What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

wrote in message
oups.com...

wrote:
From: "Dee Flint" on Fri, Oct 27 2006 8:16pm
wrote in message
Dee Flint wrote:
wrote in message
Dee Flint wrote:
"Chris" wrote in message

How refreshing to find that not one attribute has been forged.

In addition, I have repeatedly stated that each and every mode has
its
advantages and disadvantages.

If you were to compare and contrast all existing modes, it think it is
likely that you would claim that CW is the best mode.

Depends on the conditions. One can construct scenarios where whatever
mode
they favor is the "best".

"CW always gets through..." :-)

"CW always gets through" in only one scenario, and that is a fictitious
K3LT scenario.

Any one striving to be a knowledgeable ham should
be converstant with those scenarios.

...especially in the Newington, CT, area. :-)

Is somebody running for an ARRL office?

If you need an image, SST or fax are
far better modes than CW. The "best" mode depends on the purpose of the
communication and the conditions under which that communication must be
sent.

There is NO separate pass-fail TEST for "image, SST [sic]
or fax" nor for data or voice required by the FCC for an
amateur license. ["SSTV"]

The ONLY separate pass-fail TEST is for manual telegraphy.

Wow! I guess CW is more valued than ALL OF THE OTHER MODES COMBINED!


Not so. However, all the digital and image modes are merely a matter of
connecting the radio to the computer and running the appropriate software.
Once I decided to try the digital thing, I made the interface and was up and
running in an hour. After a couple of months, it became rather boring. On
the other hand, code needs to be learned before it can be tried. Many
people will give up learning before they've had a chance to try it if there
is not a test for it.

PSK will allow 100 WPM data to get through when all the
morsepersons have to use their imaginations to fill in
the garbled morse characters.

Yet PSK fails utterly and completely when there is an aurora. And the
ionospheric problems associated with an aurora cause problems far south of
the actual aurora zone so it is not just a northern issue. The computer may
be sending PSK at 100wpm per minute but the data won't be copyable on the
other end. Even a beginner sending and receiving at 5wpm will have better
throughput. When the aurora is relatively mild, even voice will be more
successful than PSK.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

wrote in message
ups.com...

Dee Flint wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

Slow Code wrote:

Larry, Dee and Me are the only pro 'Keep the code test' people in the
group anymore.

SC

Then the presentation of sound reasoning has been successful.

No most of them have left due to the spam created by Mark Morgan, the
interminable pontification of Len Anderson, the compulsive responses that
some seem to feel that they must post to the spam, the vulgarity of
people
like Opus, the slamming that people like Slow Code do to those who
licensed
or will license under the current system and so on.

Actually, Mark Morgan is merely the necessary balance to Robesin's
postings. I read Marks posting that are responding to what I've posted
and very little else that he posts.


I think they're both a little off plumb but Morgan is the worst. He's been
known to post hundreds of messages in a day. Robeson can't seem to resist
jabbing him.

I do smaple some of Lens posting because they sometimes carry a lot of
satire. What do you thik of Len characterizing you as "Miss Manners?"


Doesn't bother me in the least. I hold myself to a high standard and
believe that the world would be more pleasant if others did the same.
However it's their problem if they don't. Occasionally I get a little
annoyed and so get a little sharp but I work hard at not doing so. You get
a lot better response from people (in general) if you treat them right.

Opus? He/She must be posting under another name these days. Ditto
K3LT, K4YZ, and N2EY.

i.e. They left because it was impossible to have a good, spirited debate
without things getting out of hand.

OUT OF HAND???

Robesin is OUT OF MIND! Good thing you don't shoot your mouth off or
you might find bricks through windows, slashed tires, or terrorized ham
husbands...


Perhaps but that and worse has been said to him. He seems to have a
compulstion to attempt to refute every comment directed at him. I've posted
in here suggesting "shunning" those who slam him but he doesn't seem to want
to. He'd rather perpetuate the threads.

I only drop in occasionally to see what's happening. Mostly I don't
bother
to respond as it has proven to be pointless with all the bad eggs on
line.

Dee, N8UZE

I like you're "steady as she goes" format even when I disagree with
you, which I do.


Thank you, I appreciate that. I enjoy good debates but find that a debate
that has deteriorated to personal insults is boring. It's unfortunate that
happens so much in here.

