![]() |
You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.
Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: wrote: ARRL kept promoting themselves as "representative" allegedly for the amateur to the FCC but suspiciously more like a "filter" of amateurs' opinions. Why are you suspicious, Len? Anyone could petition the FCC directly, and many did, long before the Internet and ECFS. Len is suspicious of the League's elections of Directors too. Len is suspicious of a number of things in which he isn't involved. Interesting how Carl was barred from running for section office. Professional talent need not apply - we only want amateurs. The ARRL's rules regarding candidacy for elected ARRL positions existed decades before Carl's run. The matter is moot since Carl's mouth would have precluded his being elected had he qualified for candidacy. The skeletons were pouring forth from the r.r.a.p. closet. Dave K8MN You're describing halloween. If you take Carls remarks in context, there are a lot of hams that would agree with him, and would welcome a scrapper in the white house, err volunteer office. |
You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.
wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: From: on Sun, Sep 3 2006 1:49 pm (whole bunch of Len's errors and insults snipped in the interest of time and space) The fact is that the "incentive licensing" changes were an attempt to *return* to a system something like that which existed before February 1953. The complexity of the final result was due in large part to it being pieced together from the numerous non-ARRL proposals mentioned earlier. If that is true (and it is not) then there were FIVE classes of amateur radio licenses prior to "incentive licensing." :-) Actually, there were six classes of amateur radio licenses in the USA from 1951 until the mid-1970s. They were Novice, Technician, General, Conditional, Advanced and Extra. Was the Conditional actually a class of license or a method of taking the exam? FCC considered it a different class of license until it was phased out. What priveleges did it convey? Same *operating* privileges as General. However, over its history, the Conditional had some unique characteristics. First off, you could only get a Conditional if you lived more than a certain distance from an FCC exam point, or were disabled enough to be physically unable to travel to an exam session. The Conditional distance changed a few times over the history of that license, and the amount of CONUS that was "Conditional territory" changed dramatically. Second, until the mid-1950s, if a Conditional moved closer to an exam point than the Conditional distance, they had 90 days to show up at an FCC exam session and re-test for the General. Third, the Conditional did not convey any test-element credit for higher class licenses. If a non-disabled Conditional wanted an Advanced or Extra, they had to get to an exam point, and would have to retake the General code and theory before being allowed to try the other exam elements. Sounds like the "original" dumbed down license if there ever was one. Even the FCC didn't trust the system which granted conditional licenses. Why do some OF's state that they had a General when, in fact, they held the Conditional license? I don't know - ask *them*. Was there shame associated with the Conditional license? Not that I know of. Why should anyone be ashamed of any class of license? Why all the retesting? In the mid-1970s the Conditional was phased out. When a Conditional was renewed or modified, the FCC changed the license class to General. Hmmmm? Almost interesting. The number of amateur radio license classes in the USA remained at 5 until the Technician Plus lucense was created in the early 1990s. False. No, true. The Technician Plus class was created in the early 1990s - about 1993. 1993 is the early 1990s. The Technician-without-code-test went into effect February 14, 1991. The technician (with code) and the technician (without code) ran concurrently until the Plus was developed. Two different licenses with the same name. The Technician with 5wpm code ran concurrently with the Technician license without code. That lasted for about two years, then we got the "Plus" as a marker for the code accomplished. That's right. From February 1991 to about mid-1993, both flavors of Technician were simply "Technician". It was left to the licensee to keep documentation. They weren't different flavors. They were different license classes with the same name. But then the strangest thing happened. It went back to "Technician" and you have to keep track of your code "accomplishment" yourself. Doesn't sound like the FCC values the code "accomplishment" all that much. Maybe not. However, note that: - The FCC did create the Tech Plus license class - The FCC could have reduced the code test requirement for all license classes to 5 wpm long before 2000, but they didn't. FCC even went through the additional complexity of medical waivers for a decade before reducing the code test requirement - Despite all their pronouncements about code testing in the various NPRMs and R&Os, FCC has not yet changed the rules about code testing from those imposed in 2000. It's been more than three years since the treaty changed, yet they won't even say when they will make a decision. If FCC doesn't value the Element 1 accomplishment, why have they retained it for so long? You tell me? Maybe changes to Part 97 are not a high priority to FCC. Even when the FCC addresses amateur related issues, they do so poorly. Those are the plain and simple facts, Len. Those are almost the plain and simple facts, Jim. Are you taking stage magician lessons? You've FAILED. How is it a failure for someone to state the facts? Simple. Your "facts" failed. I corrected them, but you need not thank me. My facts were correct - the "early 1990s" did not mean Fenruary 14, 1991. The fact is that there were two different technician licenses. You counted only one. btw, the 1951 restructuring that gave us the license classes with names rather than letters was not primarily driven by ARRL. Sweetums, do NOT go into your smokescreening by diversion routine again. That's SO transparent. You don't really know what caused the 1951 restructuring, do you, Len? I didn't think so. (rest of Len's errors snipped for sake of time and space). Are you going to tell us again? You don't seem to know, either How far is it to the moon? |
You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.
wrote:
Dave Heil wrote: wrote: wrote: On 4 Sep 2006 18:13:27 -0700, wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: wrote: ARRL kept promoting themselves as "representative" allegedly for the amateur to the FCC but suspiciously more like a "filter" of amateurs' opinions. Why are you suspicious, Len? Anyone could petition the FCC directly, and many did, long before the Internet and ECFS. Len is suspicious of the League's elections of Directors too. Len is suspicious of a number of things in which he isn't involved. Interesting how Carl was barred from running for section office. Professional talent need not apply - we only want amateurs. and yet no problem for the ARRL's marketing director to hop over to Yeasu He is forever tainted... Wow, Goobers united! I don't think Yaesu/Vertex Standard has a policy which precludes the hiring of those who worked at the League. The League's policy doesn't preclude the candidacy of those who *previously* worked in professional communications or the manufacture and marketing of amateur radio equipment. They deal with those who work in such fields *currently*, at the time of the election. Likely candidates for ARRL volunteer positions are what? retirees? Volunteer positions are not elected positions. Read up on it. Just what the hobby needs more of... I welcome all the retirees amateur radio can get, just as I welcome all of the young people and all of those in between. Dave K8MN |
You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.
|
You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.
Dave Heil wrote:
wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: wrote: From: an old friend on Sun, Sep 3 2006 10:09 am ARRL was first a very small group of local New Englanders, formed 5 years after the first (and still surviving) national organization, the Radio Club of America. But it didn't stay that way for long. By the time of the 1917 shutdown - just three years after ARRL was founded - it was a national organization. One of the cofounders, Charles H. Stewart, 3ZS, lived right here in Radnor, PA. Hardly "local" in those days. Heck, Jim, you're going to ruin one of Leonard's rants. I'm just pointing out some plain, simple facts. Stewart, as I recall, succeeded HPM. You are confusing Charles H. Stewart with Kenneth B. Warner. It was KBW who succeeded HPM. We're both wrong. Stewart also died in 1936. His death announcement was in the same April, 1936 issue of QST as Maxim's. K.B. Warner was never President of the ARRL. He was the Secretary. Maxim was succeeded by Eugene Woodruff W8CMP of State College, Pennsylvania. Yup. KBW was also General Manager. He died in 1948. KBW was a major part of ARRL from the early days until his death in the late 1940s. IMHO he was as important in the 1930s and 40s as Maxim was in the teens and 20s. KBW is just not as well known. He was quite well known in his day. He was certainly a shaper of policy. From what I've read, he was known as a tyrant among the staff. Interesting. There were lots of "national club" competitors in the 1920s but those eventually dropped out. Name some. RCA still exists but is not much concerned with amateur radio. It is a very small organization whose main activities seem to be honorary and historical. Why are those guys always living in the past? ;-o Well, there you have it. Living in the past is fine with Leonard, as long as he is the one doing it. Exactly Prior to the Internet going public in 1991, the only major presence for US amateur radio in DC was the legal firm on retainer from the ARRL. There was nothing to stop others from doing the same thing. Nor from contacting FCC directly. ARRL kept promoting themselves as "representative" allegedly for the amateur to the FCC but suspiciously more like a "filter" of amateurs' opinions. Why are you suspicious, Len? Anyone could petition the FCC directly, and many did, long before the Internet and ECFS. Len is suspicious of the League's elections of Directors too. Len is suspicious of a number of things in which he isn't involved. Have you forgotten the profile already? I will never, ever forget the accurate profile of Len's likely actions. Not so much "likely" as "practically guaranteed" That changed dramatically once the FCC got their website going and ramped up to take Comments electronically. The ARRL had to retain a second firm in DC for lobbying. All ECFS did was to make it easier to petition and comment. Correct. It also saved a stamp. In the case of a number of Len's comments, it saved him lots of stamps. It should be remembered that, back in 1998, Len couldn't get ECFS to work for him and had to mail his comments to FCC. Meanwhile, thousands of us whom he denigrates had no problem filing comments online, even then. I'd forgotten that. There must have been another meltdown in the Anderson home comm center. Despite the fact that 98-143 had an unusually long comment period, too. The evidence is an observation of the number and kind of Comments on 98-143 "restructuring" versus Comments on all those Petitions and last year's NPRM concerning code testing elimination. The pro-code-test advocates' Comments were straight out of the League hymn book about morsemanship with a few adding in nebulous advantages for "homeland security" necessities! [those Petitions began after 11 Sep 01] ?? You know--the ARRL hymnal. It's filled with songs rallying government to the ARRL. Len's sense of the surreal is working overtime. Ah - now I understand. Len especially likes: No. 73 "Armageddon Day" (sung to the tune of "Graduation Day") and No. 88 "Maxim Will Haunt You" (sung to the tune of "Moonlight Becomes You") The fact is that the majority of individuals who commented supported the retention of at least some Morse Code testing. The majority also supported elimination of the Morse Code test for the General Class license. However, the most likely outcome is that FCC will just drop Element 1 completely. The surprising thing is that it has taken so long. It doesn't seem to be a surprise to Len. He seems to think that there's a plot afoot, set in motion by the ARRL. I thought McCarthyism was long gone... What is more telling about the League's stubbornness on their pro-code-test stance is that the IARU took a firm stand on changing the ITU-R amateur radio regulations compulsory (by administrations) morse testing for any license having below-30-MHz privileges...the IARU wanted it OPTIONAL by all administrations (at their discretion) a good year BEFORE WRC-03. The ARRL wanted to keep the compulsory regulation. Not true! Not true at all, Len. The fact is that way back in 2000 or 2001, the ARRL BoD changed their policy wrt S25.5. They decided to neither support nor oppose changes to ITU-R S25.5. Given the strong support from many other member countries to change S25.5, the ARRL's no-opinion policy pretty much guaranteed there would be majority support to change S25.5. After WRC-03 the League took a neutral stance, neither for nor against code testing in the USA. It's still a "ARRL versus the World" situation. Wrong again, Len! In ARRL's petition to FCC, they proposed eliminating the Morse Code test for General but retaining it for Extra. Len isn't going to let facts stand in his way. His mind is made up. Like concrete: all mixed up and firmly set. Concrete is all thick and heavy, isn't it? Usually. Also brittle, rough, and very weak in some characteristics. The majority of individuals commenting on the NPRM wanted the test eliminated for General. The majority of individuals commenting on the NPRM wanted the test retained for Extra. The two majorities are not composed of all the same individuals, but they *are* majorities. Thank you, Rick! You spoke volumes of reality in this new millennium. And you're still just as stupid as you were before you read it. Now, now, "Slow," you are starting to sound like one of those inbred bigoted morsemen in here. You can't discuss anything reasonable-like, only cuss at those who disagree with you. :-) yet I do wonder if he isn't Robeson somedays but I am pretty sure he is just another bitter old that bought into "incetive Licesning) the brain child of the ARRL It should be abundantly clear that "Incentive Licensing" was never about "advancing" in amateur radio beyond getting TITLE, RAND, and STATUS. "RAND"? Do you mean Remington Rand, Ayn Rand, or the South African monetary unit? It is obviously a reference to the Rand Corporation--all very hush hush. I disagree! Remington Rand wasn't part of Len's CV. Heh. Ayn Rand promoted her philosophy of Objectivism, which demanded strict adherence to reality, not the surreal. Also, a core value of Objectivism was the value of the individual and individual accomplishment. Not something Len likes to acknowledge, unless it's *his* personal value and accomplishment. OTOH, Len's value system places a high value on being a "professional" (meaning being paid for something) and how much material wealth a person has amassed (so they can pay CASH for things like Japanese-made general-coverage receivers). Len generally capitalizes "PROFESSIONAL". The term seems to have connotations of rank, status and privilege to him. Now you are beginning to understand. So it must be the South African rand... I'm sticking with the Rand Corporation. I think Len believes that there's a large, secret report being generated somewhere. It is abundantly clear that Len's mind is made up. He KNOWS what incentive licensing was about. Facts notwithstanding. After all, he has read, cut and pasted Thomas White. Except that White's commentary ends about 1927 That was VERY important to the controlling coterie of the League, folks who wanted to be "better" than others...in a hobby activity. Nope. That's not what it was about at all, Len. Do try to get your history straight. The fact is that the "incentive licensing" changes were an attempt to *return* to a system something like that which existed before February 1953. The complexity of the final result was due in large part to it being pieced together from the numerous non-ARRL proposals mentioned earlier. btw, the 1951 restructuring that gave us the license classes with names rather than letters was not primarily driven by ARRL. Of course Len does not know where it actually came from... Thomas White doesn't have it? Not online. What "incentive licensing" DID create was just the opposite of "good fellowship" among amateurs, that of CLASS DISTINCTION and a "pecking order" based largely on morsemanship. How so? Did you forget about the written tests? Don't ruin his rant, Jim. He needs to massage a few facts to make things fit with his conclusion. Massage or mangle? The effect is the same: to take facts and make them state something different than they'd generally reveal. IOW, to tell untruths. Fact is, ARRL proposed in 1963 that there be *no* additional code testing for full privileges - just an additional written test. Yup. The morsemen won it. Never mind that radio technology was already far advanced from the 1930s' style of amateur radio and that morse code was falling by the wayside in every other radio service, the League still (stubbornly) held to the belief that all amateurs "should" be able to be morse skilled...even four decades after the 1930s. How