"Al Klein" wrote in message
You don't like CW because you can't tell emotions on CW. Since you
can't tell emotions on Usenet, you evidently don't like Usenet. Or
you're being inconsistent.

.... _ _ _ ... ... _ _ _ ... ... _ _ _ ...

.. _ _ _ _ _ _ .. _ _ _ _. ... . _ . .._ _. _. ..
_. _ _ . .... .. _ _. ...



.. _ _ _ ._ _._. _._







...
On Sun, 01 Oct 2006 02:27:51 GMT, Opus- wrote:

On Sat, 30 Sep 2006 14:54:46 -0400, Al Klein
spake thusly:
On Sat, 30 Sep 2006 06:54:33 GMT, Opus- wrote:

You're simply wrong. Humans are aural creatures. Argue with me when
you get enough education in the subject that you're qualified to
discuss it.

Are YOU qualified? We gather more information about our environment
from vision than any other sense.

We gather more information from fellow humans by words than by any
other means. And words aren't processed in the visual cortex, not
even written words.

Ever have a pet cat or
dog that was blind and deaf? I have and you would be surprised how
well then can adapt with just the sense of smell and touch alone.
Humans need some degree of assistance.

Apples and oranges. Deaf-blind people get along pretty well too, if
they're given food, water and all the comforts of home by someone
else.

Why would I want to leave usenet?

You don't like CW because you can't tell emotions on CW. Since you
can't tell emotions on Usenet, you evidently don't like Usenet. Or
you're being inconsistent.

I don't speak Ukrainian but I sure knew when my grandmother
was mad at me.

Not by her words, though, which is what you're claiming. So tell me,
what mood am I in at the moment? Evidently, since Usenet is a visual
medium, you can tell.

I never said I could tell by her words.

That's what this discussion is about, so I guess the grandmother story
is just a red herring.

Usent is text, by the way, not visual.

I'll have to start using my ears to read your posts, then.

Your insularity is showing.

Not insularity...humanity.

Which has nothing to do with communication, which every life form
participates in - even those who have no analog of vision.

Not quite sure what point you are making here.

The discussion was about communication. YOUR discussion. You started
it. Did you forget what you were talking about?

Jack Ricci wrote:
.... .. _ _. ...

Jack, what does "HIGS" mean? Is that a name for
Hams who are pIGS? :-)
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
t...
Jack Ricci wrote:
.... .. _ _. ...

Jack, what does "HIGS" mean? Is that a name for
Hams who are pIGS? :-)
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com


....Nope..." high " was the last word, and I left out a " dot " on the last "
h " to make it an " s " as in " higs " instead of " high " . Just testing
to see if anyone out there cared enough about CW at all to catch
that...Proved my point, I guess

Jack

Jack Ricci wrote:
...Nope..." high " was the last word, and I left out a " dot " on the last "
h " to make it an " s " as in " higs " instead of " high " . Just testing
to see if anyone out there cared enough about CW at all to catch
that...Proved my point, I guess

CW is my favorite mode. I'm a member of FISTS (8741).
Strange that I helped design the 8741 at Intel, huh?

Vanilla Bean ice cream is my favorite ice cream. But
I wouldn't dream of forcing my favorite ice cream on
anyone else, including my fellow amateur radio
operators. QSL?
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

"Jack Ricci" wrote in :


"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
t...
Jack Ricci wrote:
.... .. _ _. ...

Jack, what does "HIGS" mean? Is that a name for
Hams who are pIGS? :-)
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com


...Nope..." high " was the last word, and I left out a " dot " on the
last " h " to make it an " s " as in " higs " instead of " high " .
Just testing to see if anyone out there cared enough about CW at all to
catch that...Proved my point, I guess

Jack


I don't think you proved anything. But keep trying.

SC

On Sun, 1 Oct 2006 11:52:12 -0400, "Jack Ricci"
wrote:

...Nope..." high " was the last word, and I left out a " dot " on the last "
h " to make it an " s " as in " higs " instead of " high " . Just testing
to see if anyone out there cared enough about CW at all to catch
that...Proved my point, I guess

Maybe the point was that a lot of us who can read CW should wear their
glasses when reading it on a screen. I swear I saw it as an H. Even
the second time, after I read this post. (That's what astigmatism
will do to you.)

On Sun, 1 Oct 2006 10:19:25 -0400, "Jack Ricci"
wrote:

"Al Klein" wrote in message
You don't like CW because you can't tell emotions on CW. Since you
can't tell emotions on Usenet, you evidently don't like Usenet. Or
you're being inconsistent.

... _ _ _ ... ... _ _ _ ... ... _ _ _ ...

. _ _ _ _ _ _ .. _ _ _ _. ... . _ . .._ _. _. ..
_. _ _ . .... .. _ _. ...



. _ _ _ ._ _._. _._


Some may be but not mine. I'm cool as an unpowered CPU. (CW wasn't
meant to be read in visual form. Give me 20 or 30 in my ears any
time.)

Oh - _. _ _ _ _..._ _ _ _._ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ .. _ _ _ _.
.... ._. _._. _ _ _ ._.. ._._._