So who do you think "Slow Code" is? Coslo? Miccolis? Roll? Deignan?
Dan, Dan the CB Radio Man?


Haven't a clue on Slow Code. The style doesn't sound like Coslo or
Miccolis. Don't really know the style of the other fellows writing.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

wrote in message
ups.com...

Dee Flint wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

Slow Code wrote:

Larry, Dee and Me are the only pro 'Keep the code test' people in the
group anymore.

SC

Then the presentation of sound reasoning has been successful.

No most of them have left due to the spam created by Mark Morgan,

I see Mark Morgan as the necessary balance in the vicious postings by
Robesin.

He doesn't need to create dozens of posts to refute each one. Many of
Mark's posts are and were quite vicious. I killfiled Morgan the day he made
unacceptable comments about Steve's deceased daughter.

We actually have very little in common. We both claim to be
amateur radio operator and military veterans. I got chopped to the US
Army twice, so I know a little bit about the Army. I also got chopped
to the US Navy once, and there and at service schools, and in Somalia,
was fairly close to the USMC.

As far as amateur radio goes, the only one of these bozos I've ever
QSO'd was Heil when I was DX on Guam.

the
interminable pontification of Len Anderson,

Yeh, well, we have Jim who served in other ways. I'm sure he has
something to be proud of, too, but so far he hasn't mentioned it in
other ways.


I happen to remember the post. He said that one can serve in other ways.
He did not say whether he himself served in the military or in other ways.
Yet based on that comment, Len Anderson and others have made ASSumptions.

the compulsive responses that
some seem to feel that they must post to the spam, the vulgarity of
people
like Opus,

I guess you conveniently forgot Dan and Bruce's postings to Kim....


Long time ago, but I think I mentioned it was stupid of them. However,
she's an adult and is capable of dealing with these people on her own.

Talk about not just sexist, but bonifide sexual harassment (and Jim
never once chimed in to say boo)....


She chose the call sign. It's not up to him or me or any one else to defend
her other than to say it was her right. I believe that I commented that I
thought it was a poor choice but it was up to her.

the slamming that people like Slow Code do to those who licensed
or will license under the current system and so on.

He's only saying what the PCTA Extras would like to say without their
callsigns attached to it.


I'm a pro code test advocate and an Extra. I would never hide behind
anonymity. And I do not hold the candidates responsible for the quality or
extent of the tests. They have no choice in the matter. What the new ham
does have a choice in is to either stagnate or progress. He can gain the
experience to then join in discussions and contribute or he can put his foot
in his mouth with such inexperienced statements as "you need an amplifier to
work DX" or "you can't work Texas from Michigan on VHF". However even then,
I try to avoid anything that could be taken as a put down because I want
them to stay in ham radio and grow and develop. I'll invite them over to
work a contest with my measly 100 watts or I'll introduce them to one of the
QRP enthusiasts. I'll invite them to work the VHF station at Field Day and
pair them up with one of our VHF experts. It's called being a good ham and
an Elmer.

i.e. They left because it was impossible to have a good, spirited debate
without things getting out of hand.

I like spirited, and I like the dignity that you lend when things get
spirited...

I only drop in occasionally to see what's happening. Mostly I don't
bother
to respond as it has proven to be pointless with all the bad eggs on
line.

Dee, N8UZE

Is an egg that's come to room temp and incubating a little bit of
salmonella really all that bad?


Not if you enjoy being sick.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

From: on Sat, Oct 28 2006 1:28pm

wrote:
From: on Sat, Oct 21 2006 4:01pm
wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
wrote:

Beyond that, he could be anybody with a computer and an internet
connection. "Slow Code" could be Len Anderson, who has used at least
seven different screen names here - that we know of.

How many screen names have you used here - that you know of?

Jimmie will NEVER admit to using any pseudonyms. :-)

Jim doesn't want to tell a lie, so he avoids the question... pretend it
wasn't asked.

...and then tries to misdirect the whole thread! :-)

OK, that's 'Quitefine' with me...:-)

Jimmie is a proud amateur "serving his country in other ways"
such as playing with his radio hobby, spreading "international
good will" by working DX on HF with CW. :-)

A-1 Operator!

Is he into the sauce? :-)


"Slow Code" could be Brian Burke, N0IMD,

Slow Code could be Jim/N2EY, despite protests that it isn't him.