many other radio services used Morse Code in 1966, Len? Let's see...there were the military, particularly the US Navy and Coast Guard, the maritime services, various government agencies, some press services, and of course amateur radio. Was there a shortage of trained radiotelegraphers during the Vietnam War? The League lobbied for and got the "vanity license" system so that olde-tymers could get their 1x2 and 2x1 super-special guru-status callsigns. Even more status symbolism. Should accomplishment not be rewarded? Len shouldn't confuse the Vanity Callsign System with the earlier FCC decisions, beginning in 1968 to award 1x2 calls to those who held the Extra and had been licensed for a certan number of years. Actually, there were forms of "vanity" callsigns long before 1968. In fact, if you search qrz.com, you may still be able to find amateurs with 1x2 callsigns who are not Extras. My mentor, A.G. Timberlake W8MN was one. Andy held the General and later the Advanced. He received the W8MN call by virtue of having gotten his first ticket in 1923. That was later modified to include any Extra Class licensee without a minimum number of years licensed. There was no periodic fee charged for those callsign changes. That's how I got N2EY in 1977. I simply asked FCC for a 1x2 when I moved to New York State, and it was sequentially issued. I'd been an Extra for seven years by then. I was able to obtain K8MN in a similar manner, though I didn't opt for a sequentially issued callsign. I requested a specific call. You were way ahead of me in obtaining the Extra ticket. I didn't get mine until 1977. It is clear that it really bothers Len that some of us got our amateur licenses as "teeners", and rapidly progressed to the highest class of license. That it chafes Len, is tough. All sorts of things chafe Len. ...apparently none moreso than hams talking about amateur radio, a field in which he is not a participant. Combining "vanity" calls and "incentive licensing" there was a perfect setup for all who managed to get both to crow and holler they WERE BETTER than all others. Good fellowship went out the window...rank, status, title RULED. Perhaps in Len's mind, it did. btw, Len, did you ever manage to get your Extra out of the box? It's been more than six and a half years now... Len still hasn't opened the box to obtain any amateur radio license. He's been carping in this newsgroup for a decade or so and inertia rulez. Further, you are ten kinds of short on ability to threaten. Your threats and "orders" become recycled electrons doing nothing but dissipating a tiny bit of heat. yawn amasing how they keep resorting to threats and orders That's all they have left in this new millennium, Mark. Some of them, such as Blow Code and Hambrecht still think they are "better than others" in all aspects, not just morsemanship. Well, maybe they are, Len. Or maybe they aren't. Why does it bother you so much? Do you have a need to look down on everyone? There are those doing something in which Len is not a participant. Some of those who are participants are perceived by Len to have rank, status and privilege. In amateur radio, Len would have to begin as all did--at the bottom. He'd have no rank, status or privilege for quite some time. There'd be those who would think they were "better" than him. There are others who'd actually BE better than him. The thought chafes him. Len isn't an instant anything in amateur radio. He isn't yet a neophyte. Actually there's a bit more to it than that. If you recall, Len once set out to get an amateur license, and reportedly got up to 7 or 8 wpm before he gave up on learning Morse Code. You see, learning Morse Code was "hard work" for Len back then. He's apparently one of those folks who does "book learnin'" rather easily - let him read something and he'll lecture you on it endlessly. Some of what he says will actually be right, too. But often, after having read something, he'll lecture as if he is an expert in a field, even when he has no actual experience. Reading about rebuilding an automatic transmission is not the same as being able to rebuild the contraption. Exactly. Being able to describe a bicycle doesn't mean someone can ride one. But learning Morse Code to the 13 wpm level needed for a General license turned out to be not so easy for Len, so he has held a grudge about it for decades. A couple of motor skills stymied him. I don't think so. I think what bothered him was that Morse Code was not so easy for him to learn, and that he didn't see how he could make money with Morse Code skill. That made it a bad thing to Len. Now you may wonder why, if Len could do 7 or 8 wpm at one point, he didn't just get a Novice license, and improve his Morse Code skills by operating, as most of us did. The answer should be obvious: No way would Len allow himself to be classified as a "Novice". That license did not carry the appropriate title or status for him. That's where I was going with my earlier comments. Len will not accept being classified as a beginner in anything. He rants at length about radio amateurs having "rank, status and privilege", when "rank status and privilege" would seem to be very important to him. So when you see those rants, remember that Len is really talking about himself. They LIKE that. So much so that they are in great personal fear of losing that very precious rank, status, title, and privilege that MIGHT happen if the code test is eliminated. How will any currently licensed amateur lose anything if the Morse Code test is eliminated? They will LOSE their "better than you" rationalization. How? If they really are better than you, they'll still be better without the test. And vice-versa. Precisely. They'll also have much more experience in amateur radio than Leonard H. Anderson. Those who are proficient in the use of Morse, will always be a leg up on Leonard. So what? People have all kinds of skills, experience, etc. I'm sure there are things where Len has more experience/knowledge/skill than I, and things where I have more experience/knowledge/skill than he. The former doesn't bother me, but the latter seems to bother him no end. Sure it does. Internally the sky will have fallen on their self-perceptions. Personally, I think radio and electronics is totally fascinating. Me too. Amateur radio particularly. Seconded. How it must burn to have professed a decades-long interest in something only to remain an outsider. An outsider by choice. There has been a US amateur radio license with no Morse Code test for the past 15-1/2 years. All other classes of US amateur radio license have required only a 5 wpm code test since 2000. Len's been ranting here for better than a decade. Perhaps he's just a late bloomer. So much so that I made a career choice of it while studying for an entirely different sort of work. Funded by the taxpayers, too. ...and you'll note that Len is back to talking careers. Think of the South African rand. Heh. That's one of the wonderful things about amateur radio. One can work in something quite far afield from radio and still have a rich and rewarding experience in amateur radio. One of my local friends works at a funeral home. One works as a jail guard. One is a retired teacher. All find much enjoyment in amateur radio. Exactly. Amateur radio is "radio for its own sake". ...and if one isn't interested in the things radio amateurs do, why would one be concerned with them? Why would one devote better than ten years of his life to haunting an amateur radio newsgroup? To damage/destroy amateur radio. Remember that he has commented to FCC in great volume on a radio service in which he is completely uninvolved. Professional work, not some amateur dabbling, yet I liked to make electronic things in my home workshop. Does being paid for something make someone automatically "better", Len? It apparently does, unless it something made through dabbling in his home workshop. In case you've forgotten, Len did some writing for the now-defunct amateur radio magazine "ham radio". He got paid for those articles, of course. None of his articles were actual projects, though. That hasn't stopped him for lambasting you over your own homebuilt equipment. He's just jealous. Not only is he unable to build a rig like mine, but he is unable to use one. Not Qualified. Maybe Len feels that undertaking anything which doesn't result in profit for him, is simply beneath him. Profile needs a rework to include that. Things other than work-related tasks. It is FUN, personally rewarding, not "work." But not rewarding enough for you to get an amateur radio license, it seems. ...and learning morse would apparently be "work" for Leonard. "hard work", actually. That's why he gave up on it. ...and the experience hardened his heart. and mind... Or have you gotten that Extra out of its box, as you told us you were going to do, way back on January 19, 2000? He talks the talk, but has trouble with the walk. I got into Big Time HF comms 53 1/2 years ago and have seen what modes DO work well and on a 24/7 basis on long-haul circuits that HAD to be kept working. Using equipment supplied and paid for by others. With a team of several hundred people trained to do the job. It is always Big Time in the Len recounting. At least he has dropped the claim that HE worked 24/7. My personal experience with PROFESSIONAL long haul circuits that HAD to be kept working is that they don't always. When a healthy solar flare comes along, you might as well mail 'em a letter. Looks like a deep seated insecurity on Len's part, though. I'd say so. Fortunately such circuits are mostly handled via landline and satellite these days. That makes outages more rare, but it doesn't rule them out. Equipment can and does fail and human error occurs. All the "have to" talk in the world can't prevent that. That doesn't make you more qualified to judge what amateurs do - self-funded and largely self-trained. Years later some KID is trying to "moralize" me into "working on morsemanship?" Is youth somehow wrong, Len? You surely remember what he has said about CHILDREN in the past. Oh yes - something about his difficulty including them in what he sees as an adult activity. Also, he proposed a minimum age requirement for an amateur license even though he had absolutely no evidence of problems caused by the licensing of young people. Then there's his accusating the ARRL and some VEs of "fraud" in licensing some young children. Len's suspicious of the League and suspicious of children. W8MN was 15 when he became a radio amateur. My late friend John Fox W4JBP was only 12 when he became a ham in 1912 (before Federal licenses were required). I still have the REO spark coil he used in getting on the air. He (or she) can go shove it somewhere...until he (or she) can prove they've done more than I in radio communications...which they have NOT done yet in here. I see. What if someone older than you, with more radio experience, told you that you should work on your morse code skills? How would you react? How about if someone younger than Len, but with more experience in radio told him? See the profile...it wouldn't matter. Point taken. Once, a very long time ago, I thought that becoming a "ham" was a cool deal. That was before the commsats, before technology had fully gotten with the semi- conductor era, before the wonderful way we can get over most of the world via PCs and the Internet. What about your posting of January 19, 2000? In addition to that, what about the fact that he is paying for internet service and that invariably, that internet circuit goes through wires somewhere? The cellular telephone is a wonderful thing too, but it isn't a substitute for amateur radio. It'd be pricey too. Why IS it that some have to be a grand champion of the 1930s over seven decades later? What are THEY trying to prove? I could care less about 1930s technology and the "radio standards" of then. I live in the NOW. Then why do you tell us so much about your past? If he didn't, he couldn't regale us with tales of his days in Big Time HF radio! btw, if you are *not* interested in becoming a ham, why are you so vocal about the requirements? Didn't you know, Jim? Len's made himself an ADVOCATE for something-or-other. Keeping real estate zoning regulations as they were 40+ years ago? That's one, but the real estate thing was only to serve his personal interest. Regarding amateur radio, Len's advocacy is...Hey, wait a minute! Do you suppose Len's self-appointment to advocacy in amateur radio regulation is self-serving? Ya broke da cipher! Note that Len's real estate thing was an attempt to prevent others from doing what they wanted with their property. If some dumb**** wants to moralize about "working" and "investing" he (or she) can go get some flagellation and suffer themselves for their own "cause." I'm not about to join him (or her) in such moralistic self- abuse/mis-use. You sure seem to spend a lot of effort arguing about it, though. Why? His life is otherwise empty, depsite the comfortable income, two mortgage-free homes and the like. Maybe Len can take a part-time job as bag boy at Ralph's. No, Ralph's requires that everything be Pretty Good. Including the ketchup. Sorry. If these self-styled emperors want to flap their new clothes in my direction, I'll just keep on pointing out that they are NAKED (and ugly). Perhaps they are simply holding up a mirror..... Len often acts ugly. I prefer not to think of him as naked. Please don't go there... Oops! I might get UnWiseman worked into a lather. Gee, Len, it's been more than three years since the ITU treaty changed. Some countries have eliminated Morse Code testing, some haven't, and at least one (Canada) has worked out a unique solution to the debate. Meanwhile the USA rules on the subject haven't changed since 2000. Are you frustrated because your will has not become law...yet? Whether Len is ever a radio amateur or not, I'm not going to lose any sleep over it. Nor I. Besides, it's just not going to happen. I think they'll pry a microphone from Len's cold, dead fingers. Of course it won't be connected to an amateur radio transmitter. Len should be working on improving his Morse Code skills. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.
|
You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.
From: on Mon, Sep 4 2006 7:40 pm
wrote: wrote: From: on Sun, Sep 3 2006 1:49 pm (whole bunch of Len's errors and insults snipped in the interest of time and space) Tsk, M. Superior does ruler-spank and forgets her habit needs cleaning. :-) The fact is that the "incentive licensing" changes were an attempt to *return* to a system something like that which existed before February 1953. The complexity of the final result was due in large part to it being pieced together from the numerous non-ARRL proposals mentioned earlier. If that is true (and it is not) then there were FIVE classes of amateur radio licenses prior to "incentive licensing." :-) Actually, there were six classes of amateur radio licenses in the USA from 1951 until the mid-1970s. They were Novice, Technician, General, Conditional, Advanced and Extra. Clever, casually omitting the period between the "mid-1970s" up to 1991 and the creation of the no-code Technician class. The number of amateur radio license classes in the USA remained at 5 until the Technician Plus lucense was created in the early 1990s. "Lucense?" :-) False. The Technician with 5wpm code ran concurrently with the Technician license without code. That lasted for about two years, then we got the "Plus" as a marker for the code accomplished. But then the strangest thing happened. It went back to "Technician" and you have to keep track of your code "accomplishment" yourself. Doesn't sound like the FCC values the code "accomplishment" all that much. The FCC didn't think that manual morsemanship was worth their decision in granting ANY amateur license in the 1990 NPRM. Those are the plain and simple facts, Len. Those are almost the plain and simple facts, Jim. Jimmy is a Code Bigot -and- Code Zealot. He CANNOT be corrected on anything by a no-code-test advocate. How is it a failure for someone to state the facts? Simple. Your "facts" failed. I corrected them, but you need not thank me. Jimmy "thanks" only other morsemen. :-) btw, the 1951 restructuring that gave us the license classes with names rather than letters was not primarily driven by ARRL. Sweetums, do NOT go into your smokescreening by diversion routine again. That's SO transparent. You don't really know what caused the 1951 restructuring, do you, Len? I didn't think so. Tsk. M. Superior at it again. :-) In 1951 I was graduating from Senior High School, coming up on Draft eligibility and the Korean War was going hot and heavy in northeast Asia. I went to work full-time as an illustrator to get enough money to attend a good art school. A radio hobby was way low on my priority list then. [I would voluntarily enlist in the US Army in early 1952] Where was Jimmy in 1951? Did he exist? No. 1951 is 55 years ago. Was Jimmy somehow "impressed" with the moral necessity to be an amateur morseman before conception?!? Probably so... morsemanship is in his jeans. Jimmy thinks it HIGHLY IMPORTANT that all get amateur radio history (as told by the ARRL) CORRECT. Failure to do so, showing the slightest imperfection of factual detail (as lectured by Jimmy) is a moral and ethical felony punishable by ruler-spank and personal denigration. :-( (rest of Len's errors snipped for sake of time and space). Are you going to tell us again? (Jim's errors kept for posterity) His errors should be pasted on his posterior. Jimmy is never wrong. He is a morseman. Dum tacet clamatto. |
You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.
