specified classes of them), so as to set forth their orthography, pronunciation, signification, and use, their synonyms, derivation, and history, or at least some of these facts. (O.E.D.) History in this context relates to the historic derivation of the word. Yet again a matter of record, again the facts speak for themselves. 4 As nearly any editor, lawyer or student of the English language will know, the comma in the RFC is redundant. However, I do not need to debate the semantics with you, you know that. You were seeking to place your own errant construction on the RFC. 5 We have been here before. Again you wish to get your point over by putting it in front of the views of others. This is typical of a bigot. 6 Even to one as bigotted as you, it is sensible to read the news post in some sensible order. If you need to understand the term "bigotted", here it is, courtesy of the O.E.D.: Obstinately and blindly attached to some creed, opinion, or party; unreasonably devoted to a system or party, and intolerant towards others. I think this is a nice summation of your views. Need I say more - oh yes, I "de top posted" again. Geoff |
"Frank Turner-Smith G3VKI" wrote in
: "Ryan Breai" wrote in message ... 1. You have misrepresented what I posted, and therefore you are a _LIAR_. I did not post what you said that I posted. I have endeavoured to recreate the correct way in which things were posted, E&OE. 2. It was you who used the term, "village idiot" however you wish to claim that you latterly quoted it. Shame on you. Grow up - by your childish predisposition you demonstrate that you did not, in fact, grow up years ago, as you claimed, but one cannot expect any more from a demonstrable _LIAR_. crap snipped You're wasting your time, Geoff. This bloke is such a retard that he can't even work out that the reason he can't see the original is because the poster (me) is in his kill file. He won't see this post either, so if you respond he'll probably accuse you of talking to yourself! At the risk of being accused of picking "easy targets", I am sure that majority of the readers of uk.r.a must agree that it is fun. As I have said in my last post, "the village idiot", matched to his pseudonym, is a matter of record. I doubt that anybody else would admit to that. Geoff |
No. You wish, but you seem to want to come across as a silly
child, taking your current postings together with your contributions in recent weeks. Geoff wrote in message ... Aw, who is now getting uppity, have I hit on the truth? |
Yes. You did misrepresent what I said. I am a proponent of
top-posting, and by reorganising it to appear that I did not post in a top-posting manner. you are a _LIAR_ to claim that what you presented was what I posted. By the same token, your last sentence below, " I do not lie, the facts speak for themselves." by mere reorganisation reads, " I lie, do not the facts speak for themselves." Geoff wrote in message ... 1 No I have not misrepresented what you have said. The only change that I have made in your news post is in the posting order, I have "de top posted them", placing the contributions in chronological order, which, like the rest, is a matter of record. My local news server retains posts for a period of time, unadulterated with the exception of adding the R-lines, as do news servers all over the world. I do not lie, the facts speak for themselves. |
Which came first, the words or the dictionary?
Putting it into the context of this NG, in which dictionary did the word, "transistor" appear before it was used by Shockley, et al? 3 The definition of a dictionary: A book dealing with the individual words of a language (or certain specified classes of them), so as to set forth their orthography, pronunciation, signification, and use, their synonyms, derivation, and history, or at least some of these facts. (O.E.D.) History in this context relates to the historic derivation of the word. Yet again a matter of record, again the facts speak for themselves. |
As nearly any editor, lawyer or student of the English language will
know, the comma in the RFC is relevant. However, I do not need to debate the semantics with you, you know that. You were seeking to place your own errant construction on the RFC. Geoff wrote in message ... 4 As nearly any editor, lawyer or student of the English language will know, the comma in the RFC is redundant. However, I do not need to debate the semantics with you, you know that. You were seeking to place your own errant construction on the RFC. |
Sorry, in your further resorting to childish remarks, were
trying to support or refute my assertion that you are childish, OM? Geoff wrote in message ... 5 We have been here before. Again you wish to get your point over by putting it in front of the views of others. This is typical of a bigot. 6 Even to one as bigotted as you, it is sensible to read the news post in some sensible order. If you need to understand the term "bigotted", here it is, courtesy of the O.E.D.: Obstinately and blindly attached to some creed, opinion, or party; unreasonably devoted to a system or party, and intolerant towards others. I think this is a nice summation of your views. Need I say more - oh yes, I "de top posted" again. |
