wrote:
From: Paul W. Schleck on Fri, Sep 22 2006 4:09 pm
Email: Paul W. Schleck


writes:
From: Paul W. Schleck on Thurs, Sep 21 2006 12:21 pm
writes:

Let's recap:

Why? :-)

Paul: "I know Dave Heil. I respect Dave Heil. I don't need to be a
clone of Dave Heil to express an opinion in this forum."

Len: "Tsk. A paraphrase of a Senator who lost an election is a poor
choice of words..."

Why mention that the Senator "lost an election" if it doesn't attempt to
advance any argument other than an undermining of my words and his? Why
dig up the bones of a dead man just to have something to throw at me?

Why did you - repeat you - bring up the late Lloyd
Bentsen at all? Did Lloyd Bentsen have an amateur
radio license? :-)

Heck, Leonard, it should put you at ease. You don't have one either.


Which is the greater "Tsk"-able offense in your mind? That I've
allegedly cribbed from someone? Or that I've allegedly paraphrased a
quote from a context where the person stating it was not successful in
his goals?

You are building a Mount Everest out of an anthill. :-)

Try to remember that ANY public posting in any computer-
modem venue, from early BBS to the Internet, is OPEN for
"commentary" by ANYONE.

Just a couple of days ago, you made a post where you felt compelled to
state that I reply to posts not directed to me. You've gotten yourself
into a little dilemma, old boy.

If you take offense at every
negative comment that you perceive is directed at you,
you are already in trouble. But, that trouble is only
yours, your perception.

Then why do you feel the necessity of going to ALL CAPS and raving of
PERSONAL denigration, especially after you've engaged in personal
denigration?

["Been there, done that," got lots of moderator T-shirts]

You certainly have been there and done that, t-shirts not withstanding.


It's reasonable to
argue that pacing of short, declarative sentences to build to a
conclusion is a common technique that both the Senator and I were using,
and both owe our thanks to a rich and common language heritage that
existed well before our times.

Try to concentrate on amateur radio policy matters in this
newsgroup. If you want to do Literary Review things, I'm
sure there is some kind of newsgroup for that somewhere.

Please remember that you wrote the above words. You are very likely to
see them again.

This newsgroup is not a debate forum for national politics
of the USA of the past millennium. Really.

Is it about your military escapades of better than a half-century back?
Does it concern itself with your PROFESSIONAL experience?


Do you feel that
only you are capable of properly advancing these arguments in this
forum, and no one else?

Tsk, I state my opinions directly. If those collide with
others, then they collide. TS.

And if others react to your direct opinions and to the manner in which
they are presented?

I will also make commentary about things and persons as I
would do in person.

If you had said some of the things in a face-to-face encounter that
you've written here, odds are that you'd find yourself on the seat of
your pants fairly often.


Tscha, my suggestion is still the For an indefinite
period of time DELETE this newsgroup. Put it on a hold,
whatever. Let the sociopaths, misfits, the emotionally-
disturbed malcontents go somewhere else for their filthy
perverted jollies. You (and the newsgroup powers-that-
be) cannot control them now, what makes you think you
can control them with group "moderating?"

That should be easy to figure out, Len. Their posts don't appear.

Dave K8MN

Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
From: Paul W. Schleck on Fri, Sep 22 2006 4:09 pm
Email: Paul W. Schleck


writes:
From: Paul W. Schleck on Thurs, Sep 21 2006 12:21 pm
writes:

Let's recap:

Why? :-)

Paul: "I know Dave Heil. I respect Dave Heil. I don't need to be a
clone of Dave Heil to express an opinion in this forum."

Len: "Tsk. A paraphrase of a Senator who lost an election is a poor
choice of words..."

Why mention that the Senator "lost an election" if it doesn't attempt to
advance any argument other than an undermining of my words and his? Why
dig up the bones of a dead man just to have something to throw at me?

Why did you - repeat you - bring up the late Lloyd
Bentsen at all? Did Lloyd Bentsen have an amateur
radio license? :-)

Heck, Leonard, it should put you at ease. You don't have one either.

Good grief! Did you have to query QRZ on that one, too?

Robesin did.

wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
From: Paul W. Schleck on Fri, Sep 22 2006 4:09 pm
Email: Paul W. Schleck


writes:
From: Paul W. Schleck on Thurs, Sep 21 2006 12:21 pm
writes:
Let's recap:
Why? :-)

Paul: "I know Dave Heil. I respect Dave Heil. I don't need to be a
clone of Dave Heil to express an opinion in this forum."