From: on Mon, Sep 4 2006 5:30 pm
Dave Heil wrote: wrote: wrote: From: an old friend on Sun, Sep 3 2006 10:09 am Actually there's a bit more to it than that. If you recall, Len once set out to get an amateur license, and reportedly got up to 7 or 8 wpm before he gave up on learning Morse Code. You see, learning Morse Code was "hard work" for Len back then. Tsk. M. Superior is in her innuendo habit... I explained that but you can't use my explanation and have to manufacture a NON-reason of your own. In the early 1960s I did make an attempt to get my morse cognition skill up to 13 WPM, using mainly code tapes (magneitc). I'm not sure of the reason I had then, probably some pressure from co-workers who were into SSB voice; my lab boss at Ramo-Wooldridge was Ed Dodds, W6ERU, had a nice Collins setup in Woodland Hills, beam antenna, regular skeds with a friend in New Zealand. While CB (on 27 MHz) had been authorized in 1958, it had only spread so far in 1962 since the off-shore electronics industry hadn't yet begun to invade the market. My E.F. Johnson Viking Messenger had been removed from my 1953 Austin-Healey (an excellent ground plane with all-aluminum body) since my first wife coerced me into getting Detroit Iron. Apartment dwelling was not good for CB then, nor for amateur radio. We went house-hunting. He's apparently one of those folks who does "book learnin'" rather easily - let him read something and he'll lecture you on it endlessly. Some of what he says will actually be right, too. No, Jimmy, that's YOUR ploy in here. :-) But learning Morse Code to the 13 wpm level needed for a General license turned out to be not so easy for Len, so he has held a grudge about it for decades. No "grudge" for any amateur wanting to USE it. A view only against the alleged "necessity" to demonstrate morsemanship just to GET a license. You've manufactured a "moral defect" which didn't exist. You've conveniently OMITTED the fact that eleven years before then I began working Big Time HF radio comms where there was NO manual morse code used nor required. CB had already been authorized on HF five years before and required NO test whatsoever, certainly NOT morse code. Seven years before that I'd been granted a First 'Phone commercial license, again not requiring any manual morse code demonstration yet I could (commercially) operate on HF using that. There arose what Cecil Moore would later term "return on investment" given the readily-observable CHANGE in communications already taking place in the late 1950s. In using code tapes there was no "difficulty" in learning the tone patterns, only the TIME needed to get them down well enough. TIME is not an unlimited quantity and a LOT of things needed my time in my twenties. If I had to choose between a girlfriend (and later wife) and "morse code practice," those code tapes would be kicked to the gutter. If you think opposite, just shove a J-38 up yer bum and have an orgasm, morse style. Now you may wonder why, if Len could do 7 or 8 wpm at one point, he didn't just get a Novice license, and improve his Morse Code skills by operating, as most of us did. I bought a house in 1963. Shortly thereafter my (then) wife was diagnosed with cancer. She died in 1964. I was then 31 and stuck with a bunch of bills that required a second job to break even. Night college classes had to be postponed for an indefinite period. I kept the house. With all that, you indefatiguable little character assassin, you thought it was NECESSARY TO STUDY MORSE CODE?!?!? If you really thought that, you have all the emotional sensitivity of a lump of wet clay...or an aberrant outlook that isn't in Psych 101 or 102 textbooks. Too twisted for my undergrad knowledge of psychology. The answer should be obvious: No way would Len allow himself to be classified as a "Novice". That license did not carry the appropriate title or status for him. I'm not a "novice" in radio, Jimmy. Neither do I have any emotional need for Rank, Status, Title in a HOBBY activity. Since remodeling one unused bedroom into an office, I haven't even mounted the RCA "first-patent" plaque given to me by Chief Engineer Ray Aires nor the picture of me getting it with Jim Hall, KD6JG, my immediate manager at the time looking on. My wife is the same way (I do the bragging about her) and her 'sheepskins' (3) are in storage up north. All of my First 'Phone and GROL certificates and single college certificate are in the big safety deposit box down here; don't need them. I am secure in myself and what I can do. Outside of the amateur radio pecking order, WHAT GOOD IS MORSEMANSHIP TODAY? It isn't used for regular comms by any other radio service. There isn't one single Public Safety radio service that uses manual morse code. There isn't even one surviving landline morse code telegraph circuit now. I've communicated by radio from land, from a cockpit (at the controls) in the air, from the sea (Ventura Harbor area), from a moving vehicle, from a stationary vehicle, while on march in the Army with a PRC-8 on my back. All during the last half century. No "TITLES" necessary to do any of that or to do it well. Precisely. They'll also have much more experience in amateur radio than Leonard H. Anderson. Those who are proficient in the use of Morse, will always be a leg up on Leonard. Riiiight, world's greates DXer, amateur radio is SOOOO much more advanced than every other radio. [barf, har har] So what? People have all kinds of skills, experience, etc. I'm sure there are things where Len has more experience/knowledge/skill than I, IMPOSSIBLE in Jimmyworld. :-) [he will almost say that outright] and things where I have more experience/knowledge/skill than he. Morsemanship, obviously. Something in great demand these days of the 1930s. Morse champions are to be rewarded with titles of nobility. Long live the morsemen. Huzzah. On anything else, Jimmy hasn't made himself known. Such as what he does for a living (if a life of morsemanship is called living). Does Jimmy have a girlfriend? Boyfriend? Any social life not requiring an antenna? Do we care? [in general, no] Exactly. Amateur radio is "radio for its own sake". Then why all the titles, rank, status, privilege, bandplans and attendant class distinction? In case you've forgotten, Len did some writing for the now-defunct amateur radio magazine "ham radio". He got paid for those articles, of course. None of his articles were actual projects, though. That is a moral deficit? :-) You are IN ERROR, Jimmy. Look up the one on using an HP-25 calculator to convert Noise Bridge readings. That was developed to aid some local friends on antenna measurements. Look at the footnotes on that article and some of the examples. The whole "Digital Techniques" series was based on personal descriptions to others (some of which were amateurs)...the last one on a Phase-Frequency Detector was based on the prototyping I did, partly on an old Apple ][, for an optical interferometer. You conveniently forget the two-plus years I spent with Ham Radio magazine as an Associate Editor. Look on the mastheads for proof of that. Did that under Alf Wilson (W6NIF, took over after Jim Fisk suddenly died) and Rich Rosen (K1RR?). I opted out from HR from time pressure of self-employment...and learning that publisher Skip Tenney was going to sell HR to CQ. ...and learning morse would apparently be "work" for Leonard. "hard work", actually. That's why he gave up on it. No, DUMB work. Waste of my time. Why do I need morse? Why does anyone need morsemanship? To keep the USA safe from terrorists? BWAAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It is always Big Time in the Len recounting. It was NOT "Big Time?" What do you call 36 to 43 HF transmitters ON at any one time, power outputs of 1 KW to 40 KW, relaying 220 thousand message a month, the third largest station in ACAN-DCS? :-) You need to see the following then: http://sujan.hallikainen.org/Broadca...phabetSoup.pdf I didn't make that one, just copied it. Circa 1962. Produced by the Japan Signal Overseas Battalion, a merging of the old "71st" and "72nd" battalions. At least he has dropped the claim that HE worked 24/7. I was on-call 24/7 with the scheduling times. NCOs got stuck with that. Longest I worked was 34 hours, one time. Jimmy Noserve not know stuff like dat. He never be in military serving his country. Jimmy "serve country in different ways," the 'different' very, very undefined. My personal experience with PROFESSIONAL long haul circuits that HAD to be kept working is that they don't always. When a healthy solar flare comes along, you might as well mail 'em a letter. Tsk, from the 80s and later? :-) Military has used all kinds of comms spectra/modes from 1980 onwards, mostly microwave...comm sats, troposcatter (both microwave, work right through solar flares) and HF which is delayed only a few hours on CERTAIN HF routes. HF radios with ALE (Automatic Link Establishment, not the drink). Looks like a deep seated insecurity on Len's part, though. The only "deep seated insecurity" I have is the folding chairs on the patio. The webbing is damaged by 25-30 years of solar radiation. Seat oneself in them now and there is a great deal of "deep seated (to the floor) insecurity." :-) Must decide whether to get webbed ones or solid plastic replacements. Still have the homebuilt swing sofa out there. You surely remember what he has said about CHILDREN in the past. Oh yes - something about his difficulty including them in what he sees as an adult activity. Also, he proposed a minimum age requirement for an amateur license even though he had absolutely no evidence of problems caused by the licensing of young people. Then there's his accusating the ARRL and some VEs of "fraud" in licensing some young children. "Accusating?" :-) I was not "accusating" the ARRL. I said their actions were "grandfatherly" to a pair of cute six-year-olds. I gave NO outright accusation if that's what your raging character assassination words tried to say. :-) FCC amateur radio regulations are written such that ANY licensee, regardless of age, can operate (within bounds of their license class) at any time. Says NOTHING about "parental supervision" of six-year-olds or even nine- year-old Extras. Correct, legal operation of radios requires MATURITY of RESPONSIBILITY. If you still think that 6 year olds and 9 year olds are MATURE, your head isn't on straight. If nine-year-olds can become Extras, then what does that say about the MATURITY level of other Extras? :-) Tsk, tsk, still bitching about a Comment I made to the FCC in January 1999? Seven years ago and you still can't let go of it? Not a good mental picture of you, Jimmy. Didn't you know, Jim? Len's made himself an ADVOCATE for something-or-other. Keeping real estate zoning regulations as they were 40+ years ago? What has THAT manufactured dispute of yours to do with ANY radio?!? Oh, you are homeless? (in Radnor, PA?) Jimmy got no sense of LIVING on his own PROPERTY? Jimmy and Davie only care about amateur morse code, ham radio, and growing antennas... His life is otherwise empty, depsite the comfortable income, two mortgage-free homes and the like. Maybe Len can take a part-time job as bag boy at Ralph's. Maybe Davie can go stick a plastic shopping bag on his head? Breathe deep with it on, Davie. Use your hands to tap out morse code if you get in trouble. :-) No, Ralph's requires that everything be Pretty Good. Including the ketchup. Ralphs, Vons, Albertsons chains all sell food made by professional food growers and producers. AMATEURS aren't wanted as growers/producers. Maybe at Tressieras or Food4Less, but we don't go there. BTW, quit trying to glean info on where the Burbank HRO outlet is, it moved. You might tell Stevie the Imposter. It isn't across the street from the Ralphs market where we shop for food. Len often acts ugly. I prefer not to think of him as naked. Please don't go there... You have a repugnance to seeing naked human beings, Jimmy? Oh, yes, you are unmarried, right? Whether Len is ever a radio amateur or not, I'm not going to lose any sleep over it. Nor I. Besides, it's just not going to happen. The code test issue was never about me or "whether or not I get a license." That is in your weird, manufacture-the- worst-personal-assassination scenarios, Jimmy and Davie. Long ago and several times since then I've said that my actions are for ending the US manual morse code test for an amateur radio license. There is NO "personal" motive in that...you are confusing PERSISTENCE with 'personal.' You two need to take a look at what YOUR personal motives are in taking it so hard about those of us who seek removal of the code test. Several possibilities exist the 1. Either of you (or both) are just Code Bigots, bigots always approving of actions of similar bigotry in others. 2. Either of you (or both) are control freaks determined to make all obey YOUR commands. 3. Neither of you, despite claims otherwise, understand that manual morse code is a dead or dying mode in ALL radio services; there is NO need to keep the manual morse test to provide a "pool" of trained morsemen for the national interest. 4. Either of you (or both) are scared that removal of the code test will end your bragging rights, of self-defined "importance" of rank-title-status- privilege based largely on morsemanship. 5. Either of you (or both) are elitist snobs who have the "deep insecurity" of NEEDING rank-status-title to make you appear "better" than others. Either of you (or both) fit one of those 5 things above, possibly several of them. Irrelevant and a detail as to which but your actions DO show fitting at least one of them. Both of you have to understand that there are a great number of other citizens who also wish the code test removal. Both of you have to understand that such a position is NOT some idiotic moral imperfection but rather a reasonable opinion based on the advancement of technology of all radio by this first decade of the new millennium. Try to keep up. Unless it is too hard for you... |
You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.
|
You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.
wrote:
wrote: From: on Mon, Sep 4 2006 7:40 pm wrote: wrote: From: on Sun, Sep 3 2006 1:49 pm The fact is that the "incentive licensing" changes were an attempt to *return* to a system something like that which existed before February 1953. The complexity of the final result was due in large part to it being pieced together from the numerous non-ARRL proposals mentioned earlier. If that is true (and it is not) then there were FIVE classes of amateur radio licenses prior to "incentive licensing." :-) Actually, there were six classes of amateur radio licenses in the USA from 1951 until the mid-1970s. They were Novice, Technician, General, Conditional, Advanced and Extra. "Incentive licensing" went into effect in the late 1960s. There were six classes of license prior to "incentive licensing". Incentive licensing was implemented in two stages, the first in November 1968 and the second in November 1969. I was one of those who was perfectly content with a General Class license until the implementation of Incentive Licensing. I drove to Dallas and passed the Advanced in 1970. It wasn't until 1977 that I was moved to try for the Extra. Clever, casually omitting the period between the "mid-1970s" up to 1991 and the creation of the no-code Technician class. That wasn't the time period under discussion. Incentive licensing was in effect then. You can't win, Jim. Len sees your statements as a ploy. The incentive licening changes of 1967 to 1969 did not create any new license classes. That's a plain and simple fact. btw, the 1951 restructuring that gave us the license classes with names rather than letters was not primarily driven by ARRL. Sweetums, do NOT go into your smokescreening by diversion routine again. That's SO transparent. You don't really know what caused the 1951 restructuring, do you, Len? I didn't think so. Tsk. M. Superior at it again. :-) You don't know, do you, Len? Or maybe you do know, but don't want to admit it, because doing so would show the errors in your anti-ARRL rants. If he knows, he is certainly keeping it a secret. My guess is that he is frantically searching the internet for information. In 1951 I was graduating from Senior High School, coming up on Draft eligibility and the Korean War was going hot and heavy in northeast Asia. I went to work full-time as an illustrator to get enough money to attend a good art school. A radio hobby was way low on my priority list then. [I would voluntarily enlist in the US Army in early 1952] Bully for you, Len. What does that have to do with your mistakes and ignorance? I don't think he was commenting on those. He was addressing his inability to multi-task. By the time I was graduating from high school, I'd already had an Amateur Extra class license for two years and had been a licensed radio amateur for almost five years. Then I went to EE school. Graduated in four years, having worked all the way through those years. So you found the time to attend school, do your homework, take care of the chores, watch TV and still found enough time to obtain an amateur radio license and to operate? The war in those days was in Southeast Asia. Some people my age went, others did not. But it's not really about me, Len. Whether I was around in 1951 or not has no effect on the non-ARRL groups that influenced FCC back then. The fact is that you simply don't know much about amateur radio history, and what you do know is full of errors and bias. Where was Jimmy in 1951? Did he exist? No. So what? Can a person only talk about things that happened during their lifetime? You rant on and on about what Maxim and ARRL did, years before *you* existed. Where was Len in 1066, or 1215 or 1538 or 1861? The difference is that you repeatedly get the facts wrong. ....and launches into wordy tirades to cover up his errors. ---- Len, you should work on improving your Morse Code skills. It ain't happenin'. Dave K8MN |
You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.