haven't yet realised that you don't win a debate by bragging how big
your willie is. you can't ?.... --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.542 / Virus Database: 336 - Release Date: 11/18/03 |
Well spotted, Walt - that is a frequent error of the
bottom-poster which is all too frequently laid at the door of the top-poster. By commenting upon the tediosity of ploughing through great tracts of old stuff, you are at last seeing the light about top-posting! Walt Davidson wrote in message ... On Fri, 28 Nov 2003 23:15:26 +0000 (UTC), Geoff wrote: Need I say more - oh yes, I "de top posted" again. Well, that's a start. As the next step, you could now learn to trim quotes properly, instead of repeating the entire, tedious thread ahead of each of your postings. |
Geoff wrote in
: Aw, who is now getting uppity, have I hit on the truth? Lets examine your points in order: 1 No I have not misrepresented what you have said. The only change that I have made in your news post is in the posting order, I have "de top posted them", placing the contributions in chronological order, which, like the rest, is a matter of record. My local news server retains posts for a period of time, unadulterated with the exception of adding the R-lines, as do news servers all over the world. I do not lie, the facts speak for themselves. 2 As I said, the term "Village Idiot" appears alongside your pseudonym in an internet address as already described. If you care to check, the net time of this predates my post by some hours. Again, a matter of record, I do not lie, the facts speak for themselves. 3 The definition of a dictionary: A book dealing with the individual words of a language (or certain specified classes of them), so as to set forth their orthography, pronunciation, signification, and use, their synonyms, derivation, and history, or at least some of these facts. (O.E.D.) History in this context relates to the historic derivation of the word. Yet again a matter of record, again the facts speak for themselves. 4 As nearly any editor, lawyer or student of the English language will know, the comma in the RFC is redundant. However, I do not need to debate the semantics with you, you know that. You were seeking to place your own errant construction on the RFC. 5 We have been here before. Again you wish to get your point over by putting it in front of the views of others. This is typical of a bigot. 6 Even to one as bigotted as you, it is sensible to read the news post in some sensible order. If you need to understand the term "bigotted", here it is, courtesy of the O.E.D.: Obstinately and blindly attached to some creed, opinion, or party; unreasonably devoted to a system or party, and intolerant towards others. I think this is a nice summation of your views. As you who is known here by the pseudonym "The Village Idiot", a title given by others, not I, seem unable to post a single, reasoned, and coherent reply to my post, I repeat it above for your convenience in assembling something worthy of consideration. Your piecemeal replies are an attempt of self-aggrandisement which is typical of paranoid tendancies. Geoff |
A childish outburst from you.
Shame on you, Geoff. Grow up, OM. "Geoff" wrote in message ... As you who is known here by the pseudonym "The Village Idiot", ..... seem unable to post a single, reasoned, and coherent reply to my post....attempt of self-aggrandisement..... typical of paranoid tendancies. |
"Geoff" wrote in message
... As you who is known here by the pseudonym "The Village Idiot", ..... seem unable to post a single, reasoned, and coherent reply to my post....attempt of self-aggrandisement..... typical of paranoid tendancies. "Ryan Breai" wrote in news:3fc86897_3@mk-nntp- 1.news.uk.worldonline.com: A childish outburst from you. Shame on you, Geoff. Grow up, OM. Your piecemeal replies are an attempt of self-aggrandisement which is typical of paranoid tendancies. Geoff |
"Geoff" wrote in message
... "Geoff" wrote in message ... As you who is known here by the pseudonym "The Village Idiot", ..... seem unable to post a single, reasoned, and coherent reply to my post....attempt of self-aggrandisement..... typical of paranoid tendancies. "Ryan Breai" wrote in news:3fc86897_3@mk-nntp- 1.news.uk.worldonline.com: A childish outburst from you. Shame on you, Geoff. Grow up, OM. Your piecemeal replies are an attempt of self-aggrandisement which is typical of paranoid tendancies. He isn't paranoid, everyone is getting at him. ;-) His problem is having a NARCISSISTIC PERSONALITY (def.) personality marked by self-love and self-absorption; unrealistic views about your own qualities and little regard for others. Best just leave him to it and ignore him. 73 Brian |
A somewhat childish response from you, OM.
