Now that CW is gone there will be more ham to non-ham conflicts.
 

The code hating losers were too stupid and lazy to learn and use CW,
they're also probably going to be too stupid and lazy to solve TVI
and interference problems with their neigbhors. There will be more
amateur to amateur and amateur to non-amateur conflicts. Hams will look
bad and the FCC will regulate the service more because of all the retards
we let have HF privledges. CQ Breaker, CQ Breaker.

Welcome to CB everybody.

Now that CW is gone there will be more ham to non-ham conflicts.
 

On Feb 22, 5:16 pm, Retard Invasion wrote:
The code hating losers were too stupid and lazy to learn and use CW,
they're also probably going to be too stupid and lazy to solve TVI
and interference problems with their neigbhors. There will be more
amateur to amateur and amateur to non-amateur conflicts. Hams will look
bad and the FCC will regulate the service more because of all the retards
we let have HF privledges. CQ Breaker, CQ Breaker.

Welcome to CB everybody.

And your point is ????

Now that CW is gone there will be more ham to non-ham conflicts.
 

"Lefty" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Feb 22, 5:16 pm, Retard Invasion wrote:
The code hating losers were too stupid and lazy to learn and use CW,
they're also probably going to be too stupid and lazy to solve TVI
and interference problems with their neigbhors. There will be more
amateur to amateur and amateur to non-amateur conflicts. Hams will look
bad and the FCC will regulate the service more because of all the retards
we let have HF privledges. CQ Breaker, CQ Breaker.

Welcome to CB everybody.

And your point is ????

I think it would have been sufficient to punctuate your sentence with just 3
question marks. Four question marks seems a bit excessive, agree???

Now that CW is gone there will be more ham to non-ham conflicts.
 

On Feb 23, 9:32 pm, "Stefan Wolfe" wrote:
I think it would have been sufficient to punctuate your sentence with just 3
question marks. Four question marks seems a bit excessive, agree???

Nah. The number of question marks is immaterial and avoids the
contentious and intolerant (rant?) of the OP. Such comments very
divisive to the the Amateur Radio hobby; IMHO.

Might one not think such an intolerant (possibly also an elitist?)
attitude by a serving (already licensed) radio amateur does not augur
well for the future of the hobby. Not sure as a newcomer I'd want to
join a group with members who have that 'unkind' attitude!

Previously noticing some other intolerant (even vituperative) comments
would not be surprised they may tend to give outsiders a view of an
outdated, closed knit clan/society. Old codgers still using spark
transmitters and coherer receivers, pounding away in their dimly lit
shacks late at night and boasting about how many countries they have
contacted for 500 milliseconds per contact; and please QSL.

QSLs via the Internet these days I presume?

Total four (4) question marks; used one at a time!

Rather than portray Amateur Radio as open, welcoming to younger
newcomers and new modes of communication/trends.

No wonder the hobby is, in the opinion of some, dying?

Now that CW is gone there will be more ham to non-ham conflicts.
 

QSLs via the Internet these days I presume?

Total four (4) question marks; used one at a time!

Rather than portray Amateur Radio as open, welcoming to younger
newcomers and new modes of communication/trends.

No wonder the hobby is, in the opinion of some, dying?


The hobby is alive and well, though offshooting into private little cliques
here and there.
Paul W. Schleck is a bit delusional what with his new, exclusionary new
newsgroup, but like all fads, this one, too, will pass.

Paul's new moderated group, I predict, will see a modicum of new users at
the outset, but after, say, 60 days his moderated group will wither on the
vine and become history. His new moderated group was doomed for failure well
before it reached fruition.

I wonder if BlowGut Paul will send his "welcome" messages to the new users
of his self-serving moderated group? He, Paul, has a knack for being an
insufferable blowhard. Come to think of it, he is not too far removed from
the gasseous emissions of Lennie, the California Cryaby who still has issues
with old zoning matters.