Len: "Tsk. A paraphrase of a Senator who lost an election is a poor
choice of words..."

Why mention that the Senator "lost an election" if it doesn't attempt to
advance any argument other than an undermining of my words and his? Why
dig up the bones of a dead man just to have something to throw at me?
Why did you - repeat you - bring up the late Lloyd
Bentsen at all? Did Lloyd Bentsen have an amateur
radio license? :-)
Heck, Leonard, it should put you at ease. You don't have one either.

Good grief! Did you have to query QRZ on that one, too?

How do you put it--take a WAG?

Robesin did.

I don't know anyone named Robesin.

Dave K8MN

From: on Sat, Sep 23 2006 7:06 pm

Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
From: Paul W. Schleck on Fri, Sep 22 2006 4:09 pm
writes:
From: Paul W. Schleck on Thurs, Sep 21 2006 12:21 pm
writes:


Why did you - repeat you - bring up the late Lloyd
Bentsen at all? Did Lloyd Bentsen have an amateur
radio license? :-)

Heck, Leonard, it should put you at ease. You don't have one either.

Good grief! Did you have to query QRZ on that one, too?

Robesin did.

They are birds of a feather, Brian. The only difference
between them is better literacy in Heil's postings. But,
the same hatred of losing anything and bluffmanship
is evident in both.

Heil is fixated on his one-cannot-possibly-talk-about-
getting-into-amateur-radio until one is already in
amateur radio. [the "chicken and the egg" arrived
at the same time logic...]

Now the FCC does NOT require any commissioner or staffer
to hold an amateur radio license grant in order to
REGULATE US amateur radio. Heil's concept of who rules
is faulty.

Heil often expresses disdain and contempt for anyone on
the "outside" of amateur radio attempting to "tell radio
amateurs what to do." That is also illogical and faulty
but grounded in extreme emotional territorialism. He
does NOT rule yet pretends to be the ruler in behavior to
others.

The FCC tells Heil "what to do" and Heil has no choice
but to obey...or lose his precious amateur extra class
license. In any discussion with others about a singular
test to ENTER amateur radio, Heil does not play well and
assumes He can tell others what to do...and does not
hesitate to do so with his typical smug arrogance.

That is NOT a good picture to present to the public about
US amateur radio. But, I doubt that Heil cares. Heil
has His and the rest can go do something else. :-(

wrote:
From: on Sat, Sep 23 2006 7:06 pm

Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
From: Paul W. Schleck on Fri, Sep 22 2006 4:09 pm
writes:
From: Paul W. Schleck on Thurs, Sep 21 2006 12:21 pm
writes:


Why did you - repeat you - bring up the late Lloyd
Bentsen at all? Did Lloyd Bentsen have an amateur
radio license? :-)

Heck, Leonard, it should put you at ease. You don't have one either.

Good grief! Did you have to query QRZ on that one, too?

Robesin did.

They are birds of a feather, Brian. The only difference
between them is better literacy in Heil's postings. But,
the same hatred of losing anything and bluffmanship
is evident in both.

Heil is fixated on his one-cannot-possibly-talk-about-
getting-into-amateur-radio until one is already in
amateur radio. [the "chicken and the egg" arrived
at the same time logic...]
and that even Hams like myself may not coment on Morsemenship


Now the FCC does NOT require any commissioner or staffer
to hold an amateur radio license grant in order to
REGULATE US amateur radio. Heil's concept of who rules
is faulty.

Heil often expresses disdain and contempt for anyone on
the "outside" of amateur radio attempting to "tell radio
amateurs what to do." That is also illogical and faulty
but grounded in extreme emotional territorialism. He
does NOT rule yet pretends to be the ruler in behavior to
others.

The FCC tells Heil "what to do" and Heil has no choice
but to obey...or lose his precious amateur extra class
license. In any discussion with others about a singular
test to ENTER amateur radio, Heil does not play well and
assumes He can tell others what to do...and does not
hesitate to do so with his typical smug arrogance.