Shame on You. Grow up, Geoff. "Geoff" wrote in message ... Your piecemeal replies are an attempt of self-aggrandisement which is typical of paranoid tendancies. |
"jim.gm4dhj" wrote in message
... haven't yet realised that you don't win a debate by bragging how big your willie is. you can't ?.... ....but we've got the biggest, balls of them all... (ACDC) -- ;) 73 de Frank Turner-Smith G3VKI - mine's a pint. |
I have bought several items from W&S, from small to large. The only
problem I ever had was then sent me a PL259 right angle when I asked for a BNC right angle. A phone call got me the correct item and was told to keep the wrong one. So I rate W&S OK I also use ML&S, both mail order and I pop in when passing to Heathrow. Chris T is excellent and the service both mail order and in the shop is fine. The only problem I ever had with ML&S was that a tax form went missing costing me 90squid. I don't know for certain it was there it could have been at the VAT man but that is my only problem. So personally I rate both as excellent. Wonka Not a UK resident |
On Sat, 29 Nov 2003 00:34:01 +0000, wrote:
haven't yet realised that you don't win a debate by bragging how big your willie is. or perhaps HOW MANY DEGRESS one has !! |
On Sat, 29 Nov 2003 00:34:01 +0000, wrote:
haven't yet realised that you don't win a debate by bragging how big your willie is. or HOW MANY PEOPLE one has trained !! |
On Sat, 29 Nov 2003 00:34:01 +0000, wrote:
haven't yet realised that you don't win a debate by bragging how big your willie is. or HOW MANY LETTERS one has written to the RA!! |
|
"class_a_zpk_12wpm" t wrote
in message ... On Sat, 29 Nov 2003 00:34:01 +0000, wrote: haven't yet realised that you don't win a debate by bragging how big your willie is. or HOW MANY PEOPLE one has NOT trained to do the MAY2003/DEC2003 RAE? or how many responses one has posted to the same article. -- ;) 73 de Frank Turner-Smith G3VKI - mine's a pint. |
"class_a_zpk_12wpm" t wrote
in message ... On Sat, 29 Nov 2003 00:34:01 +0000, wrote: haven't yet realised that you don't win a debate by bragging how big your willie is. or HOW MANY PEOPLE one has NOT trained to do the MAY2003/DEC2003 RAE? OK you win. I admit it, you did NOT train more people for the May 2003 and Dec 2003 RAE than I did NOT train. Seems a bit odd to me that you should be so proud of doing so little but there is no accounting for test. So, what did you win for training fewing people? May be if we just pop you in the kill file with Gareth................... -- 73 Brian G8OSN www.g8osn.org.uk www.amateurradiotraining.org.uk for FREE training material for all UK amateur radio licences www.phoenixradioclub.org.uk - a RADIO club specifically for those wishing to learn more about amateur radio |
Duncan Munro wrote in
: In article , says... "Ryan Breai" aka Gareth Alun Evans wrote in news:3fc86897_3@mk-nntp- 1.news.uk.worldonline.com: A childish outburst from you. Shame on you, Geoff. Grow up, OM. Your piecemeal replies are an attempt of self-aggrandisement which is typical of paranoid tendancies. Steady Geoff, you could end up in his fan club and he will adopt anagrams of your name as his usenet persona. I've already put Gaffe Bloke in the killfile just to be safe ;-) Eeee, that's a good'un Duncan. Have you spoken to your dad lately. I did say to him that I may be up in the Islands soon, and was invited to drop in. It now seems that this isn't going to happen, this year at least. BTW, remember that Novell 3.11 that was so much hassle to install some 10 years back, it is still going, just keeps wearing disks out! (I think it is on its third!) BCNU Geoff |
In article ,
says... Duncan Munro wrote in : I've already put Gaffe Bloke in the killfile just to be safe ;-) Eeee, that's a good'un Duncan. Have you spoken to your dad lately. I did say to him that I may be up in the Islands soon, and was invited to drop in. It now seems that this isn't going to happen, this year at least. I spoke to him a couple of days ago, he says he will let me have one of his HF rigs for Xmas. Not sure when I will get time to set anything up though :-( Do go and visit - you will enjoy the scenery, it's really something else and very relaxing. BTW, remember that Novell 3.11 that was so much hassle to install some 10 years back, it is still going, just keeps wearing disks out! (I think it is on its third!) Heh heh... -- Duncan Munro http://www.duncanamps.com |
On Sat, 29 Nov 2003 16:23:08 -0000, "Brian Reay"
wrote: Seems a bit odd to me that you should be so proud of doing so little but at least i didnt encourage anyone who can read to do the m3 because ''its as easy as they say it is'' at least i encouraged anyone who can read to aim high and keep going to get the a-licence. there is no accounting for test. TEST? what TEST would that be BRIAN.....THE MORSE TEST ? (THE TEST YOU REFUSED TO HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH?) So, what did you win for training fewing people? who said anything about winning ? i didnt know there was a competition on brian. IT IS MY OPINION that yu are showing signs of needing to be top-dog in your own little m3 world. May be if we just pop you in the kill file with Gareth................... ohhh typical response from someone who still hasnt been able to accept his own double standards of refusing to recognise morse code test but yet ran off to get an m3 licence by sitting a farce joke fail-impossible morse appreciation/assessment. time will come when those who are leading the way in lowering the standard will be on the receiving end of the cb attitude that is already present on the bands. 10-4! --- R:020211/1548Z @:GB7SOU.#48.GBR.EU #:40361 [SOUTHAMPTON] $:620832G7DTH ... I've done the Morse Assessment- it is as easy as they say. Even my 11 year old daughter passed fair and square with NO PREPARATION and about an hours graft at the local club. The idea may fail but your only investment is to send an Email. Honest. 73 Brian Extract from Bulletin sent on packet radio by someone @gb7sou Feb 11 2002 The introductory text leads the reader to believe that the 'BRIAN' signature at the end is someone who just might have two degrees. |