From: on Wed, Sep 6 2006 2:49 am
wrote: From: on Mon, Sep 4 2006 7:40 pm wrote: wrote: From: on Sun, Sep 3 2006 1:49 pm "Incentive licensing" went into effect in the late 1960s. There were six classes of license prior to "incentive licensing". You used too much Conditioner when you had your hair permed. Tell the hairstylist that affects your ego too strongly. So, the privileges of the Conditional Class was somehow "different" because the FCC made allowances for those who had long distances to travel to their Field Offices? Point those out in detail, why don't you? Or do you want to go into YET ANOTHER semantics battle in order to prove your "rightness?" [I opt you go for the latter] Clever, casually omitting the period between the "mid-1970s" up to 1991 and the creation of the no-code Technician class. That wasn't the time period under discussion. Tsk, tsk, tsk...show what I originally wrote for a time period that started all this semantics battling of yours. NOW you claim YOUR stated time period is the ONLY one under discussion? Of course it is YOUR time period. You are Time Lord and Dr. Who all together in the 1930s when Kode was King. :-) The incentive licening changes of 1967 to 1969 did not create any new license classes. "Licening?" I liked your original typo better. :-) So, what are you setting up for another semantics battle with that two-year period, Jimmy? Or are the rules of "time period under discussion" now limited to those two years you've stated? Keep us informed. You don't really know what caused the 1951 restructuring, do you, Len? I didn't think so. Tsk. M. Superior at it again. :-) You don't know, do you, Len? Or maybe you do know, but don't want to admit it, because doing so would show the errors in your anti-ARRL rants. The League is your shepherd, you shall not want... :-) Mother, kindly remember that ARRL membership has never been more than a quarter of all licensed US amateur radio licensees. It is a MINORITY "representative" organization. The ARRL "leadership" is highly biased towards morsemanship and never fails to promote that. You abhor such statements because you are a staunch Believer, perhaps supplicant at the Church of St. Hiram. Poor baby. Failure to "Believe" in the ARRL is an "error?" Okay, then THREE-QUARTERS of US amateur radio licensees are "in error." Go point out their "error" to them, why don't you? Bully for you, Len. What does that have to do with your mistakes and ignorance? Jimmy, you REALLY need to work on your PEOPLE SKILLS! By the time I was graduating from high school, I'd already had an Amateur Extra class license for two years and had been a licensed radio amateur for almost five years. Then I went to EE school. Graduated in four years, having worked all the way through those years. Wow. M. Superior in a gilded cage. The war in those days was in Southeast Asia. Some people my age went, others did not. So, how did you "serve in other ways?" Tsk, tsk, didn't you READ in your military expertise books that only one out of seven in the military were ever directly involved in battle? That little factoid has been common knowledge in the military from WW2 to the present day. Your precious body stood a good chance of being one of those NOT in battle or being harmed. But it's not really about me, Len. Tsk, you seem to be working very hard to showcase yourself. Whether I was around in 1951 or not has no effect on the non-ARRL groups that influenced FCC back then. That much is true. If you didn't exist then, you could not do much of anything... :-) The fact is that you simply don't know much about amateur radio history, and what you do know is full of errors and bias. Sigh, you REALLY need to work on your PEOPLE SKILLS, Jimmy. I have to admit that I haven't committed the ARRL's version of US amateur radio history to heart or memory. I've only been working IN radio-electronics since 1953 and no doubt have "missed" the glory of pioneering radio done by radio amateurs since then. yawn Since you consider amateurs to be oh, so much BETTER than us pros, you will naturally go berserk whenever the League is faulted or I fail to glorify the glory and majesty of morse code. Of course, the ENTIRE radio world outside of ham radio is "full of errors and bias" because they've GIVEN UP on using morse code for communications. Looks like you have a BIG job ahead to "correct their errors!" Where was Jimmy in 1951? Did he exist? No. So what? Clever biasing technique you have, Jimmy, that of taking sentences out of context and then manufacturing a "dispute" or whatever as YOU choose. :-) Can a person only talk about things that happened during their lifetime? Doesn't seem to bother you, Jimmy, although you DO concentrate overmuch on times BEFORE you existed. You are able to make virtual Mount Everests from little ant hills about "historical facts" which, for amateur radio, are limited to the ARRL's biasing about itself. Minutae. Things made much of in order to divert a thread subject. You rant on and on about what Maxim and ARRL did, years before *you* existed. Not really. :-) When I was born Hiram Percy was still quite alive, Kode was King in US amateur radio, and the ARRL had managed to reach the top of the ham club food chain. :-) Not much has changed in ham radio since. You still revere Maxim, think Kode is King, and get totally ****ed whenever anyone says the least little negative about the League. :-) The difference is that you repeatedly get the facts wrong. Tsk. Why do you bother replying to me at all? :-) --- Jimmy, you need to work on your PEOPLE SKILLS. |
You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.
wrote:
From: on Mon, Sep 4 2006 5:30 pm Dave Heil wrote: wrote: wrote: From: an old friend on Sun, Sep 3 2006 10:09 am Actually there's a bit more to it than that. If you recall, Len once set out to get an amateur license, and reportedly got up to 7 or 8 wpm before he gave up on learning Morse Code. You see, learning Morse Code was "hard work" for Len back then. Tsk. M. Superior is in her innuendo habit... ....and Major Hoople is harumphing and posturing. I explained that but you can't use my explanation and have to manufacture a NON-reason of your own. In the early 1960s I did make an attempt to get my morse cognition skill up to 13 WPM, using mainly code tapes (magneitc). I'm not sure of the reason I had then, probably some pressure from co-workers who were into SSB voice; So Phone men were pressuring you to learn CW? I thought only code bigots did things like that. Pressure is not a very good motivator for learning something. my lab boss at Ramo-Wooldridge was Ed Dodds, W6ERU, had a nice Collins setup in Woodland Hills, beam antenna, regular skeds with a friend in New Zealand. While CB (on 27 MHz) had been authorized in 1958, it had only spread so far in 1962 since the off-shore electronics industry hadn't yet begun to invade the market. My E.F. Johnson Viking Messenger had been removed from my 1953 Austin-Healey (an excellent ground plane with all-aluminum body) since my first wife coerced me into getting Detroit Iron. Apartment dwelling was not good for CB then, nor for amateur radio. We went house-hunting. ....and you still have the dusty, tiny Johnson. He's apparently one of those folks who does "book learnin'" rather easily - let him read something and he'll lecture you on it endlessly. Some of what he says will actually be right, too. No, Jimmy, that's YOUR ploy in here. :-) Nobody has come close to matching the output of your windy pontifications. One would think that you are a short story writer getting paid by the word. You're long on volume, short on facts. But learning Morse Code to the 13 wpm level needed for a General license turned out to be not so easy for Len, so he has held a grudge about it for decades. No "grudge" for any amateur wanting to USE it. A view only against the alleged "necessity" to demonstrate morsemanship just to GET a license. It hasn't been an alleged necessity, Len. The necessity to pass a morse exam in order to obtain a license was a reality. You've manufactured a "moral defect" which didn't exist. You've conveniently OMITTED the fact that eleven years before then I began working Big Time HF radio comms where there was NO manual morse code used nor required. Your tale was interesting in the first few tellings. The hole in your story is that it was a military station and not an amateur radio station. Your military experience had nothing whatever to do with amateur radio. CB had already been authorized on HF five years before and required NO test whatsoever, certainly NOT morse code. Then again, CB radio isn't amateur radio and it was never intended to be such. The Citizens Band precluded user modification to the FCC type-accepted equipment, mandated no more than five watts output and restricted antenna height. There were prohibitions on working DX. There were limits on how long one could transmit in a given time period. Operation was limited to spot channels. Seven years before that I'd been granted a First 'Phone commercial license, again not requiring any manual morse code demonstration yet I could (commercially) operate on HF using that. Imagine that! A radiotelephone license didn't require morse! That wasn't amateur radio. There arose what Cecil Moore would later term "return on investment" given the readily-observable CHANGE in communications already taking place in the late 1950s. In using code tapes there was no "difficulty" in learning the tone patterns, only the TIME needed to get them down well enough. TIME is not an unlimited quantity and a LOT of things needed my time in my twenties. I feel your pain, Len. I learned morse in the Cub Scouts over the course of several weekly meetings. When I studied for my Novice exam, it took all of two weeks of spare time brushup to bring my code speed to 5 wpm. Still, I managed to squeeze the time in between my school activities, homework, sports, learning to play the guitar, television and church. If I had to choose between a girlfriend (and later wife) and "morse code practice," those code tapes would be kicked to the gutter. Most of us didn't feel a need to choose. Maybe we slept a little less. If you think opposite, just shove a J-38 up yer bum and have an orgasm, morse style. Have you been studying the works of Roger L. Wiseman? Now you may wonder why, if Len could do 7 or 8 wpm at one point, he didn't just get a Novice license, and improve his Morse Code skills by operating, as most of us did. I bought a house in 1963. Shortly thereafter my (then) wife was diagnosed with cancer. She died in 1964. I was then 31 and stuck with a bunch of bills that required a second job to break even. Night college classes had to be postponed for an indefinite period. I kept the house. With all that, you indefatiguable little character assassin, you thought it was NECESSARY TO STUDY MORSE CODE?!?!? How did Jim assassinate your character, Len? You've had many years since those days in which to obtain an amateur radio license. You've been wasting your time posting here for better than a decade. You don't have to work. You don't have house payments. You've wasted ten years or better. If you really thought that, you have all the emotional sensitivity of a lump of wet clay...or an aberrant outlook that isn't in Psych 101 or 102 textbooks. Too twisted for my undergrad knowledge of psychology. I'm almost feeling sorry for you, Len. Then I remember that a piranha in his eighth decade is still a piranha. The answer should be obvious: No way would Len allow himself to be classified as a "Novice". That license did not carry the appropriate title or status for him. I'm not a "novice" in radio, Jimmy. You're certainly not novice or neophyte in amateur radio. You have yet to reach that plateau, Lennie. Neither do I have any emotional need for Rank, Status, Title in a HOBBY activity. But those things seem very important to you in a PROFESSIONAL capacity. Have you stayed away from social clubs and lodges too, Len? Those things are filled with rank, status and privilege. Most hobbies have some sort of pecking order associated with them. Guys are beginners, competent participants or experts in the field. The only way you can avoid those labels is to be a loner. That's pretty hard to do in amateur radio. Since remodeling one unused bedroom into an office, I haven't even mounted the RCA "first-patent" plaque given to me by Chief Engineer Ray Aires nor the picture of me getting it with Jim Hall, KD6JG, my immediate manager at the time looking on. Does that address your previous PROFESSIONAL status? It has nothing to do with amateur radio, yet you found the need to tell us about it. My wife is the same way (I do the bragging about her) and her 'sheepskins' (3) are in storage up north. All of my First 'Phone and GROL certificates and single college certificate are in the big safety deposit box down here; don't need them. I am secure in myself and what I can do. But you felt the need to comment on those non-amateur radio related things. If you really felt secure in yourself and what you can do, why did you feel compelled to comment on them? Outside of the amateur radio pecking order, WHAT GOOD IS MORSEMANSHIP TODAY? It comes in really handy for conducting CW QSOs. It isn't used for regular comms by any other radio service. Luckily for us, we aren't discussing other radio services. There isn't one single Public Safety radio service that uses manual morse code. Well, imagine that! There isn't even one surviving landline morse code telegraph circuit now. That's fascinating! I've communicated by radio from land, from a cockpit (at the controls) in the air, from the sea (Ventura Harbor area), from a moving vehicle, from a stationary vehicle, while on march in the Army with a PRC-8 on my back. All during the last half century. No "TITLES" necessary to do any of that or to do it well. None of those things is related to amateur radio, yet you felt the need to tell us about them. Do they simply relate to your perceptions of your own rank, status or privilege? Precisely. They'll also have much more experience in amateur radio than Leonard H. Anderson. Those who are proficient in the use of Morse, will always be a leg up on Leonard. Riiiight, world's greates DXer, amateur radio is SOOOO much more advanced than every other radio. [barf, har har] I've never laid claim to any such title. Amateur radio operation is different from other radio services. You've unwittingly showed us a number of examples above. It isn't primarily a point-to-point service. It uses a variety of modes. It isn't primarily channelized. It isn't a commercial or military service. It covers wide portions of the spectrum. My claim that those who are proficient in the use of morse, when it comes to amateur radio operation, is an absolute fact. So what? People have all kinds of skills, experience, etc. I'm sure there are things where Len has more experience/knowledge/skill than I, IMPOSSIBLE in Jimmyworld. :-) [he will almost say that outright] Then why did he just state the exact opposite? and things where I have more experience/knowledge/skill than he. Morsemanship, obviously. Something in great demand these days of the 1930s. Morse champions are to be rewarded with titles of nobility. Long live the morsemen. Huzzah. Jim is an EE. It is possible and even likely that there are areas of that field where he outshines you. On anything else, Jimmy hasn't made himself known. Such as what he does for a living (if a life of morsemanship is called living). Does Jimmy have a girlfriend? Boyfriend? Any social life not requiring an antenna? Do we care? [in general, no] You must care. You've gone fishing for that information a number of times. Jim has seen what happens when you glean a little information about someone. Exactly. Amateur radio is "radio for its own sake". Then why all the titles, rank, status, privilege, bandplans and attendant class distinction? How do any of those change one's love of radio as radio? Do you think that all bandplans have to do with titles, rank, status or privilege? You don't really need to worry about it. You don't hold an amateur radio license of any class. You have no status, rank or privilege in amateur radio. In case you've forgotten, Len did some writing for the now-defunct amateur radio magazine "ham radio". He got paid for those articles, of course. None of his articles were actual projects, though. That is a moral deficit? :-) You are IN ERROR, Jimmy. Look up the one on using an HP-25 calculator to convert Noise Bridge readings. That was developed to aid some local friends on antenna measurements. Look at the footnotes on that article and some of the examples. The whole "Digital Techniques" series was based on personal descriptions to others (some of which were amateurs)...the last one on a Phase-Frequency Detector was based on the prototyping I did, partly on an old Apple ][, for an optical interferometer. You conveniently forget the two-plus years I spent with Ham Radio magazine as an Associate Editor. Look on the mastheads for proof of that. Did that under Alf Wilson (W6NIF, took over after Jim Fisk suddenly died) and Rich Rosen (K1RR?). I opted out from HR from time pressure of self-employment...and learning that publisher Skip Tenney was going to sell HR to CQ. It looks like more of your efforts to impress with titles, rank, status and privilege, Len. ...and learning morse would apparently be "work" for Leonard. "hard work", actually. That's why he gave up on it. No, DUMB work. Waste of my time. Why do I need morse? Len Anderson: Self declared several decade interest in amateur radio. He has never attempted to pass an amateur radio exam. It has been more than a decade since he began posting to r.r.a.p. He still has no amateur radio license. Talk about wasting your time! Why does anyone need morsemanship? To keep the USA safe from terrorists? BWAAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Do you see that as one of your areas of self-appointed advocacy? It is always Big Time in the Len recounting. It was NOT "Big Time?" What do you call 36 to 43 HF transmitters ON at any one time, power outputs of 1 KW to 40 KW, relaying 220 thousand message a month, the third largest station in ACAN-DCS? :-) "We're number three! We're number three!" Yet you've continued to denigrate the experience of others in "Big Time" HF communications. Some have done as much for longer than you, Leonard. Some have actually *operated* such "Big Time" gear--keyed the transmitters, changed frequencies, selected from a whole field full of monster antennas. Your tale goes back over half a century and it isn't amateur radio. You need to see the following then: http://sujan.hallikainen.org/Broadca...phabetSoup.pdf I didn't make that one, just