Not in Miccolis' petty prissy manner of "always being correct."
[i.e., thinking as Miccolis thinks...all else is "wrong"]

Miccolis already tried at least one pseudonym. That pesudo
STOPPED when confronted. [that's in the Google archives]
But, but, but...Miccolis (who never swears) swears "it wasn't
him!" AS IF. :-)

Squeaky Clean.

Squeak...mouse..."the mouse that roared."

Ditto
Robesin, Coslo, Bruce, Dan, Larry Roll, or anyone else who "appears" to
be absent from RRAP.

Maybe it is Val Germann, frustrated that he can't get his
(code speed) up? :-)

Probably never tried. For if he had really, really tried, he could
have been a 20WPM, Code-Tape Extra.

One of Missouri's Finest!

Could even be KH2D after starting the Alzheimer's route...who
knows?

That Jim's not that old...

Mental deterioration could be happening since he left Guam?

Maybe it is Lamont Cranston? "Who knows what evil lurks in
the hearts of No-Coders?" :-)

Little Billy Beeper's mentor?

Nah. Wouldn't be close to Hans Brakob. Hans has a sense
of humor. Humor is very rare among morsemen; Hans is a
morseman but is NOT for the US amateur radio code test. :-)

Blowcode is just an Attention-WANTER, making trouble so he
can feel "famous." All he can think about is memorized
lines from the ARRL hymnbook of a half century past. He
can't think for himself. His bigotry is in the way.


who has used a wide variety of screen names
here, ("billy beeper", "hot ham and cheese", to name just a few)
usually without including his name or callsign.

I understand that Brian Burke has received a whole lot less spam email
on his regular user account than when he posted here under his name and
call. I also understand that he let go of "Billy Beeper" at Han's
Brakob's request, as "Billy Beeper" was an invention of Hans, a
fictitious boy who feared evil No-Coders.

There's lots of fictitious BOYS in here fearing evil No-Coders.

Most of them use pseudonyms. No guts. No courage. No brains.

They hide behind their BFO-enabled beeping, afraid to stray
beyond the anonymity of their monotonic dots and dashes...and
dreams of glory and honor via morsemanship..."serving their
country in 'other' ways." :-)

They wished.

They wish so hard they think it is real. Poor babies.

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

"A. G. Bell" anon@anon wrote in :

Dee killfiled you, Mark. She doesn't see your insipid comments.



QRZ KF'd him too.


BwHAAHAAHAAHAHAAA!

SC

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

From: on Sat, Oct 28 2006 2:56pm

wrote:
From: "Dee Flint" on Fri, Oct 27 2006 8:16pm
wrote in message
Dee Flint wrote:
wrote in message
Dee Flint wrote:
"Chris" wrote in message

How refreshing to find that not one attribute has been forged.

Wonders never cease! :-)

In addition, I have repeatedly stated that each and every mode has its
advantages and disadvantages.

If you were to compare and contrast all existing modes, it think it is
likely that you would claim that CW is the best mode.

Depends on the conditions. One can construct scenarios where whatever mode
they favor is the "best".

"CW always gets through..." :-)

"CW always gets through" in only one scenario, and that is a fictitious
K3LT scenario.

Tsk, Larry Troll BORROWED an old, old saying in ["CW"]
ham radio. It was around in the 1930s. Troll tried to
make a scenario of a desert island where a "floating"
Ten-Tec washed ashore to use for 'rescue.' :-)

Any one striving to be a knowledgeable ham should
be converstant with those scenarios.

...especially in the Newington, CT, area. :-)

Is somebody running for an ARRL office?

Who knows? :-)

If you need an image, SST or fax are
far better modes than CW. The "best" mode depends on the purpose of the
communication and the conditions under which that communication must be
sent.

There is NO separate pass-fail TEST for "image, SST [sic]
or fax" nor for data or voice required by the FCC for an
amateur license. ["SSTV"]

The ONLY separate pass-fail TEST is for manual telegraphy.

Wow! I guess CW is more valued than ALL OF THE OTHER MODES COMBINED!

Absolutely! Gots to get Morris Goad 'technology!'

Because of the efforts made to dismiss countless Morse Myths over the
years, you were just now able to state that not all CW signals are good
without 1x2 PCTAs pooh poohing such talk.