Oops! Tsk! Tsk!. Did I poke politically incorrect fun at a poor, disgruntled
oldster whose colostomy bag runneth over?

Now that CW is gone there will be more ham to non-ham conflicts.
 

On Sat, 24 Feb 2007 03:38:18 -0500, "Len Slanderson" flatusr@socal
wrote:



QSLs via the Internet these days I presume?

Total four (4) question marks; used one at a time!

Rather than portray Amateur Radio as open, welcoming to younger
newcomers and new modes of communication/trends.

No wonder the hobby is, in the opinion of some, dying?


The hobby is alive and well, though offshooting into private little cliques
here and there.
Paul W. Schleck is a bit delusional what with his new, exclusionary new
newsgroup, but like all fads, this one, too, will pass.

Paul's new moderated group, I predict, will see a modicum of new users at
the outset, but after, say, 60 days his moderated group will wither on the
vine and become history.

Only because this is not YOUR moderated group?

P.Z.

Now that CW is gone there will be more ham to non-ham conflicts.
 

terry wrote:
On Feb 23, 9:32 pm, "Stefan Wolfe" wrote:
I think it would have been sufficient to punctuate your sentence with just 3
question marks. Four question marks seems a bit excessive, agree???

Nah. The number of question marks is immaterial and avoids the
contentious and intolerant (rant?) of the OP. Such comments very
divisive to the the Amateur Radio hobby; IMHO.

Might one not think such an intolerant (possibly also an elitist?)
attitude by a serving (already licensed) radio amateur does not augur
well for the future of the hobby. Not sure as a newcomer I'd want to
join a group with members who have that 'unkind' attitude!

Previously noticing some other intolerant (even vituperative) comments
would not be surprised they may tend to give outsiders a view of an
outdated, closed knit clan/society. Old codgers still using spark
transmitters and coherer receivers, pounding away in their dimly lit
shacks late at night and boasting about how many countries they have
contacted for 500 milliseconds per contact; and please QSL.

QSLs via the Internet these days I presume?

Total four (4) question marks; used one at a time!

Rather than portray Amateur Radio as open, welcoming to younger
newcomers and new modes of communication/trends.

No wonder the hobby is, in the opinion of some, dying?

RIGHT, don't be an "elitist." Be a moron like the rest of the no-coders so you
will fit in.

Now that CW is gone there will be more ham to non-ham conflicts.
 

On Sat, 24 Feb 2007 08:56:46 -0500, NoMoreSpam
wrote:



RIGHT, don't be an "elitist." Be a moron like the rest of the no-coders so you
will fit in.

Why no-coders are "morons"?...

A.L.

Now that CW is gone there will be more ham to non-ham conflicts.
 

"terry" wrote in message
ps.com...

Old codgers still using spark
transmitters and coherer receivers, pounding away in their dimly lit
shacks late at night and boasting about how many countries they have
contacted for 500 milliseconds per contact; and please QSL.

Can you imagine that? People could communicate around the world simply by
constructing a simple transmitter salvaged from a Model T ignition coil and
a receiver contructed of metal filings in a glass tube between antenna and
ground and a battery powered relay.

Amazing. Absolutely amazing.

Now that CW is gone there will be more ham to non-ham conflicts.
 

On Feb 24, 6:29 pm, "Stefan Wolfe" wrote:
"terry" wrote in message

ps.com...

Old codgers still using spark
transmitters and coherer receivers, pounding away in their dimly lit
shacks late at night and boasting about how many countries they have
contacted for 500 milliseconds per contact; and please QSL.

Can you imagine that? People could communicate around the world simply by
constructing a simple transmitter salvaged from a Model T ignition coil and
a receiver contructed of metal filings in a glass tube between antenna and
ground and a battery powered relay.

Amazing. Absolutely amazing.


Yes, with the most basic materials; little more than a battery and
some wire, in an emergency or primitive conditions you can communicate
via wireless. But you must have one more thing; gotta have code