That is NOT a good picture to present to the public about
US amateur radio. But, I doubt that Heil cares. Heil
has His and the rest can go do something else. :-(

yep and they whine about thee hobby dying around them slowly too

wrote:
From: on Sat, Sep 23 2006 7:06 pm

Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
From: Paul W. Schleck on Fri, Sep 22 2006 4:09 pm
writes:
From: Paul W. Schleck on Thurs, Sep 21 2006 12:21 pm
writes:


Why did you - repeat you - bring up the late Lloyd
Bentsen at all? Did Lloyd Bentsen have an amateur
radio license? :-)
Heck, Leonard, it should put you at ease. You don't have one either.
Good grief! Did you have to query QRZ on that one, too?

Robesin did.

They are birds of a feather, Brian. The only difference
between them is better literacy in Heil's postings. But,
the same hatred of losing anything and bluffmanship
is evident in both.

I lose no privileges whether morse code testing disappears or not.
Do you have anything else to share with the group?

Heil is fixated on his one-cannot-possibly-talk-about-
getting-into-amateur-radio until one is already in
amateur radio. [the "chicken and the egg" arrived
at the same time logic...]

You've talked. You've commented to the FCC. You've commented, ranted,
railed and have generally acted like a small child here. What next?

Now the FCC does NOT require any commissioner or staffer
to hold an amateur radio license grant in order to
REGULATE US amateur radio.

No one at any state's DMV needs hold a drivers license. You don't work
at the DMV or the FCC.

Heil's concept of who rules
is faulty.

You don't regulate. You aren't a radio amateur. You have no stake in
amateur radio.

Heil often expresses disdain and contempt for anyone on
the "outside" of amateur radio attempting to "tell radio
amateurs what to do." That is also illogical and faulty
but grounded in extreme emotional territorialism. He
does NOT rule yet pretends to be the ruler in behavior to
others.

I'm fully aware that I don't "rule" amateur radio. I'm fully aware that
the FCC does "rule" amateur radio. I'm fully aware that you aren't the
FCC or a radio amateur.

The FCC tells Heil "what to do" and Heil has no choice
but to obey...or lose his precious amateur extra class
license.

When it comes to amateur radio, you are not bound by FCC regulations
unless you decide to take to the air illegally.

I'm quite happy to observe the regulations governing amateur radio in
this country. I've received not as much as a single warning letter from
the FCC in nearly 43 years.

In any discussion with others about a singular
test to ENTER amateur radio,

You aren't entering amateur radio.

Heil does not play well...

I've encountered no sane person posting here who plays less well with
others than Leonard H. Anderson.

...and
assumes He can tell others what to do...and does not
hesitate to do so with his typical smug arrogance.

Tell you what to do, Len? I've not ordered you to obtain an amateur
radio license or not to obtain an amateur radio license. I've not told
you to comment to the FCC or not to comment to the FCC. If you don't
like my "smug arrogance", change your own tactics.

That is NOT a good picture to present to the public about
US amateur radio. But, I doubt that Heil cares.

Len, why don't you address the IEEE Code of Ethics?

Heil
has His and the rest can go do something else. :-(

Anyone who chooses to obtain an amateur radio license may do so without
any interference from me. You've been braying in this newsgroup for
better than a decade. You have not made an attempt to obtain an amateur
radio license. I had nothing to do with your failure to do so. You're
a victim of inertia.

From: Dave Heil on Sun, Sep 24 2006 2:59 pm

wrote:
From: on Sat, Sep 23 2006 7:06 pm
Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
From: Paul W. Schleck on Fri, Sep 22 2006 4:09 pm
writes:
From: Paul W. Schleck on Thurs, Sep 21 2006 12:21 pm
writes:


I lose no privileges whether morse code testing disappears or not.

Then WHY are you so angry and antagonistic to those of
us who want to eliminate the code test? No harm will come
to you if the test is eliminated.


Heil is fixated on his one-cannot-possibly-talk-about-
getting-into-amateur-radio until one is already in
amateur radio. [the "chicken and the egg" arrived
at the same time logic...]

You've talked. You've commented to the FCC.

Ah, but Heil has NOT answered his illogical stance on
WHO may comment or otherwise talk about amateur radio
regulations.

You've commented, ranted,
railed and have generally acted like a small child here.

Now, now, you are beginning to act angry and petulant
again. :-)


No one at any state's DMV needs hold a drivers license.

WRONG. Driving inspectors MUST hold valid drivers
licenses in Illinois and California.

You don't work at the DMV or the FCC.