You are exaggerating.

Hardly. ALL of the pro-code 1x2s in here, plus some 1x3s,
have stated the hoary old Maxim "CW always gets through."

Except N2EY who never admits to doing anything wrong...:-)

Yet he avoids my question about the aliases he's posted under on RRAP.

Jimmie never did anything wrong! :-)

None have stated all CW signals are good. What they
have contended is that it is possible to copy a poor CW signal under
conditions where you could not copy other types of signals.

"CW always gets through..." :-)

Nope.

Well, that's what I've been told...by pro-coders... :-)

If morse code radiotelegraphy were so "good," why hasn't
NASA picked up on it for the Deep Space Net? For the
quarter-million-mile 'DX' path to our moon? Why have
the maritime folks GIVEN UP on morse code for Safety Of
Life At Sea? [GMDSS uses a form of data, automated]

500KHz.

Not to worry. Some hams are 'experimenting' with a small
slice right next to 500 KHz, using it for 'radio research'
or something. Like that region of the EM spectrum has
"never been examined" before. :-)

PSK will allow 100 WPM data to get through when all the
morsepersons have to use their imaginations to fill in
the garbled morse characters.

Oh SHUT UP! That doesn't help the Morse argument one little bit!

Oh, dear, now Jimmie will get on MY case because YOU
told me to "shut up!" :-)

Ackshully, that's 'okay' since an NCTA said that to
another NCTA. We can't EVER tell a PCTA to shut up!

Still, the argument over the separate pass-fail "CW"
TEST is there with all the morsepersons wanting it be
kept forever and ever in FCC regulations...WHY?

Because Morse is used in ham radio contests.

Rhetorical question.

Darnit! I should have read ahead!!!

The separate pass-fail "CW" TEST
is there because: (1) The ARRL wants it (they "know
what is best for ham radio"); (2) The already-licensed
had to take a morse test and everyone else had better
take one, too!

EXactly.

I could have added "tradition" as a third 'reason' but hams
can't use Spark, the very first way hams used radio. That's
been outlawed. So much for "tradition."

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

From: "Dee Flint" on Sat, Oct 28 2006 5:47pm

wrote in message
Slow Code wrote:

Larry, Dee and Me are the only pro 'Keep the code test' people in the
group anymore.

Then the presentation of sound reasoning has been successful.

No most of them have left due to the spam created by Mark Morgan, the
interminable pontification of Len Anderson, the compulsive responses that
some seem to feel that they must post to the spam, the vulgarity of people
like Opus, the slamming that people like Slow Code do to those who licensed
or will license under the current system and so on.

Mark Morgan is an NCTA.

Len Anderson is an NCTA.

Opus is an NCTA.

We are all "vulgar" BECAUSE we are NCTA? Must be... :-)

Carl Stevenson is an NCTA. He quit posting. Is the
present head of NCI.

Hans Brakob is a sort-of NCTA even though he IS a morseperson
of long experience. Hans doesn't post much now.

Cecil Moore, a long-timer, one who DOES "CW" but
doesn't think the code test should be there. [anyone
who owns and rides a spiffy Harley is hardly bad...]
Cecil hangs out in rec.radio.amateur.antenna now.


Now we get to the PCTAs, the self-styled Rulers of RRAP:

K4YZ, the USMC Imposter who has NEVER made available ANY
documentation of his supposed "18-year career with USMC."
Ten kinds of filthy outpouring from that sick puppy here.

N2EY, K4YZ's stand-in, who tells everyone that disagrees
with him they are "wrong." Won't say what he does for a
living or for who. Prissy Mother Superior who dotes on
ancient times before he was born.

K8MN, probably a graduate of Karlsrhue, busy trying to
smack down ANY NCTA that DARES to talk back to him!
He is a "Superior" with a capital S.

Chris Davies, a relative newcomer, trying to assert
hisself as some kind of "superior" but disses all
NCTAs just like the older, unwiser PCTAs do.

Ed Hare of the ARRL Lab used to be here. He was
about the only rational PCTA in the group but tried
to overrate his employer to the point of nausea.

Dozens of Little BOYS using anony-mousies, no brains,
no courage to give their calls, busy regressing to
the middle-school machismo they use in postings.