copied it. Circa 1962. Produced by the Japan Signal Overseas Battalion, a merging of the old "71st" and "72nd" battalions. Bully, Len. At least he has dropped the claim that HE worked 24/7. I was on-call 24/7 with the scheduling times. NCOs got stuck with that. Longest I worked was 34 hours, one time. That's quite different from your earlier claim. I've run the CQ Worldwide DX SSB Contest for as long as 45 of 48 hours. My friend OH2MM has often worked the entire 48 hours during the CW weekend. Of course we're getting older and no longer have the stamina to do so. My last such effort was when I was 42. Ville continued to do so into his 50's. Last year I managed only a feeble 38 hours. I've never worked 24/7 and neither has anyone else in the history of time. It is a physical impossibility. Jimmy Noserve not know stuff like dat. He never be in military serving his country. Why are you writing black, jive dialect, Len? What of the statement? Do you see yourself as having more rank, status or privilege than someone who never served in the military? Jimmy "serve country in different ways," the 'different' very, very undefined. ....and not knowing what he did, where he worked, what his marital status is or much else about him is driving you nuts, OT. My personal experience with PROFESSIONAL long haul circuits that HAD to be kept working is that they don't always. When a healthy solar flare comes along, you might as well mail 'em a letter. Tsk, from the 80s and later? :-) The point in time is irrelevant. A major solar flare is a major solar flare. If you're running an HF circuit, you're often out of luck until its effects pass. Military has used all kinds of comms spectra/modes from 1980 onwards, mostly microwave...comm sats, troposcatter (both microwave, work right through solar flares) We were discussing HF, Leonard, though even sats may be disrupted. A transatlantic microwave link is a creature I'm not familiar with. and HF which is delayed only a few hours on CERTAIN HF routes. HF radios with ALE (Automatic Link Establishment, not the drink). But the circuit HAS TO WORK according to you. If it is out for a few hours, it isn't working. I've personally observed the West African Echo, severe night time multipath distortion preventing baudot circuits from working for as long as twelve hours, regardless of chose frequency. The circuit HAD TO WORK, but it didn't. If our equipment had worked as low as 2 MHz, it might have. Looks like a deep seated insecurity on Len's part, though. The only "deep seated insecurity" I have is the folding chairs on the patio. The webbing is damaged by 25-30 years of solar radiation. Seat oneself in them now and there is a great deal of "deep seated (to the floor) insecurity." :-) People worry about peculiar things as they age. With your comfortable income, you could buy new chairs or at least replace the webbing. Must decide whether to get webbed ones or solid plastic replacements. Still have the homebuilt swing sofa out there. See? You spend your time worrying about outdoor furniture and regs involving a radio service in which you are not a participant. You surely remember what he has said about CHILDREN in the past. Oh yes - something about his difficulty including them in what he sees as an adult activity. Also, he proposed a minimum age requirement for an amateur license even though he had absolutely no evidence of problems caused by the licensing of young people. Then there's his accusating the ARRL and some VEs of "fraud" in licensing some young children. "Accusating?" :-) I was not "accusating" the ARRL. I said their actions were "grandfatherly" to a pair of cute six-year-olds. You said much more than that. Google knows. I gave NO outright accusation if that's what your raging character assassination words tried to say. :-) You might want to think about your response. FCC amateur radio regulations are written such that ANY licensee, regardless of age, can operate (within bounds of their license class) at any time. Says NOTHING about "parental supervision" of six-year-olds or even nine- year-old Extras. Precisely--and the FCC has not seen fit to set an age limit for amateur radio licensing, ever. Correct, legal operation of radios requires MATURITY of RESPONSIBILITY. If you still think that 6 year olds and 9 year olds are MATURE, your head isn't on straight. ....and if you can find an age-related FCC amateur radio enforcement action dealing with a young person, please provide it. If nine-year-olds can become Extras, then what does that say about the MATURITY level of other Extras? :-) It says that you haven't achieved that level of maturity. You're still on the outside, looking in. Tsk, tsk, still bitching about a Comment I made to the FCC in January 1999? Seven years ago and you still can't let go of it? Not a good mental picture of you, Jimmy. You've had seven years of wearing that dried egg on your mug. Now THERE is a picture. Didn't you know, Jim? Len's made himself an ADVOCATE for something-or-other. Keeping real estate zoning regulations as they were 40+ years ago? What has THAT manufactured dispute of yours to do with ANY radio?!? You manufactured the dispute--with the owners of the land to be developed. Oh, you are homeless? (in Radnor, PA?) Jimmy got no sense of LIVING on his own PROPERTY? I don't think he believes he can make the rules for the property of his neighbors. Jimmy and Davie only care about amateur morse code, ham radio, and growing antennas... I care about much, much more, Lennie. It isn't really material I care to discuss in an amateur radio forum--or with you. His life is otherwise empty, depsite the comfortable income, two mortgage-free homes and the like. Maybe Len can take a part-time job as bag boy at Ralph's. Maybe Davie can go stick a plastic shopping bag on his head? Breathe deep with it on, Davie. Use your hands to tap out morse code if you get in trouble. :-) That's the attitude that'll preclude your employment at Ralph's. No, Ralph's requires that everything be Pretty Good. Including the ketchup. Ralphs, Vons, Albertsons chains all sell food made by professional food growers and producers. ....with all their titles, rank, status and privilege. AMATEURS aren't wanted as growers/producers. Maybe at Tressieras or Food4Less, but we don't go there. Ahhhh! Rank, status and privilege? BTW, quit trying to glean info on where the Burbank HRO outlet is, it moved. Why would either of us need to traipse across the country for ham gear? You might tell Stevie the Imposter. It isn't across the street from the Ralphs market where we shop for food. I'm sure someone with no life will make a note of it. Maybe Wiseman! He can add it to that list of information containing the information on where I worked in high school and what color my car is. Len often acts ugly. I prefer not to think of him as naked. Please don't go there... You have a repugnance to seeing naked human beings, Jimmy? I don't even want to see naked fruit or veggies if they're past their "sell by" date. Oh, yes, you are unmarried, right? Are you writing a book? Leave this chapter out and make it a mystery. By the way, I know Jim's marital status, but I'm not telling you. Whether Len is ever a radio amateur or not, I'm not going to lose any sleep over it. Nor I. Besides, it's just not going to happen. The code test issue was never about me or "whether or not I get a license." That is in your weird, manufacture-the- worst-personal-assassination scenarios, Jimmy and Davie. Well, Lennie, it has to have something to do with you personally. As you demonstrated when talking about other areas of your life, you don't do things unless there is something in it for you. Long ago and several times since then I've said that my actions are for ending the US manual morse code test for an amateur radio license. There is NO "personal" motive in that...you are confusing PERSISTENCE with 'personal.' Persistance? Try obsession. You're a retired goofball with an amateur radio fetish. You two need to take a look at what YOUR personal motives are in taking it so hard about those of us who seek removal of the code test. Several possibilities exist the ....and you missed 'em all. Dave K8MN |
You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.
Dave Heil wrote:
wrote: wrote: From: on Mon, Sep 4 2006 7:40 pm wrote: wrote: From: on Sun, Sep 3 2006 1:49 pm The fact is that the "incentive licensing" changes were an attempt to *return* to a system something like that which existed before February 1953. The complexity of the final result was due in large part to it being pieced together from the numerous non-ARRL proposals mentioned earlier. If that is true (and it is not) then there were FIVE classes of amateur radio licenses prior to "incentive licensing." :-) Actually, there were six classes of amateur radio licenses in the USA from 1951 until the mid-1970s. They were Novice, Technician, General, Conditional, Advanced and Extra. "Incentive licensing" went into effect in the late 1960s. There were six classes of license prior to "incentive licensing". Incentive licensing was implemented in two stages, the first in November 1968 and the second in November 1969. There were actually three stages, Dave, but only the last two are usually remembered. The first stage happened in mid-1967. That was when the Novice license term was doubled to two years, and the Advanced license was reopened to new issues. The existing written test for Extra was split into two elements, with one for Advanced and the other for Extra. I was one of the first two-year Novices, license dated October 12, 1967. I was one of those who was perfectly content with a General Class license until the implementation of Incentive Licensing. I drove to Dallas and passed the Advanced in 1970. It wasn't until 1977 that I was moved to try for the Extra. I was lucky enough to be just a subway ride from the Philly FCC office, with a bit of walking to and from the Market Frankford line (now known as SEPTA's Blue Line, it is partly elevated, partly underground, and partly at grade level, yet is usually called "The El"). I figured the FCC wouldn't be making the tests easier in the future, so I upgraded as soon as possible. The incentive licening changes of 1967 to 1969 did not create any new license classes. That's a plain and simple fact. Six license classes before and six license classes after, until the Conditional was eliminated in the mid-1970s. If he knows, he is certainly keeping it a secret. My guess is that he is frantically searching the internet for information. By the time I was graduating from high school, I'd already had an Amateur Extra class license for two years and had been a licensed radio amateur for almost five years. Then I went to EE school. Graduated in four years, having worked all the way through those years. So you found the time to attend school, do your homework, take care of the chores, watch TV and still found enough time to obtain an amateur radio license and to operate? Yup. I also worked part time, was active in some extracurricular school activities, and built much of my amateur radio station from recycled parts taken from TVs, BC radios and WW2 surplus. Swords into plowshares, doncha know. And maintained a high enough academic average to be admitted to every college/university I applied to. My accomplishments as a radio amateur figured into my being accepted to EE school. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.
Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: wrote: On 4 Sep 2006 18:13:27 -0700, wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: wrote: ARRL kept promoting themselves as "representative" allegedly for the amateur to the FCC but suspiciously more like a "filter" of amateurs' opinions. Why are you suspicious, Len? Anyone could petition the FCC directly, and many did, long before the Internet and ECFS. Len is suspicious of the League's elections of Directors too. Len is suspicious of a number of things in which he isn't involved. Interesting how Carl was barred from running for section office. Professional talent need not apply - we only want amateurs. and yet no problem for the ARRL's marketing director to hop over to Yeasu He is forever tainted... Wow, Goobers united! I don't think Yaesu/Vertex Standard has a policy which precludes the hiring of those who worked at the League. The League's policy doesn't preclude the candidacy of those who *previously* worked in professional communications or the manufacture and marketing of amateur radio equipment. They deal with those who work in such fields *currently*, at the time of the election. Likely candidates for ARRL volunteer positions are what? retirees? Volunteer positions are not elected positions. Read up on it. What do the elected positions pay? Just what the hobby needs more of... I welcome all the retirees amateur radio can get, just as I welcome all of the young people and all of those in between. Dave K8MN Right. |
You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.
Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: wrote: ARRL kept promoting themselves as "representative" allegedly for the amateur to the FCC but suspiciously more like a "filter" of amateurs' opinions. Why are you suspicious, Len? Anyone could petition the FCC directly, and many did, long before the Internet and ECFS. Len is suspicious of the League's elections of Directors too. Len is suspicious of a number of things in which he isn't involved. Interesting how Carl was barred from running for section office. Professional talent need not apply - we only want amateurs. The ARRL's rules regarding candidacy for elected ARRL positions existed decades before Carl's run. The matter is moot since Carl's mouth would have precluded his being elected had he qualified for candidacy. The skeletons were pouring forth from the r.r.a.p. closet. Dave K8MN You're describing halloween. I'm describing statements made by Carl. If those are Halloween, so be it. Skeletons pouring forth... Like working out of band frenchmen on six meters... If you take Carls remarks in context, there are a lot of hams that would agree with him... There's not much evidence of that. Who might they be--the MoveOn.org of ham radio? Dave K8MN and would welcome a scrapper in the white house, err volunteer office. I'm unfamiliar with the MoveOn.org of ham radio. |
You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.
wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: You're describing halloween. I'm describing statements made by Carl. If those are Halloween, so be it. Skeletons pouring forth... lets see Robseson outs himself as gay and quite a week here in rrap Like working out of band frenchmen on six meters... If you take Carls remarks in context, there are a lot of hams that would agree with him... There's not much evidence of that. Who might they be--the MoveOn.org of ham radio? Dave K8MN and would welcome a scrapper in the white house, err volunteer office. I'm unfamiliar with the MoveOn.org of ham radio. indeed it is red herring the oher standard attack of the proocders |
You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.
an old freind wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: You're describing halloween. I'm describing statements made by Carl. If those are Halloween, so be it. Skeletons pouring forth... lets see, Robseson outs himself as gay and quite a week here in rrap Hi! Years and years of complaining and he finally decided to do something about it... He became a participant. Like working out of band frenchmen on six meters... If you take Carls remarks in context, there are a lot of hams that would agree with him... There's not much evidence of that. Who might they be--the MoveOn.org of ham radio? Dave K8MN and would welcome a scrapper in the white house, err volunteer office. I'm unfamiliar with the MoveOn.org of ham radio. indeed it is red herring the oher standard attack of the proocders Maybe he'll have some crackers with that red herring. |
You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.
wrote:
Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: wrote: On 4 Sep 2006 18:13:27 -0700, wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: wrote: ARRL kept promoting themselves as "representative" allegedly for the amateur to the FCC but suspiciously more like a "filter" of amateurs' opinions. Why are you suspicious, Len? Anyone could petition the FCC directly, and many did, long before the Internet and ECFS. Len is suspicious of the League's elections of Directors too. Len is suspicious of a number of things in which he isn't involved. Interesting how Carl was barred from running for section office. Professional talent need not apply - we only want amateurs. and yet no problem for the ARRL's marketing director to hop over to Yeasu He is forever tainted... Wow, Goobers united! I don't think Yaesu/Vertex Standard has a policy which precludes the hiring of those who worked at the League. The League's policy doesn't preclude the candidacy of those who *previously* worked in professional communications or the manufacture and marketing of amateur radio equipment. They deal with those who work in such fields *currently*, at the time of the election. Likely candidates for ARRL volunteer positions are what? retirees? Volunteer positions are not elected positions. Read up on it. What do the elected positions pay? Read up on it. Just what the hobby needs more of... I welcome all the retirees amateur radio can get, just as I welcome all of the young people and all of those in between. Dave K8MN Right. Absolutely right. Dave K8MN |
You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.
|
Why Does Brian P Burke Participate In Blatant Lying In Public?
wrote: an old freind wrote: wrote: lets see, Robseson outs himself as gay and quite a week here in rrap Oh...?!?! Where did that happen? Hi! Years and years of complaining and he finally decided to do something about it... He became a participant. Participant? In what? Why do you insist on lying in public, Brian? Does Mrs Brain know about your on-line behaviour? Perhaps some snail mail is overdue. Like working out of band frenchmen on six meters... If you take Carls remarks in context, there are a lot of hams that would agree with him... There's not much evidence of that. Who might they be--the MoveOn.org of ham radio? Dave K8MN and would welcome a scrapper in the white house, err volunteer office. I'm unfamiliar with the MoveOn.org of ham radio. indeed it is red herring the oher standard attack of the proocders Maybe he'll have some crackers with that red herring. Maybe Brian P Burke will stop his two-faced on-line behaviour? But I doubt it. Stev,e K4YZ |
You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.