Clear something up for us: Do you REQUIRE that anyone
work at a Department of Motor Vehicles in order to talk
and discuss US amateur radio regulations?!?

A most irrational statement you made.

Here's a plain and simple fact: The FCC does NOT require
any commissioner or staffer to be granted amateur radio
licenses in order to regulated US civil radio. Really.


You don't regulate.

Regulate WHAT? There are many many things that I
regularly regulate. :-) US civil radio regulations
are NOT something I regulate.

You aren't a radio amateur.

True, but what DOES that have to do with talking about
US amateur radio regulations?

You have no stake in amateur radio.

Now, now, Count Dracula, don't get worried. :-)

Tsk, you are still angry and petulant. NOT a good
attitude.

YOU are an amateur extra but YOU do NOT regulate US
amateur radio. The FCC does that, grants amateur
radio licenses, shuts down amateur radio stations for
rules violations, can even establish federal fines for
such violations.


I'm fully aware that I don't "rule" amateur radio.

You don't rule there. You don't regulate amateur radio.

I'm fully aware that the FCC does "rule" amateur radio.

Are you SURE about that? You vacillate back and forth
so much...

I'm fully aware that you aren't the FCC or a radio amateur.

Remarkable 'awareness!' Do you think that will get you
a cookie? :-)


The FCC tells Heil "what to do" and Heil has no choice
but to obey...or lose his precious amateur extra class
license.

When it comes to amateur radio, you are not bound by FCC regulations
unless you decide to take to the air illegally.

Tsk, angry, petulant, and now ACCUSATORY of something you
state "I am going to do!"

You ARE wrong about FCC regulations. I am very much bound
by FCC regulations, both by radio but also for certain
wireline communications. You really need the entire Title
47 C.F.R. to confirm that (for your own edification).


I'm quite happy to observe the regulations governing amateur radio in
this country. I've received not as much as a single warning letter from
the FCC in nearly 43 years.

Marvelous! Should we chip in get you a nice little gold
star for your report card?

I don't recall that anyone was accusing you of anything
other than a bad temper, irrational behavior, or trying
to imitate some Waffen SS offizier in here. FCC doesn't
regulate behavior.


You aren't entering amateur radio.

I'm "not"?!?" What do you KNOW what I'm doing? Are you
Claire Voyant in some ham radio column or something?


I've encountered no sane person posting here who plays less well with
others than Leonard H. Anderson.

Now, now, you are adding a mean streak to your bad temper,
petulance, and irrationality. Try playing "nice." :-)


I've not ordered you to obtain an amateur
radio license or not to obtain an amateur radio license.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. You certainly gone on and on and on and
on about my "not having one!" Why is that?

I've not told
you to comment to the FCC or not to comment to the FCC.

You've certainly gone on and on and on and on and
on about attempting ridicule of what I've written
to the FCC. :-)

If you don't like my "smug arrogance", change your own tactics.

Now, now, you ARE telling me what to do! Hypocrite.


Len, why don't you address the IEEE Code of Ethics?

Oh, but I DID! Here is the address again:

IEEE
445 Hoes Lane
Box 1331
Piscatawny, NJ 08855-1331
USA

I apologize for not giving the web address: www.ieee.org

You are free to talk all you want with the IEEE Ethics
Committee.

You might even consider membership in the IEEE, but you
will have to get three IEEE members to vouch for you.
You probably won't live long enough to qualify for a
Life Member status (it is a free upgrade and doesn't
require dues payments after that).


Anyone who chooses to obtain an amateur radio license may do so without
any interference from me.

How wonderfully magnanimous of Heil! :-)

You've been braying in this newsgroup for better than a decade.

"Braying?" Neighhhh, Wilbur. :-)

You have not made an attempt to obtain an amateur radio license.

Now, now, there you go again with your bad temper and
terrible insistence that ONLY amateur licensees can
talk about amateur radio!

I had nothing to do with your failure to do so.

"Failure?!?" Tsk, tsk, never tried.

I've had a Commercial radio operator license since 1956.
Why do you insist I have an AMATEUR license?

Tsk, Heil is exhibiting irrationality again.

You're a victim of inertia.

Must be that why my anti-gravity project failed; Something
was holding me down! Should I channel Isaac N. for a cure?