Larry Troll left here. He was a claimed summa cum
laude in Human Reseources, claimed he could get ANY
personnel job he wanted. He wound up driving a BUS.
Bragged a lot but couldn't hack it.

Lots and lots of assorted other NCTAs have been in here
all blabbering about the gloriousness and majesty of
morse (several ex-USN chiefs in that group). They've
all LEFT. [couldn't take the heat, got out of the
kitchen...they couldn't be served in the dining room
by NCTAs, poor dears]

i.e. They left because it was impossible to have a good, spirited debate
without things getting out of hand.

Riiiiight..."ein Reich, ein Volk" for "debate." All
repeat the ARRL party line of everyone do code or you
are all bad people. Lemming mentality. Hive mind.
All think alike (Big Brother is watching you!).

I only drop in occasionally to see what's happening.

Riiiiight... :-)

Mostly I don't bother
to respond as it has proven to be pointless with all the bad eggs on line.

Ostrich syndrome. Anyone NOT following the ARRL party
line is a "bad egg?" Okay, then the entirety of the
OTHER radio services are "bad eggs." ALL of those
either quit using telegraphy or never considered it in
the first place. Ergo, all those OTHER radio services
are "bad eggs."

Yeah, let's hear it for "debate." "Ein Reich, ein volk!"

Let's open up Auschvitz, Lublin, Bergen-Belsen, etc. for
the heinous NCTAs! Do away with all those "bad eggs."
They don't "debate" using the ARRL party line!

It's "putsch comes to shove" time! :-)

Remember: "Arbeit macht frei!"

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

Dee killfiled you, Mark. She doesn't see your insipid comments.

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

Dee Flint wrote:

Besides that, Jim, I'm the one who taught the class where my OM upgraded to
Extra!

Dee, N8UZE

That must mean that he can't play Tower Monkey for you.

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

wrote:
From: on Sat, Oct 28 2006 1:28pm

wrote:
From: on Sat, Oct 21 2006 4:01pm
wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
wrote:

Beyond that, he could be anybody with a computer and an internet
connection. "Slow Code" could be Len Anderson, who has used at least
seven different screen names here - that we know of.

How many screen names have you used here - that you know of?

Jimmie will NEVER admit to using any pseudonyms. :-)

Jim doesn't want to tell a lie, so he avoids the question... pretend it
wasn't asked.

...and then tries to misdirect the whole thread! :-)

OK, that's 'Quitefine' with me...:-)

Quiterite!

Jimmie is a proud amateur "serving his country in other ways"
such as playing with his radio hobby, spreading "international
good will" by working DX on HF with CW. :-)

A-1 Operator!

Is he into the sauce? :-)

Which one? There are 57 varieties.

"Slow Code" could be Brian Burke, N0IMD,

Slow Code could be Jim/N2EY, despite protests that it isn't him.

Not in Miccolis' petty prissy manner of "always being correct."
[i.e., thinking as Miccolis thinks...all else is "wrong"]

Miccolis already tried at least one pseudonym. That pesudo
STOPPED when confronted. [that's in the Google archives]
But, but, but...Miccolis (who never swears) swears "it wasn't
him!" AS IF. :-)

Squeaky Clean.

Squeak...mouse..."the mouse that roared."

Into a maze of his own making.

Ditto
Robesin, Coslo, Bruce, Dan, Larry Roll, or anyone else who "appears" to
be absent from RRAP.

Maybe it is Val Germann, frustrated that he can't get his
(code speed) up? :-)

Probably never tried. For if he had really, really tried, he could
have been a 20WPM, Code-Tape Extra.

One of Missouri's Finest!

But he didn't try, for if anyone ever tries, they would suceede.

Could even be KH2D after starting the Alzheimer's route...who
knows?

That Jim's not that old...

Mental deterioration could be happening since he left Guam?

Mine sure has...

Maybe it is Lamont Cranston? "Who knows what evil lurks in
the hearts of No-Coders?" :-)

Little Billy Beeper's mentor?

Nah. Wouldn't be close to Hans Brakob. Hans has a sense
of humor. Humor is very rare among morsemen; Hans is a
morseman but is NOT for the US amateur radio code test. :-)

Blowcode is just an Attention-WANTER, making trouble so he
can feel "famous." All he can think about is memorized
lines from the ARRL hymnbook of a half century past. He
can't think for himself. His bigotry is in the way.