Dave Heil wrote:
The ARRL's rules regarding candidacy for elected ARRL positions existed decades before Carl's run. They go all the way back to the very beginning of the League. They're really very basic conflict-of-interest rules. Someone whose employment is tied to parts of the radio industry that conflict with amateur radio, or could conflict with amateur radio, are not allowed to hold policy-making ARRL positions, such as Director and Vice-Director. For example, someone working on a BPL system could not be a vice director. It's not about whether someone is a "professional" or not, but whether the person's "pecuniary interest" could present a conflict. The problem is in the interpretation of those rules. The committee which decides such things decided there could be a conflict-of-interest. The BoD agreed with the committee. Some of us here in the Atlantic Division (where he lives), and elsewhere, thought that Carl should be allowed to run. We did not see the alleged conflict-of-interest. We expressed that opinion to the commitee, the board, the officers, etc. but they did not change their minds. btw, director and vice director are division positions, not section positions. The matter is moot since Carl's mouth would have precluded his being elected had he qualified for candidacy. Possibly. But as an ARRL member in the Atlantic Division, I thought he should have the chance to run. The fact that I disagree with him on some issues might have been overshadowed by broad agreement on other issues. Maybe I would have voted for him, maybe not. Maybe he could have won, maybe not, but at least I wanted the choice. Carl's excellent work on interference-from-BPL speaks for itself. Director terms are not for life. The board, committees and officers change over time. There will be other elections. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
The WHOLE Truth That Morkie Won't Quote Accurately
wrote: On 7 Sep 2006 00:41:13 -0700, "K4YZ" wrote: wrote: an old freind wrote: wrote: lets see, Robseson outs himself as gay and quite a week here in rrap Oh...?!?! Where did that happen? Stop lying about being misquoted "What it's like to lick my excrement off of another man's genitals"sayth Robeson steve has been quoted exactly I'm not lying. You're quoting out of context. Here's the WHOLE TRUTH: QUOTE an old friend continues to refuse to get back on his meds: N9OGL still hasn't got a clue: Slow Code wrote: Thanks. You need to contact Mark to see what speed he wants. Sc You seem to misunderstand that Omega One Radio is a BROADCAST station, not an amateur station. No..."Omega One Radio" is a pirate station. And even if it were within Part 15 limits, it STILL would not be a "broadcast station". slwo code understands even less than steve Morkie, I will conceed that you know two things that I will never know...What it's like to lick my excrement off of another man's genitals, and the going welfare rates in Michigan. Enjoy your win. Steve, K4YZ UNQUOTE So now I have you AND Brian Putz Burke caught in a lie! Hi! Years and years of complaining and he finally decided to do something about it... He became a participant. Participant? In what? Why do you insist on lying in public, Brian? Stop lying about being misquoted "What it's like to lick my excrement off of another man's genitals"sayth Robeson steve has been quoted exactly Sigh; Here's the WHOLE TRUTH AGAIN: QUOTE an old friend continues to refuse to get back on his meds: N9OGL still hasn't got a clue: Slow Code wrote: Thanks. You need to contact Mark to see what speed he wants. Sc You seem to misunderstand that Omega One Radio is a BROADCAST station, not an amateur station. No..."Omega One Radio" is a pirate station. And even if it were within Part 15 limits, it STILL would not be a "broadcast station". slwo code understands even less than steve Morkie, I will conceed that you know two things that I will never know...What it's like to lick my excrement off of another man's genitals, and the going welfare rates in Michigan. Enjoy your win. Steve, K4YZ UNQUOTE Does Mrs Brain know about your on-line behaviour? Perhaps some snail mail is overdue. more of YOUR stalking Robeson Nope. and a threat to comit mail fraud it seems You need to learn the true definition of "mail fraud", PutzBoy. THE WHOLE TRUTH, ONE MORE TIME! QUOTE an old friend continues to refuse to get back on his meds: N9OGL still hasn't got a clue: Slow Code wrote: Thanks. You need to contact Mark to see what speed he wants. Sc You seem to misunderstand that Omega One Radio is a BROADCAST station, not an amateur station. No..."Omega One Radio" is a pirate station. And even if it were within Part 15 limits, it STILL would not be a "broadcast station". slwo code understands even less than steve Morkie, I will conceed that you know two things that I will never know...What it's like to lick my excrement off of another man's genitals, and the going welfare rates in Michigan. Enjoy your win. Steve, K4YZ UNQUOTE Steve, K4YZ |
The WHOLE Truth That stave is afraid of "What it's like to lick my excrement off of another man's genitals"sayth Robeson
K4YZ wrote: "What it's like to lick my excrement off of another man's genitals"sayth Robeson he cofessed to homosexauls and insits he never posts anything un ture therefore steve is a homosexual by his own words does Amy Know |
The WHOLE Truth That Morkie Won't Quote Accurately
K4YZ wrote (Minus The Morkie Threadjacking): wrote: On 7 Sep 2006 00:41:13 -0700, "K4YZ" wrote: wrote: an old freind wrote: wrote: lets see, Robseson outs himself as gay and quite a week here in rrap Oh...?!?! Where did that happen? Stop lying about being misquoted "What it's like to lick my excrement off of another man's genitals"sayth Robeson steve has been quoted exactly I'm not lying. You're quoting out of context. Here's the WHOLE TRUTH: QUOTE an old friend continues to refuse to get back on his meds: N9OGL still hasn't got a clue: Slow Code wrote: Thanks. You need to contact Mark to see what speed he wants. Sc You seem to misunderstand that Omega One Radio is a BROADCAST station, not an amateur station. No..."Omega One Radio" is a pirate station. And even if it were within Part 15 limits, it STILL would not be a "broadcast station". slwo code understands even less than steve Morkie, I will conceed that you know two things that I will never know...What it's like to lick my excrement off of another man's genitals, and the going welfare rates in Michigan. Enjoy your win. Steve, K4YZ UNQUOTE So now I have you AND Brian Putz Burke caught in a lie! Hi! Years and years of complaining and he finally decided to do something about it... He became a participant. Participant? In what? Why do you insist on lying in public, Brian? Stop lying about being misquoted "What it's like to lick my excrement off of another man's genitals"sayth Robeson steve has been quoted exactly Sigh; Here's the WHOLE TRUTH AGAIN: QUOTE an old friend continues to refuse to get back on his meds: N9OGL still hasn't got a clue: Slow Code wrote: Thanks. You need to contact Mark to see what speed he wants. Sc You seem to misunderstand that Omega One Radio is a BROADCAST station, not an amateur station. No..."Omega One Radio" is a pirate station. And even if it were within Part 15 limits, it STILL would not be a "broadcast station". slwo code understands even less than steve Morkie, I will conceed that you know two things that I will never know...What it's like to lick my excrement off of another man's genitals, and the going welfare rates in Michigan. Enjoy your win. Steve, K4YZ UNQUOTE Does Mrs Brain know about your on-line behaviour? Perhaps some snail mail is overdue. more of YOUR stalking Robeson Nope. and a threat to comit mail fraud it seems You need to learn the true definition of "mail fraud", PutzBoy. THE WHOLE TRUTH, ONE MORE TIME! QUOTE an old friend continues to refuse to get back on his meds: N9OGL still hasn't got a clue: Slow Code wrote: Thanks. You need to contact Mark to see what speed he wants. Sc You seem to misunderstand that Omega One Radio is a BROADCAST station, not an amateur station. No..."Omega One Radio" is a pirate station. And even if it were within Part 15 limits, it STILL would not be a "broadcast station". slwo code understands even less than steve Morkie, I will conceed that you know two things that I will never know...What it's like to lick my excrement off of another man's genitals, and the going welfare rates in Michigan. Enjoy your win. Steve, K4YZ UNQUOTE Steve, K4YZ |
"What it's like to lick my excrement off of another man's genitals"sayth Robeson
|
You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.
From: on Wed, Sep 6 2006 6:11 pm
Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: wrote: On 4 Sep 2006 18:13:27 -0700, wrote: Interesting how Carl was barred from running for section office. Professional talent need not apply - we only want amateurs. and yet no problem for the ARRL's marketing director to hop over to Yeasu He is forever tainted... Wow, Goobers united! I don't think Yaesu/Vertex Standard has a policy which precludes the hiring of those who worked at the League. The League's policy doesn't preclude the candidacy of those who *previously* worked in professional communications or the manufacture and marketing of amateur radio equipment. They deal with those who work in such fields *currently*, at the time of the election. Likely candidates for ARRL volunteer positions are what? retirees? Volunteer positions are not elected positions. Read up on it. What do the elected positions pay? Just what the hobby needs more of... I welcome all the retirees amateur radio can get, just as I welcome all of the young people and all of those in between. Dave K8MN Right. BUT...*ONLY* if they love, honor, and obey manual morse code and the ultra-noble ARRL (which can do no wrong). In other words, a "Val Germann" type. :-) |
You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.
From: Dave Heil on Wed, Sep 6 2006 12:25 pm
wrote: From: on Mon, Sep 4 2006 5:30 pm Dave Heil wrote: Persistance? Try obsession. You're a retired goofball with an amateur radio fetish. Tsk. Heil NEEDS to work on his PEOPLE SKILLS. I am a professional in the electronics industry (that includes radio) who is only retired from regular working hours. My advocacy is only for elimination of the manual radiotelegraphy test from US amateur radio regulations. You need to take a look at what YOUR personal motives are in taking it so hard about those of us who seek removal of the code test. Several possibilities exist the 1. You are just a Code Bigot. Bigots always approve actions of similar bigotry in others. 2. You are a control freak determined to make all obey YOUR commands. 3. You cannot understand that manual morse code is a dead or dying mode in ALL radio services; there is NO need to keep the manual morse test to provide a "pool" of trained morsemen for the national interest. 4. You are scared that removal of the code test will end your bragging rights, of self-defined "importance" of rank-title-status-privilege based largely on morsemanship. 5. You are an elitist snob who has the "deep insecurity" of NEEDING rank-status-title to make you appear "better" than others. 6. You are a supreme egotist, judging all on your accomplishments and denigrating those of others. You fill at least one of those 6 things above, possibly several; irrelevant and a detail as to which but your actions DO show fitting at least one of them. You have to understand that there are a great number of other citizens who also wish the code test removal. You have to understand that such a position is NOT some idiotic moral imperfection but rather a reasonable opinion based on the advancement of technology of all radio by this first decade of the new millennium. |
You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.
|
You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.
Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: wrote: On 4 Sep 2006 18:13:27 -0700, wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: wrote: ARRL kept promoting themselves as "representative" allegedly for the amateur to the FCC but suspiciously more like a "filter" of amateurs' opinions. Why are you suspicious, Len? Anyone could petition the FCC directly, and many did, long before the Internet and ECFS. Len is suspicious of the League's elections of Directors too. Len is suspicious of a number of things in which he isn't involved. Interesting how Carl was barred from running for section office. Professional talent need not apply - we only want amateurs. and yet no problem for the ARRL's marketing director to hop over to Yeasu He is forever tainted... Wow, Goobers united! I don't think Yaesu/Vertex Standard has a policy which precludes the hiring of those who worked at the League. The League's policy doesn't preclude the candidacy of those who *previously* worked in professional communications or the manufacture and marketing of amateur radio equipment. They deal with those who work in such fields *currently*, at the time of the election. Likely candidates for ARRL volunteer positions are what? retirees? Volunteer positions are not elected positions. Read up on it. What do the elected positions pay? Read up on it. You read up on it. I already know that ARRL volunteer positions, elected or otherwise, do not pay. So the available pool of applicants are either retired, on public assistance, or both. People with up to date knowledge from the industry, such as Carl, need not apply. Now get over yourself. |
You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.
|
Why Does Steven Robeson Participate In Blatant Lying In Public? as proven by claiming"What it's like to lick my excrement off of another man's genitals"sayth Robeson
wrote: On 7 Sep 2006 00:41:13 -0700, "K4YZ" wrote: wrote: an old freind wrote: wrote: lets see, Robseson outs himself as gay and quite a week here in rrap Oh...?!?! Where did that happen? Stop lying about being misquoted "What it's like to lick my excrement off of another man's genitals"sayth Robeson steve has been quoted exactly Hi! Years and years of complaining and he finally decided to do something about it... He became a participant. Participant? In what? Why do you insist on lying in public, Brian? Stop lying about being misquoted "What it's like to lick my excrement off of another man's genitals"sayth Robeson steve has been quoted exactly Does Mrs Brain know about your on-line behaviour? Perhaps some snail mail is overdue. more of YOUR stalking Robeson and a threat to comit mail fraud it seems Robesin suffers from "victimitus." First he attacks with some incredibly sick accusations. In this attack, he trips up and says something stupid, something perhaps unintended, perhaps true, perhaps false. When that is exposed for what it is, he runs up the victim flag. Now he wants to "tell" the women folk.... I guess they're supposed to put us on bread and water rations, and withold marital relations because Robesin says so.... That's so funny. We know what Robesin is going to do even before he does. It's called a "Profile." The rat is in a maze of his own making. I wonder if he "talked" to the women folk when running morale calls on NMC MARS from Okinawa? "Saw you husband at the hitchin post talking to one of the bar girls the other night..." or "Your husband was making fun of me making fun of other people..." Sounds just like him on RRAP. |
You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.