Well, maybe you're right. I've had an abiding interest,
indeed a GREAT interest in women since the beginning of
my teens...but, never ONCE had I any interest in BECOMING
one! How about that?

Beep, beep,


Life Member

IEEE is a Professional Association with 397 thousand members
worldwide.

wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Sun, Sep 24 2006 2:59 pm

wrote:
From: on Sat, Sep 23 2006 7:06 pm
Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
From: Paul W. Schleck on Fri, Sep 22 2006 4:09 pm
writes:
From: Paul W. Schleck on Thurs, Sep 21 2006 12:21 pm
writes:


I lose no privileges whether morse code testing disappears or not.

Then WHY are you so angry and antagonistic to those of
us who want to eliminate the code test?

You keep making the same mistake, over and over. I'm not angry. I'm
ridiculing you, Len Anderson.

No harm will come
to you if the test is eliminated.

Any change made to regulations dealing with amateur radio effect me and
all others current licensees.


Heil is fixated on his one-cannot-possibly-talk-about-
getting-into-amateur-radio until one is already in
amateur radio. [the "chicken and the egg" arrived
at the same time logic...]
You've talked. You've commented to the FCC.

Ah, but Heil has NOT answered his illogical stance on
WHO may comment or otherwise talk about amateur radio
regulations.

My stance isn't illogical at all. It can't begin to compare to a fellow
who spends ten years of his life obsessed with something in which he has
no involvement. You're amateur radio fetish is beyond compare.

You've commented, ranted,
railed and have generally acted like a small child here.

Now, now, you are beginning to act angry and petulant
again. :-)

I'm not at all angry. I'm pointing out a fact.


No one at any state's DMV needs hold a drivers license.

WRONG. Driving inspectors MUST hold valid drivers
licenses in Illinois and California.

Great. I'll grant that those administering actual driving tests are
quite likely to need a driving license. Those who work inside, the
clerks who transfer titles, issue licenses and such, don't need such a
license.

You don't work at the DMV or the FCC.

Clear something up for us: Do you REQUIRE that anyone
work at a Department of Motor Vehicles in order to talk
and discuss US amateur radio regulations?!?

Clear something up for "us": Do you have anything at all to do with any
state DMV or the Federal Communications Commission?

A most irrational statement you made.

Here's a plain and simple fact: The FCC does NOT require
any commissioner or staffer to be granted amateur radio
licenses in order to regulated US civil radio. Really.

And? If any of those FCC employees or commissioners want to take part
in amateur radio, they need to obtain a license in the same manner as
anyone else who becomes licenses. Really.


You don't regulate.

Regulate WHAT? There are many many things that I
regularly regulate. :-)

Oh, yes. When a man gets to a certain age, he is likely to need more
fiber in his diet. :-)

US civil radio regulations
are NOT something I regulate.

I thought I said that.

You aren't a radio amateur.

True, but what DOES that have to do with talking about
US amateur radio regulations?

Nobody has stopped you from talking. What you want is a quiet audience.
You aren't entitled to that.

You have no stake in amateur radio.

Now, now, Count Dracula, don't get worried. :-)

I'm not at all worried, Len.

Tsk, you are still angry and petulant. NOT a good
attitude.

You make the same mistake over and over and over.

YOU are an amateur extra but YOU do NOT regulate US
amateur radio.

I recall saying that.

The FCC does that, grants amateur
radio licenses, shuts down amateur radio stations for
rules violations, can even establish federal fines for
such violations.


That's right. You have the hang of it. I've not been shut down nor
fined. You, on the other hand, aren't involved in amateur radio.

I'm fully aware that I don't "rule" amateur radio.

You don't rule there. You don't regulate amateur radio.

I used the term which was stated by Leonard H. Anderson.

I'm fully aware that the FCC does "rule" amateur radio.

Are you SURE about that? You vacillate back and forth
so much...

I haven't stated that I'm going to obtain an Extra right out of the box,
then that I have no intention of obtaining an amateur radio license and
then that I am getting into amateur radio and then that I have no desire
to obtain an amateur radio license. Now *that* is vacillation!

I'm fully aware that you aren't the FCC or a radio amateur.

Remarkable 'awareness!' Do you think that will get you
a cookie? :-)

It already did.


The FCC tells Heil "what to do" and Heil has no choice
but to obey...or lose his precious amateur extra class
license.

When it comes to amateur radio, you are not bound by FCC regulations
unless you decide to take to the air illegally.