"class_a_zpk_12wpm" t wrote in message ... May be if we just pop you in the kill file with Gareth................... ohhh typical response from someone who still hasnt been able to accept his own double standards of refusing to recognise morse code test but yet ran off to get an m3 licence by sitting a farce joke fail-impossible morse appreciation/assessment. OR, as is the case, the reaction of someone tired of your pointless whinging. The UK has a progressive licensing scheme, based on the FL, IL and Full Licence. The 5 wpm Morse requirement is no longer required in the UK, nor in an increasing number of other countries. CEPT has accepted that there should only be one class of CEPT licence- without a Morse requirement. The hobby in the UK has a bright future- new blood, a progressive licensing scheme, and the "Beyond the RAE" initiative. Other countries look likely to follow the UK lead in these areas. You have been against all of the above but they have happened anyway but you have still not learned your whinging is not productive. Please, by all means, continue whinging to yourself- you clearly have nothing positive to contribute to the hobby. Brian |
On Sat, 29 Nov 2003 20:18:23 -0000, "Brian Reay"
wrote: The 5 wpm Morse requirement is no longer required in the UK, nor in an increasing number of other countries. but refusing to sit the morse appreciation will not allow someone to get an fl....and therefore no full. therefore morse is still required and YOu are a LEAD INSTRUCTOR in this requirment! The hobby in the UK has a bright future- new blood, a progressive licensing scheme, and the "Beyond the RAE" initiative. Other countries look likely to follow the UK lead in these areas. which rsgb publication is that from ? You have been against all of the above but they have happened anyway but you have still not learned your whinging is not productive. and the result will become more evident in years to come. perhaps then you might just notice. Please, by all means, continue whinging to yourself- you clearly have nothing positive to contribute to the hobby. i have enciuraged people to get their a-licence BY WORKING FOR IT rather than encoraging people to slide off into a system designed for beginners! --- R:020211/1548Z @:GB7SOU.#48.GBR.EU #:40361 [SOUTHAMPTON] $:620832G7DTH ... I've done the Morse Assessment- it is as easy as they say. Even my 11 year old daughter passed fair and square with NO PREPARATION and about an hours graft at the local club. The idea may fail but your only investment is to send an Email. Honest. 73 Brian Extract from Bulletin sent on packet radio by someone @gb7sou Feb 11 2002 The introductory text leads the reader to believe that the 'BRIAN' signature at the end is someone who just might have two degrees. |
"Walt Davidson" wrote in message ... There is no incentive to progress beyond the Foundation Licence level. The only advantage of going further is that you get access to the 10m band; it will soon be of little interest during the sunspot minimum years. There are other incentives: 1.Use outside the UK. 2. Use of homebrew or converted kit. 3. Ability to supervise others / allow the passing of greetings 4. Most of all probably, the desire to progress. Nobody adheres to the 10w power limit for the Foundation Licence. "Nobody"- I know a number that do (or did, until they go their 2E so can now use 50W). Even in the RSCB's journal this month, there is a report of an MW3 openly admitting to running 50 watts. And he was in the wrong. Most run 100 watts. Oh yes, the famous "Walt's Way" of measuring RF remotely. The only purposes of introducing the Foundation Licence were (1) to increase (in the short term) the RSCB's membership numbers and (2) to provide a new market for commercially made, type approved radio equipment. IF that was the only reason, why are the RSGB pushing the IL, new RAE, and "Beyond the RAE"? Hardly progressive. No, you would prefer to go back the (supposed) good old days, I assume. -- 73 Brian G8OSN www.g8osn.org.uk www.amateurradiotraining.org.uk for FREE training material for all UK amateur radio licences www.phoenixradioclub.org.uk - a RADIO club specifically for those wishing to learn more about amateur radio |
"Walt Davidson" wrote in message ... There is no incentive to progress beyond the Foundation Licence level. There may be a majority that stay at foundation level, but I, and quite a few others on this newsgroup have since passed the IL and are taking the full rae tommorow. Incentive is down to the individual. I personally want to be able to contribute to the group at an ALMOST equal footing to yourself. Nobody adheres to the 10w power limit for the Foundation Licence. Even in the RSCB's journal this month, there is a report of an MW3 openly admitting to running 50 watts. Most run 100 watts. With respect Walt, I think there is a very large generalisation in your statement.One MW3 admitting to running 50 watts is a drop in the water compared to the 5000+ M3s. May I respectfully ask what published data you take the last statement from? The Foundation licence may not be perfect, but it is here, and seems to be working. Unsubstantiated comments like these are extremely disrespectful to the large number of Foundation licence holders who operate their equipment to licensing regulations. Just my tuppence worth ;-) Roll on tommorow :-0 Best 73 de Alan M3TEC/2E1TEC |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:33 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com