Dave Heil wrote: "Frenchmen". I broke no regs in my 6m operation from anywhere. Yep, just the opposite of selling tobacco to kids. It's illegal to sell it to them, but it's not illegal for them to try to buy it from you. As you've been previously advised, if you have a problem with French ops being outside their allocated band segment on any band, you should take it up with the French authorities and the REF. Hey, if you're good with taking part in illegal communications, then who am I to complain? You're the expert DXer, after all. Additionally, my 6m operation would not likely effect my eligibility to run for an ARRL elected position. Eligibility? No. Are you going to put your theory into operation? My views are mainstream and I have no record of bad mouthing the ARRL or its Board of Directors. Then you'd be perfect for the job, except for that six meter/frenchmen debacle... |
You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.
wrote: Dave Heil wrote: "Frenchmen". I broke no regs in my 6m operation from anywhere. Yep, just the opposite of selling tobacco to kids. It's illegal to sell it to them, but it's not illegal for them to try to buy it from you. You might want to check that. In many states it is illegal for a minor to buy, possess or use tobacco products. If a store sells tobacco to a minor, the minor is in possession, and both store and minor can be prosecuted. Attempting to do an illegal thing can usually be prosecuted as well. http://slati.lungusa.org/StateLegislateAction.asp Of course the enforcement of these laws is uneven at best. But here in EPA, most stores will require ID of anyone who looks under 25 years of age before they will sell them tobacco products. |
What's Lennie's Excuse or Diversion THIS Time...?!?!
wrote:
wrote: From: on Mon, Sep 4 2006 5:30 pm Dave Heil wrote: wrote: wrote: From: an old friend on Sun, Sep 3 2006 10:09 am Actually there's a bit more to it than that. If you recall, Len once set out to get an amateur license, and reportedly got up to 7 or 8 wpm before he gave up on learning Morse Code. You see, learning Morse Code was "hard work" for Len back then. Tsk. M. Superior is in her innuendo habit... I explained that but you can't use my explanation and have to manufacture a NON-reason of your own. You gave up, Len. You said yourself that it was hard work, didn't you? Yep. Archived. Bad luck for him WE never forgot it, eh? In the early 1960s I did make an attempt to get my morse cognition skill up to 13 WPM, using mainly code tapes (magneitc). I'm not sure of the reason I had then, probably some pressure from co-workers who were into SSB voice; my lab boss at Ramo-Wooldridge was Ed Dodds, W6ERU, had a nice Collins setup in Woodland Hills, beam antenna, regular skeds with a friend in New Zealand. The point was that you tried and then gave up. Even more interesting was the "pressure" he got from his "SSB voice" buddies. Guess they weren't THAT good of buddies...Lennie didn't thinkl them worthy enough of joining them on the air. While CB (on 27 MHz) had been authorized in 1958, it had only spread so far in 1962 since the off-shore electronics industry hadn't yet begun to invade the market. Didn't US manufacturers make cb sets? Sonar, E F Johnson, Allied, LaFayette...You mean those...?!?! My E.F. Johnson Viking Messenger had been removed from my 1953 Austin-Healey (an excellent ground plane with all-aluminum body) since my first wife coerced me into getting Detroit Iron. Apartment dwelling was not good for CB then, nor for amateur radio. We went house-hunting. Gosh that's lot of detail to tell a simple story. Just more braggadoccio...An opportunity to tell us about his (never existed) Austin-Healy. He's apparently one of those folks who does "book learnin'" rather easily - let him read something and he'll lecture you on it endlessly. Some of what he says will actually be right, too. No, Jimmy, that's YOUR ploy in here. Len, we all know that you talk only about yourself here... Reminds me of "Good Will Hunting"... Couldn't tell Robin Williams what the Sistine Chapel was like... But learning Morse Code to the 13 wpm level needed for a General license turned out to be not so easy for Len, so he has held a grudge about it for decades. No "grudge" for any amateur wanting to USE it. Your behavior here says otherwise, Len. In spades. A view only against the alleged "necessity" to demonstrate morsemanship just to GET a license. Even though you don't seem to want such a license. Especially since he hasn't needed it for 15 years now. You've manufactured a "moral defect" which didn't exist. Who said it was a moral defect, Len? You simply gave up. Even before it was PC to do so. You've conveniently OMITTED the fact that eleven years before then I began working Big Time HF radio comms where there was NO manual morse code used nor required. That doesn't change the fact that you gave up trying to learn Morse Code because it was too much work for you. Lennie's NEVER been into the "Big Time HF radio comms" as an OPERATOR (except for CB and the occassional jaunt on a friend's yacht) ! He was, at best, a radio mechanic. CB had already been authorized on HF five years before and required NO test whatsoever, certainly NOT morse code. Is that how you think amateur radio should be? A few channels in one part of the spectrum, very low power, one or two modes, and only approved manufactured equipment? Of COURSE that's what he wants... Then he can "Shack and Awe" the unwashed minions with his expertise and knowledge in PROFESSIONAL electronics... And no...I didn't mispell that...Lennie would drag folks into his "shack" and try to "awe" them with his Japanese SWL receiver. In any event, it doesn't change the fact that you gave up trying to learn Morse Code because it was too much work for you. Seven years before that I'd been granted a First 'Phone commercial license, again not requiring any manual morse code demonstration yet I could (commercially) operate on HF using that. But not on the amateur bands. And not using your own station unless you got a station license for it. But Lennie got to push a button that made a robot on the moon hiccup. The fact is that legally operating an amateur radio station (except in a life-and-death emergency) on the amateur bands requires a valid amateur radio license. No other form of license or experience is acceptable to FCC. You've also left out the fact of how much Morse Code is actually used on the HF amateur bands - then and now. Let's not confuse Lennie with facts. There arose what Cecil Moore would later term "return on investment" given the readily-observable CHANGE in communications already taking place in the late 1950s. How much of HF amateur radio operation used Morse Code in the late 1950s, Len? How much of HF amateur radio operation uses Morse Code today, Len? How many HF priviledges did Lennie have in the 1950's? How many does he have now...?!?! In using code tapes there was no "difficulty" in learning the tone patterns, only the TIME needed to get them down well enough. TIME is not an unlimited quantity and a LOT of things needed my time in my twenties. In other words, it was hard work because it took *you* a lot of time to learn it. Whelllp....Did take him 14 years to get that Associate's degree.... If I had to choose between a girlfriend (and later wife) and "morse code practice," those code tapes would be kicked to the gutter. Who said you had to choose? Couldn't there be time for both? (GRIN ! ! ) I always did! I was multitasking before multitasking was cool! If you think opposite, just shove a J-38 up yer bum and have an orgasm, morse style. I thought you didn't have any grudge against someone using Morse Code, Len. There you go thinking again, Jim. None of that changes the fact that you gave up trying to learn Morse Code because it was too much work for you. Now you may wonder why, if Len could do 7 or 8 wpm at one point, he didn't just get a Novice license, and improve his Morse Code skills by operating, as most of us did. I bought a house in 1963. Shortly thereafter my (then) wife was diagnosed with cancer. She died in 1964. I was then 31 and stuck with a bunch of bills that required a second job to break even. Night college classes had to be postponed for an indefinite period. I kept the house. I'm sorry for your loss, Len. It's clear some things were delayed. Yep. Sorry. Makes me feel bad about the $250K in debt my daughter's bills left...but I got paid off anyway... With all that, you indefatiguable little character assassin, you thought it was NECESSARY TO STUDY MORSE CODE?!?!? Nobody said it was necessary, Len. Read what was written, for a change. The fact is that you gave up because it was too much work for you. If it were easy for you to learn, you would have learned it quickly and passed the 13 wpm test long before 1963. 1964 was 42 years ago, Len. From your accounts of your personal history, you never again tried to learn Morse Code, nor to get any class of amateur license. But you've had plenty of time to argue about it, and make fun of others who have done what you have not. Reminds me of the arguments I ahve with the teen daughter...I constantly have to point out to her that her chores could be done in less time than she argues about them. If you really thought that, you have all the emotional sensitivity of a lump of wet clay...or an aberrant outlook that isn't in Psych 101 or 102 textbooks. Too twisted for my undergrad knowledge of psychology. It's not about me, Len. YOUR "undergrad knowledge of psychology"...?!?!? Don't you mean your wife's correspondence school reference texts...?!?! The answer should be obvious: No way would Len allow himself to be classified as a "Novice". That license did not carry the appropriate title or status for him. I'm not a "novice" in radio, Jimmy. That's right, Len. In amateur radio, you're not even a Novice yet. Neither do I have any emotional need for Rank, Status, Title in a HOBBY activity. Sure you do, Len. That's part of why you behave the way you do here. The "RANK" of "professional" The "TITLE" of "engineer" The "STATUS" of unlicensed. Since remodeling one unused bedroom into an office, I haven't even mounted the RCA "first-patent" plaque given to me by Chief Engineer Ray Aires nor the picture of me getting it with Jim Hall, KD6JG, my immediate manager at the time looking on. See? There you go! yadayadayada My wife is the same way (I do the bragging about her) and her 'sheepskins' (3) are in storage up north. I guess if you pay good money for a correspondence course, the "sheepskin" is the least you could expect. All of my First 'Phone and GROL certificates and single college certificate are in the big safety deposit box down here; don't need them. I am secure in myself and what I can do. And you tell us all about at every opportunity. In any event, it doesn't change the fact that you gave up trying to learn Morse Code because it was too much work for you. And let's not forget, Jim...Lennie told us his GROL expired back in October of 2000. Outside of the amateur radio pecking order, WHAT GOOD IS MORSEMANSHIP TODAY? What do you mean by "amateur radio pecking order"? And "morsemanship"? The plain and simple fact is that Morse Code skill is needed to pass one of the license tests for an Amateur Radio license with HF/MF privileges in the USA. Morse Code skills are very useful in operating an Amateur Radio station. Besides the fact that it is enjoyable once the skills are developed, it permits the use of a wide variety of equipment, gets the most results from limited resources, and is a different form of communication than or text modes. It isn't used for regular comms by any other radio service. There isn't one single Public Safety radio service that uses manual morse code. So what? Double ditto "so what"... The IS an AMATEUR RADIO forum...right...?!?! The fact is that lots of Amateur Radio operators *do* use Morse Code. Amateur Radio is not part of those other radio services - it's a separate and distinct radio service. Only a person with a valid Amateur Radio license can legally operate an Amateur Radio station (except in a life-and-death emergency). Why should the requirements for an Amateur Radio license be determined by what *other* radio services do, rather than by what Amateur Radio operators do? Don't try to bluff Lennie with facts and logic, Jim...The local ER will be scooping his brains off the floor for a week. There isn't even one surviving landline morse code telegraph circuit now. Are you *sure*? OF COURSE! E V E R Y O N E consults with lennie before they erect or remove ANY communications links! I've communicated by radio from land, from a cockpit (at the controls) in the air, from the sea (Ventura Harbor area), from a moving vehicle, from a stationary vehicle, while on march in the Army with a PRC-8 on my back. All during the last half century. No "TITLES" necessary to do any of that or to do it well. None of those were Amateur Radio, however. And in this age of cell phones, most people with one have probably "communicated by radio" from the sea, a moving vehicle, a stationary vehicle, while walking, etc. Radio sets like those used in aircraft and the PRC-8 are designed to be used by people with minimal radio skills. They're a means to an end, not the end itself. Precisely. They'll also have much more experience in amateur radio than Leonard H. Anderson. Those who are proficient in the use of Morse, will always be a leg up on Leonard. Riiiight, world's greates DXer, amateur radio is SOOOO much more advanced than every other radio. [barf, har har] The fact of the matter, Len, is that even with all your claimed experience, you could not communicate by radio with my Amateur Radio station. Nor with many other Amateur Radio stations. Besides the legal issues of a license, you just don't have the skills. I think that's what really bugs you in all this. What torque's Lennie's bolts is that there are 10 year old girls with more HF operating experience than he: (ie: W6EMB) So what? People have all kinds of skills, experience, etc. I'm sure there are things where Len has more experience/knowledge/skill than I, IMPOSSIBLE in Jimmyworld. :-) [he will almost say that outright] How is it impossible? Where's Jimmyworld? Is that near Epcot center? and things where I have more experience/knowledge/skill than he. Morsemanship, obviously. Something in great demand these days of the 1930s. Morse champions are to be rewarded with titles of nobility. Long live the morsemen. Huzzah. There are many things I can do better than you, Len. Morse Code is only one of them. On anything else, Jimmy hasn't made himself known. Such as what he does for a living (if a life of morsemanship is called living). Does Jimmy have a girlfriend? Boyfriend? Any social life not requiring an antenna? Do we care? [in general, no] Then why do you keep trying to find out? He's hoping there's more options out there than N9OGL and KB9RQZ. Exactly. Amateur radio is "radio for its own sake". Then why all the titles, rank, status, privilege, bandplans and attendant class distinction? Because they're all good things, Len. I think you would like it if Amateur Radio became just like cb, In case you've forgotten, Len did some writing for the now-defunct amateur radio magazine "ham radio". He got paid for those articles, of course. None of his articles were actual projects, though. That is a moral deficit? :-) Who said that? You are IN ERROR, Jimmy. Look up the one on using an HP-25 calculator to convert Noise Bridge readings. That was developed to aid some local friends on antenna measurements. That's not a project, Len. Look at the footnotes on that article and some of the examples. The whole "Digital Techniques" series was based on personal descriptions to others (some of which were amateurs)...the last one on a Phase-Frequency Detector was based on the prototyping I did, partly on an old Apple ][, for an optical interferometer. None of them was a "how to build it" article, though. Not one article in "Ham Radio" allegedly authored by Leonard H Anderson was ever subsequently footnoted in any other professional or amateur project or article...Other than his own. And the whole "Digital Techniques" stuff was in QST more than 5 years earlier. Guess that's why Lennie's stuff looked so familiar. You conveniently forget the two-plus years I spent with Ham Radio magazine as an Associate Editor. Right - looking over *other people's* work. Like I've said all along. Look on the mastheads for proof of that. Did that under Alf Wilson (W6NIF, took over after Jim Fisk suddenly died) and Rich Rosen (K1RR?). I opted out from HR from time pressure of self-employment...and learning that publisher Skip Tenney was going to sell HR to CQ. And yet in all of that, learning Morse Code was too much work for you. Oh Heaven forbid that Skip might have actually required Lennie to "do his own work." ...and learning morse would apparently be "work" for Leonard. "hard work", actually. That's why he gave up on it. No, DUMB work. Waste of my time. You just proved my point, Len. If it were easy for you, you'd have learned it quickly and moved on. None of the really "easy" things in MY life were the more satisfying ones....