Tsk, angry, petulant, and now ACCUSATORY of something you
state "I am going to do!"

Are you familiar with the term "unless"?

You ARE wrong about FCC regulations. I am very much bound
by FCC regulations, both by radio but also for certain
wireline communications. You really need the entire Title
47 C.F.R. to confirm that (for your own edification).

The point is, Leonard, that you aren't going to run afoul of Part 97
regs unless you're a radio amateur. You aren't a radio amateur.


I'm quite happy to observe the regulations governing amateur radio in
this country. I've received not as much as a single warning letter from
the FCC in nearly 43 years.

Marvelous! Should we chip in get you a nice little gold
star for your report card?

Who is "we"? Do you have a Vibroplex in your pocket? I don't feel the
need for any special recognition from you. After all, you aren't involved.

I don't recall that anyone was accusing you of anything
other than a bad temper, irrational behavior, or trying
to imitate some Waffen SS offizier in here. FCC doesn't
regulate behavior.

If it did, you wouldn't be here. If you have nothing to say, you resort
to the Nazi stuff. That makes you look foolish.


You aren't entering amateur radio.

I'm "not"?!?" What do you KNOW what I'm doing? Are you
Claire Voyant in some ham radio column or something?

I can only go by your last definitive statement on the subject. There
have been reversals in the past though. What's your stand this week?


I've encountered no sane person posting here who plays less well with
others than Leonard H. Anderson.

Now, now, you are adding a mean streak to your bad temper,
petulance, and irrationality. Try playing "nice." :-)

I provided an exceptionally frank opinion based upon years of
observation. There wasn't a hint of temper, petulance or irrationality,
Leonard.


I've not ordered you to obtain an amateur
radio license or not to obtain an amateur radio license.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. You certainly gone on and on and on and
on about my "not having one!" Why is that?

It is because you'd have radio amateurs believe that an inexperienced
fellow who has never obtained an amateur radio license knows what is
best for amateur radio. Tsk, tsk, poor baby, toad-in-a-hole and Bob's
your uncle.

I've not told
you to comment to the FCC or not to comment to the FCC.

You've certainly gone on and on and on and on and
on about attempting ridicule of what I've written
to the FCC. :-)

I surely have. Then again I've never tried to disparage your views by
ridiculing you *to* the FCC in official comments. You have done that to
others.

If you don't like my "smug arrogance", change your own tactics.

Now, now, you ARE telling me what to do! Hypocrite.

Can you understand the words, "if you don't like"? I've let you know
how to play nicely with others.


Len, why don't you address the IEEE Code of Ethics?

Oh, but I DID! Here is the address again:

No, you didn't. Aren't you bound by that code of ethics?

IEEE
445 Hoes Lane
Box 1331
Piscatawny, NJ 08855-1331
USA

I apologize for not giving the web address: www.ieee.org

You are free to talk all you want with the IEEE Ethics
Committee.

You're an IEEE member. I asked you. After all, I haven't seen the IEEE
violating its code of ethics.

You might even consider membership in the IEEE, but you
will have to get three IEEE members to vouch for you.
You probably won't live long enough to qualify for a
Life Member status (it is a free upgrade and doesn't
require dues payments after that).

I haven't expressed any desire to join the IEEE. I'm not an engineer.
Would you like to join the ARRL? You can write them at:

The American Radio Relay League
225 Main Street
Newington, CT 06111

Alternatively, you can find them at http://www.arrl.org


Anyone who chooses to obtain an amateur radio license may do so without
any interference from me.

How wonderfully magnanimous of Heil! :-)

I'm not being magnanimous, Len. I'm stating a fact.

You've been braying in this newsgroup for better than a decade.

"Braying?" Neighhhh, Wilbur. :-)

When you aren't braying, you are often to found acting like a horse.
Usually you act like the other end.

You have not made an attempt to obtain an amateur radio license.

Now, now, there you go again with your bad temper and
terrible insistence that ONLY amateur licensees can
talk about amateur radio!

No temper was exhibited. I made a statement of fact. You've talked
about amateur radio. That doesn't make you a radio amateur.

I had nothing to do with your failure to do so.

"Failure?!?" Tsk, tsk, never tried.

You've expressed a decades-long interest in amateur radio. You told us
that you were going to get an "Extra right out of the box". You have
posted to this newsgroup for better than ten years. You have failed to
obtain an amateur radio license. It doesn't matter if you tried once or
several times and failed or if you failed by never trying.

I've had a Commercial radio operator license since 1956.

You're in the wrong newsgroup. This one concerns amateur radio and Mark
Morgan's fetishes.

Why do you insist I have an AMATEUR license?

I've never insisted that you have to have one. In fact, I rather hope
that you never get one.

Tsk, Heil is exhibiting irrationality again.

If I'd insisted that you obtain an amateur radio license, that might be.
I didn't do so. Your statement is absurd.

You're a victim of inertia.

Must be that why my anti-gravity project failed; Something
was holding me down! Should I channel Isaac N. for a cure?

You keep using the same purloined Stephen Wright joke as if it'll get
funnier through repetition.

Well, maybe you're right. I've had an abiding interest,
indeed a GREAT interest in women since the beginning of
my teens...but, never ONCE had I any interest in BECOMING
one! How about that?

And so it is in your relationship to amateur radio.

Beep, beep,
Tisket, tasket



Life Member


Life Member

IEEE is a Professional Association with 397 thousand members
worldwide.

You'd think that being a PROFESSIONAL organization which grants FREE
life membership under certain conditions, it could do better than that.

wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Sun, Sep 24 2006 2:59 pm
wrote:
From: on Sat, Sep 23 2006 7:06 pm
Dave Heil wrote

I lose no privileges whether morse code testing disappears or not.

Then WHY are you so angry and antagonistic to those of
us who want to eliminate the code test?

Dave's not angry. Neither am I.

You sure seem to be angry, Len.

As for "antagaonistic", we're just opposing what we think is a bad
idea. You seem to have a very difficult time with disagreement - your
behavior rapidly deteriorates when someone here disagrees with you.

No harm will come to you if the test is eliminated.

Can you guarantee that, Len? I think not.

The subject of this thread is "Gerritsen Sentenced". Gerritsen is a
former radio amateur who caused harm to many amateurs and others in his
area - jamming their transmissions, tying up repeaters, deliberately
interfering, etc. It took years to get him convicted and sentenced.

Worst of all, he did a lot of damage to the public image of amateur
radio.

Obviously letting someone like Gerritsen get a license in the first
place was a mistake. The testing process did not insure that he would
follow the rules. He obviously did not care about proper behavior on
the air.

One concern many of us have about continued reductions in the license
test requirements - both code and written - is that more folks like
Gerritsen will get licenses and behave as he did.

If changes in the license requirements let in more like him, those of
us who are currently licensed *will* be harmed. Those like you who are
not involved in amateur radio will not be affected.

btw, Len, Gerritsen lived over in Bell, CA, about a half-hour from your
house. He's pretty close to your age, too.

It's interesting that you proposed an age requirement that would ban
anyone under the age of 14 from getting an amateur radio license,
without any examples of problems caused by the licensing of young
people.

Yet the worst amateur radio offender in recent history is pretty close
to *your* age.

You aren't a radio amateur.

True, but what DOES that have to do with talking about
US amateur radio regulations?

You can "talk" all you want, Len. Nobody is saying you shouldn't.

The problem is that you do not deal with disagreement well. You don't
want to discuss, you want to lecture and not have your lectures
examined, criticized, or refuted.

FCC doesn't regulate behavior.

Actually, they do.

You aren't entering amateur radio.

I'm "not"?!?" What do you KNOW what I'm doing? Are you
Claire Voyant in some ham radio column or something?

Back on January 19, 2000, you wrote here that you were "going for Extra
right out of the box". Hasn't happened - in fact, you have not obtained
an amateur radio license of any kind. Almost 8 years and you haven't
taken the first step.

The Technician class license has not required a code test since
February 14, 1991. Almost 16 years and you haven't taken the first
step.

It's a pretty good bet that you're not going to get an amateur radio
license, Len.

I've encountered no sane person posting here who plays less well with
others than Leonard H. Anderson.

Why should anyone presume Len is "sane"?

You have not made an attempt to obtain an amateur radio license.

Now, now, there you go again with your bad temper and
terrible insistence that ONLY amateur licensees can
talk about amateur radio!