(except for this one redhead in Laguna Beach...but she's another thread!) It was the one's where, at the end of the day, I knew I ahd put something into and subsequently got something in return that I knew I had accomplished something. I guess this is why Lennie and Morkie "meld"...they are mutually intolerant of effort to get what they want. Why do I need morse? Why does anyone need morsemanship? To keep the USA safe from terrorists? BWAAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It's still a license requirement, and it's a useful skill in Amateur Radio. But that's obvious. At least he has dropped the claim that HE worked 24/7. I was on-call 24/7 with the scheduling times. NCOs got stuck with that. Longest I worked was 34 hours, one time. A lot of people are on call 24/7 in their jobs, Len. Many do not have all the personnel you had at ADA, either. I've worked longer than 34 hours at a stretch more than a few times, too. I don't recommend it, but it can be done. I've spent many-a-WEEK living in the HANGAR at MCAS Futenma and Cubi Point. Jimmy Noserve not know stuff like dat. He never be in military serving his country. Jimmy "serve country in different ways," the 'different' very, very undefined. It doesn't matter what someone else has done, Len - if they disagree with you, it's guaranteed you'll make fun of them and their accomplishments. So why should anyone tell you what they've done? Lennie spent a "career" in a back water radio station, crawling through benjo ditches. Then 50 years later he made up a whole passle of tales about Bear Bombers and "Incoming Artillery". he topped it off with stories of what a great soldier he'd been since he served in a unit that had KIA's THREE YEARS before he was even inducted. Lennie never even pulled ADY to the country where the KIA's occured. You surely remember what he has said about CHILDREN in the past. Oh yes - something about his difficulty including them in what he sees as an adult activity. Also, he proposed a minimum age requirement for an amateur license even though he had absolutely no evidence of problems caused by the licensing of young people. Then there's his accusating the ARRL and some VEs of "fraud" in licensing some young children. "Accusating?" :-) Yep. I was not "accusating" the ARRL. I said their actions were "grandfatherly" to a pair of cute six-year-olds. I gave NO outright accusation if that's what your raging character assassination words tried to say. :-) You accused them of fraud, Len. Outright accusations. And despite dogged hounding to pony-up on his evidence of such fraud, he never did. FCC amateur radio regulations are written such that ANY licensee, regardless of age, can operate (within bounds of their license class) at any time. Says NOTHING about "parental supervision" of six-year-olds or even nine- year-old Extras. Is that a problem? There's no "parental permission" line on the current applications (never has been), and by all readings of the law, the unlicensed parent cannot supervise the child IRT Amateur Radio regulations! How many radio amateurs are enforcement problems because of their youth? Correct, legal operation of radios requires MATURITY of RESPONSIBILITY. ?? "MATURITY of RESPONSIBILITY"? Did you mean "maturity and responsibility"? If so, I agree! Again...where's the proliferation of NAL's against "underage" operators that substantiate Lennie's rant...?!?! Anyone? If you still think that 6 year olds and 9 year olds are MATURE, your head isn't on straight. Can you name even *one* case where the "maturity" of a young radio amateur was an issue in an FCC enforcement action? Licensed Amateur Radio has existed in the USA since 1912. That's 96 years, and in all that time the FCC and its regulatory predecessors have *never* seen fit to have any kind of age or "maturity" requirement. Yet you, Leonard H. Anderson, somehow know better than the FCC on the issue - even though you haven't presented even one example of a problem caused by the lack of an age requirement. And your proposed age requirement would have been 14 years - based on nothing! From the enforcement letters I've seen, the worst offenders in the Amateur Radio service are much closer to *your* age, Len. BBBWWWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHA HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! If nine-year-olds can become Extras, then what does that say about the MATURITY level of other Extras? In as much as none of the current NAL's pending against Amateurs are for persons under 40, I'd say pretty danged good! It says the FCC is satisfied that they can be mature enough to operate an Amateur Radio station, Len. OTOH, your behavior here indicates that you, Len, are nowhere near mature enough to operate an Amateur Radio station. It's a good thing you're on Usenet and not the Amateur Radio bands. Add Lennie to Morkie's "kook on parade" list. Tsk, tsk, still bitching about a Comment I made to the FCC in January 1999? Seven years ago and you still can't let go of it? Not a good mental picture of you, Jimmy. It's not my problem, Len. You're the one who 'has trouble integrating children into an adult activity'.... Morkie and Toiddie don't have any problem trying to integrate children into an "adult activity"...Now if they'd just limit that to AMATEUR RADIO..... Didn't you know, Jim? Len's made himself an ADVOCATE for something-or-other. Keeping real estate zoning regulations as they were 40+ years ago? What has THAT manufactured dispute of yours to do with ANY radio?!? It's not a manufactured dispute, Len. You brought it up, now you don't want to hear about it. Let's review that one: You and some of your neighbors tried to keep the zoning ordinances in your neighborhood stuck in the past. Despite all the changes that have occured since the early 1960s, you did not want the zoning changed. You wanted a piece of undeveloped land near your house developed only in ways you approved of. Anyone who wanted to live or build in your neighborhood should have to do it the way you did it, and no other way. People trying to Get Into Sun City had to pass muster - go through a hazing ritual - in the way *you* determined, even though so much has changed since the early 1960s. Except the zoning commission disagreed. Whew... Where have we heard THOSE rants before, Jim...?!?! Oh, you are homeless? (in Radnor, PA?) Jimmy got no sense of LIVING on his own PROPERTY? Jimmy and Davie only care about amateur morse code, ham radio, and growing antennas... His life is otherwise empty, depsite the comfortable income, two mortgage-free homes and the like. Maybe Len can take a part-time job as bag boy at Ralph's. Maybe Davie can go stick a plastic shopping bag on his head? Breathe deep with it on, Davie. Use your hands to tap out morse code if you get in trouble. :-) No, Ralph's requires that everything be Pretty Good. Including the ketchup. Ralphs, Vons, Albertsons chains all sell food made by professional food growers and producers. Not Ralphs. Ralph's. Albertson's, too, Jim! AMATEURS aren't wanted as growers/producers. Maybe at Tressieras or Food4Less, but we don't go there. In the case of food, professional doesn't always mean better. In fact, it rarely does. Len often acts ugly. I prefer not to think of him as naked. Please don't go there... You have a repugnance to seeing naked human beings, Jimmy? Oh, yes, you are unmarried, right? Uh oh...Seems Lennie's been sharing too much time at Morkie's house! Whether Len is ever a radio amateur or not, I'm not going to lose any sleep over it. Nor I. Besides, it's just not going to happen. The code test issue was never about me or "whether or not I get a license." Then why are you so obsessed with it, Len? Because Lennie's a "PROFEESIONAL"...All professionals MUST have dominion over all things not receiveing funding. That is in your weird, manufacture-the- worst-personal-assassination scenarios, Jimmy and Davie. Long ago and several times since then I've said that my actions are for ending the US manual morse code test for an amateur radio license. But you don't say why you are so obsessed with it. I still say that he was "insulted" by Amateurs at some point and has since been on a vendetta to harass Amateurs wherever/however he can. It's pure meaness, in other words. I bet that "ham" best man of his took liberties with Mrs Lennie II. There is NO "personal" motive in that...you are confusing PERSISTENCE with 'personal.' Nope - it's quite clear how personal it is to you. You make personal attacks on those who disagree with you, simply because they disagree. Yep. I was "Gunny" and "Steve" in private e mail until I told him that I appreciated his point of view but didn't agree with it. Then the "nazi" stuff followed. You two need to take a look at what YOUR personal motives are in taking it so hard about those of us who seek removal of the code test. Why? You're the one who is obsessed, Len. Uhhhhhyup. Several possibilities exist the 1. Either of you (or both) are just Code Bigots, bigots always approving of actions of similar bigotry in others. You mean like people who cannot tolerate dissenting opinions without calling others names, making fun of their work, religion, gender, ethnicity, education, government/military service, etc.? Hmmmmmmmmmmmm...Who might THAT be...?!?! 2. Either of you (or both) are control freaks determined to make all obey YOUR commands. You mean like people who want to control the requirements for a license they do not want, for a radio service in which they have no participation? You mean like people who want to control what their neighbors do with their own property, and want the law to remain unchanged from the 1960s? 3. Neither of you, despite claims otherwise, understand that manual morse code is a dead or dying mode in ALL radio services; there is NO need to keep the manual morse test to provide a "pool" of trained morsemen for the national interest. Morse Code is neither dead nor dying in Amateur Radio, though. 4. Either of you (or both) are scared that removal of the code test will end your bragging rights, of self-defined "importance" of rank-title-status- privilege based largely on morsemanship. Actually, the opposite is true. Back when only a few hams had Extras, that license was seen as a major accomplishment. When I got my Extra way back in 1970, less than 3% of US hams had that license. Many hams thought 20 wpm was amazingly fast Morse Code, particularly when copied with pencil and paper. There was similar awe surrounding the written exams. But over time, more and more hams got Extras. Thanks to Bash...and now thanks to Bash those written tests are useless for elective credits at ANY college any more. Tens of thousands of hams, young and old, from all walks of life, found that with a bit of practice and study they could pass 20 wpm code and all the theory tests. They found it wasn't nearly as hard as they had once thought. Lower the requirements and the reverse will happen. 5. Either of you (or both) are elitist snobs who have the "deep insecurity" of NEEDING rank-status-title to make you appear "better" than others. Well, Len, you've really described yourself in all of that. You tell us, over and over, about *your* rank-status-title stuff. Either of you (or both) fit one of those 5 things above, possibly several of them. Nope. The correct answer is: 6. Both of us think that since Morse Code is widely used in Amateur Radio, and has brings many advantages and benefits to the Amateur Radio service, a basic test of Morse Code skill should be required for an Amateur Radio license. That's the plain and simple fact of it. Nothing more. But themn both of you (as do I) have practical experience from which to amke an INFORMED opinion. Lennie's still got his puppy nose smushed up against the window looking in... btw, in my comments to FCC on the recent NPRM, I suggested that the Canadian solution be applied. All that would be required to change is that if someone passed the General written with a score of 85% or higher, they would get credit for Element 1 as well as Element 3. Getting an Extra would require having a General and passing Element 4. The result would be that a person could get a General or Extra the same way as today (with code test) or, by doing a bit better on the General written, they could get a General or Extra without the code test. Rules changes would be minimal. Nobody would have to take a Morse Code test, yet no one could say that standards were reduced. Why couldn't the USA adopt the solution that's working in Canada? I'd argue against that one, Jim...for the same reason their healthcare system is in a shambles...And getting worse. = Irrelevant and a detail as to which but your actions DO show fitting at least one of them. Nope. OTOH, your actions fit all of them! All that has to be done is to replace the word "code" with "anticode" and the five items you described are all about you, Len. But we knew that... Both of you have to understand that there are a great number of other citizens who also wish the code test removal. Where are they? They were outnumbered in comments to FCC. The majority of those commenting wanted at least some code testing to remain - remember, Len? Lennie...Mork...Frankie... Both of you have to understand that such a position is NOT some idiotic moral imperfection but rather a reasonable opinion based on the advancement of technology of all radio by this first decade of the new millennium. Ah, the old presuming-your-conclusion... Try to keep up. Unless it is too hard for you... You need to work on your Morse Code skills, Len - and your people skills.... Lennie doesn't HAVE any "people skills" to work on. Maybe for Christmas? Steve, K4YZ |
You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.
wrote:
Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: wrote: On 4 Sep 2006 18:13:27 -0700, wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: wrote: ARRL kept promoting themselves as "representative" allegedly for the amateur to the FCC but suspiciously more like a "filter" of amateurs' opinions. Why are you suspicious, Len? Anyone could petition the FCC directly, and many did, long before the Internet and ECFS. Len is suspicious of the League's elections of Directors too. Len is suspicious of a number of things in which he isn't involved. Interesting how Carl was barred from running for section office. Professional talent need not apply - we only want amateurs. and yet no problem for the ARRL's marketing director to hop over to Yeasu He is forever tainted... Wow, Goobers united! I don't think Yaesu/Vertex Standard has a policy which precludes the hiring of those who worked at the League. The League's policy doesn't preclude the candidacy of those who *previously* worked in professional communications or the manufacture and marketing of amateur radio equipment. They deal with those who work in such fields *currently*, at the time of the election. Likely candidates for ARRL volunteer positions are what? retirees? Volunteer positions are not elected positions. Read up on it. What do the elected positions pay? Read up on it. You read up on it. Then you had no need to ask the question. Quit wasting my time. I already know that ARRL volunteer positions, elected or otherwise, do not pay. How about that! So the available pool of applicants are either retired, on public assistance, or both. That is a false assumption. People with up to date knowledge from the industry, such as Carl, need not apply. People with possible conflicts of interest need not apply. Now get over yourself. I should get over knowing what the rules are regarding ARRL elections and how those rules are applied? Dave K8MN |
You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.
Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: wrote: On 4 Sep 2006 18:13:27 -0700, wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: wrote: ARRL kept promoting themselves as "representative" allegedly for the amateur to the FCC but suspiciously more like a "filter" of amateurs' opinions. Why are you suspicious, Len? Anyone could petition the FCC directly, and many did, long before the Internet and ECFS. Len is suspicious of the League's elections of Directors too. Len is suspicious of a number of things in which he isn't involved. Interesting how Carl was barred from running for section office. Professional talent need not apply - we only want amateurs. and yet no problem for the ARRL's marketing director to hop over to Yeasu He is forever tainted... Wow, Goobers united! I don't think Yaesu/Vertex Standard has a policy which precludes the hiring of those who worked at the League. The League's policy doesn't preclude the candidacy of those who *previously* worked in professional communications or the manufacture and marketing of amateur radio equipment. They deal with those who work in such fields *currently*, at the time of the election. Likely candidates for ARRL volunteer positions are what? retirees? Volunteer positions are not elected positions. Read up on it. What do the elected positions pay? Read up on it. You read up on it. Then you had no need to ask the question. Quit wasting my time. You choose to waste your own time. I already know that ARRL volunteer positions, elected or otherwise, do not pay. How about that! So the available pool of applicants are either retired, on public assistance, or both. That is a false assumption. People with up to date knowledge from the industry, such as Carl, need not apply. People with possible conflicts of interest need not apply. Should a conflict arise, a volunteer can recuse him/herself. Kind of like the judicial system, you know... professionals. Now get over yourself. I should get over knowing what the rules are regarding ARRL elections and how those rules are applied? I have no idea how you could have misinterpreted that. I said get over yourself, not the rules regarding ARRL elections. It's your smug attitude, which was the first thing I noted about you OFF THE AIR. |
You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.
|
You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.
wrote:
Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: wrote: On 4 Sep 2006 18:13:27 -0700, wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: wrote: ARRL kept promoting themselves as "representative" allegedly for the amateur to the FCC but suspiciously more like a "filter" of amateurs' opinions. Why are you suspicious, Len? Anyone could petition the FCC directly, and many did, long before the Internet and ECFS. Len is suspicious of the League's elections of Directors too. Len is suspicious of a number of things in which he isn't involved. Interesting how Carl was barred from running for section office. Professional talent need not apply - we only want amateurs. and yet no problem for the ARRL's marketing director to hop over to Yeasu He is forever tainted... Wow, Goobers united! I don't think Yaesu/Vertex Standard has a policy which precludes the hiring of those who worked at the League. The League's policy doesn't preclude the candidacy of those who *previously* worked in professional communications or the manufacture and marketing of amateur radio equipment. They deal with those who work in such fields *currently*, at the time of the election. Likely candidates for ARRL volunteer positions are what? retirees? Volunteer positions are not elected positions. Read up on it. What do the elected positions pay? Read up on it. You read up on it. Then you had no need to ask the question. Quit wasting my time. You choose to waste your own time. I chose not to. I already know that ARRL volunteer positions, elected or otherwise, do not pay. How about that! So the available pool of applicants are either retired, on public assistance, or both. That is a false assumption. People with up to date knowledge from the industry, such as Carl, need not apply. People with possible conflicts of interest need not apply. Should a conflict arise, a volunteer can recuse him/herself. You keep using the term "volunteers". We're not discussing volunteers or paid staff. We're discussing elected positions. Carl did not volunteer to be on the Board of Directors. The rules governing such elections are clear. Kind of like the judicial system, you know... professionals. As is often the case, you seem to be a little light on details. Now get over yourself. I should get over knowing what the rules are regarding ARRL elections and how those rules are applied? I have no idea how you could have misinterpreted that. I said get over yourself, not the rules regarding ARRL elections. Then your statement wasn't relevant to the statements I made. It's your smug attitude, which was the first thing I noted about you OFF THE AIR. You usually come in blazing with a little bit of knowledge and a chip on your shoulder. This is another such instance. Dave K8MN |
You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:18 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com