You are mistaken, Len. No one is insisting that only licensees can talk
about it.

wrote:
wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Sun, Sep 24 2006 2:59 pm
wrote:
From: on Sat, Sep 23 2006 7:06 pm
Dave Heil wrote

I lose no privileges whether morse code testing disappears or not.

Then WHY are you so angry and antagonistic to those of
us who want to eliminate the code test?

Dave's not angry. Neither am I.

You sure seem to be angry, Len.

As for "antagaonistic", we're just opposing what we think is a bad
idea. You seem to have a very difficult time with disagreement - your
behavior rapidly deteriorates when someone here disagrees with you.

Which is pretty much everyone except for Morkie, Toiddie and Brain.

Those three options in and of themselves ought to "say something"
about the company he keeps, though.

No harm will come to you if the test is eliminated.

Can you guarantee that, Len? I think not.

Sure it will.

Lennie keeps uttering that silliness as if "coded licensees" would
never share the same bandwidth as these folks. How idiotic.

The subject of this thread is "Gerritsen Sentenced". Gerritsen is a
former radio amateur who caused harm to many amateurs and others in his
area - jamming their transmissions, tying up repeaters, deliberately
interfering, etc. It took years to get him convicted and sentenced.

Lennie is a Gerritsen without the mic. Imagine what he could do
if he go ahold of one...?!?!?

Worst of all, he did a lot of damage to the public image of amateur
radio.

Obviously letting someone like Gerritsen get a license in the first
place was a mistake. The testing process did not insure that he would
follow the rules. He obviously did not care about proper behavior on
the air.

Amateur Radio...flying...model rockets...skateboarding...

There's always ONE putz that wants to ruin things for everyone
else.

Amateur Radio had one and a half...One still doesn't have a
license...

One concern many of us have about continued reductions in the license
test requirements - both code and written - is that more folks like
Gerritsen will get licenses and behave as he did.

If changes in the license requirements let in more like him, those of
us who are currently licensed *will* be harmed. Those like you who are
not involved in amateur radio will not be affected.

btw, Len, Gerritsen lived over in Bell, CA, about a half-hour from your
house. He's pretty close to your age, too.

And temperment...and responsibility....and maturity...

It's interesting that you proposed an age requirement that would ban
anyone under the age of 14 from getting an amateur radio license,
without any examples of problems caused by the licensing of young
people.

Yet the worst amateur radio offender in recent history is pretty close
to *your* age.

I wonder how well it would have sat if Lennie had proposed an age
CAP...?!?!

You aren't a radio amateur.

True, but what DOES that have to do with talking about
US amateur radio regulations?

You can "talk" all you want, Len. Nobody is saying you shouldn't.

The problem is that you do not deal with disagreement well. You don't
want to discuss, you want to lecture and not have your lectures
examined, criticized, or refuted.

Bingo.

FCC doesn't regulate behavior.

Actually, they do.

Guess Lennie's not been paying attention to all those efforts to
"can" the licenses of persons who have non-radio-related legal issues.

Personally, I think the FCC needs to be put in thier place for
that.

You aren't entering amateur radio.

I'm "not"?!?" What do you KNOW what I'm doing? Are you
Claire Voyant in some ham radio column or something?

Back on January 19, 2000, you wrote here that you were "going for Extra
right out of the box". Hasn't happened - in fact, you have not obtained
an amateur radio license of any kind. Almost 8 years and you haven't
taken the first step.

He can't. He can't retain the knowledge long enough to get to the
front door...And they won't let him take his computer into the test
exam with him.

The Technician class license has not required a code test since
February 14, 1991. Almost 16 years and you haven't taken the first
step.

It's a pretty good bet that you're not going to get an amateur radio
license, Len.

There is a god.

I've encountered no sane person posting here who plays less well with
others than Leonard H. Anderson.

Why should anyone presume Len is "sane"?

Why should we presume he was talking about himself... OUR "Leonard
H Anderson" does NOT "play well" with ANYone, let alone anyone in this
forum.

You have not made an attempt to obtain an amateur radio license.

Now, now, there you go again with your bad temper and
terrible insistence that ONLY amateur licensees can
talk about amateur radio!

You are mistaken, Len. No one is insisting that only licensees can talk
about it.

Biut only those who ARE licensed and DO have some PRACTICAL
EXPERIENCE are in a position to make INFORMED opinions. Lennie is NOT
licensed and hs NO practical experience as a radio OPERATOR.

73

Steve, K4YZ