Then he really, really could be Jim.

who has used a wide variety of screen names
here, ("billy beeper", "hot ham and cheese", to name just a few)
usually without including his name or callsign.

I understand that Brian Burke has received a whole lot less spam email
on his regular user account than when he posted here under his name and
call. I also understand that he let go of "Billy Beeper" at Han's
Brakob's request, as "Billy Beeper" was an invention of Hans, a
fictitious boy who feared evil No-Coders.

There's lots of fictitious BOYS in here fearing evil No-Coders.

Most of them use pseudonyms. No guts. No courage. No brains.

They hide behind their BFO-enabled beeping, afraid to stray
beyond the anonymity of their monotonic dots and dashes...and
dreams of glory and honor via morsemanship..."serving their
country in 'other' ways." :-)

They wished.

They wish so hard they think it is real. Poor babies.



And if they clicked their heeels together...

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

Slow Code wrote:
wrote in
ups.com:

Ha! Jim insulting Jim.

Now you've just insulted Jim, calling him he. LOL

SC

Him he who?

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

Dee Flint wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...


[snip]


Dee, place all presently licensed USA amateurs in front of stations
equipped with a manual key AND CWGET. Have them operate operate any CW
Only Contest with whichever is more comfortable for them to use. Total
the scores...

I think you get the point.


Can't tell what your point is. Those experienced with code and using only
their ears and brain will beat CWGet in any contest you care to name.

I didn't say, "those experienced..." I said all presently licensed USA
amateur radio operators...

It
doesn't do the job when there are a multitude of operators calling at the
same time. Also CWGet cannot copy the average manually keyed Morse code.
So whatever your point is, you didn't prove anything.

Even you have claimed to be a user of CWGet.

I do NOT and never have believed in the arguments about "keeping out the
riffraff", maintaining tradition, or the "I had to so you should to".

The "dumbing down" argument is just an extension of the "keeping out
the riff-raff" argument.

I've never mentioned the "dumbing down" argument. My point is that there is
a body of basic knowledge that all should know. The difficulty arises in
determining what that basic knowledge should be. Generally, the experienced
people should be the ones to define what constitutes basic knowledge. The
beginners are too inexperienced to do so.

You couldn't be more wrong. The FCC should get to define what "basic
knowledge" is, and those that do the defining don't have a clue what
Morse Code is. But they've been buffaloed into believing that it tis
something magical.

It's basic knowledge, pure and simple. Most of the people I know don't
use
any of the theory either but it is part of the basic knowledge set. I've
used ohm's law only a couple of times in the 14 years I've been licensed.
I've used the dipole equation half a dozen times. I've never used smith
charts. One could get by without the theory but having learned it, I can
choose where I want to focus my attention in amateur ration.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Dee, you have a Ham Husband to take care of the Ohm's Law and Theory
end of your station, so it's no wonder you have no real use for it..

Please do not insult me by stereotyping like that.

You do not have a Ham Husband?

I happen to be a degreed
engineer (B.S. in Aerospace Engineering) with 20 years of applied experience
in engineering (aerospace, nuclear, mechanical and automotive fields).

I can't help but think that all engineers, aerospace or civil or
otherwise, had to learn Ohm's Law as part of "thier" professional
certification. If I am wrong, then shame on the state of American
Engineerism, and shame on America. No wonder we're overrun with
engineers from India, Pakistan, China and Russia.

Learning Oh,'s Law for a hobby is one thing, but a professional
engineer........

Should I happen to run into a need to use Ohms law and so on, I am perfectly
capable of doing so. In addition, I was the one who taught the class for
our club members who wished to upgrade to Extra, a class which my husband
attended so that he could upgrade from General to Extra.

You have ASSumed and made a donkey of yourself.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Be kind enough to show where. Merely claiming to be an engineer
without a use for Ohm's Law or Radio Theory is not enough.

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

wrote in message
...
On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 18:28:15 -0400, "Dee Flint"
wrote:


wrote in message
groups.com...

wrote:
On 28 Oct 2006 14:01:31 -0700, wrote:


I mean Dee equates being able to do Morse Code (which she flasely
claims based on the lies she was taught is somehow related to basis of
Radio Maxwells equations to data that wtries to keep someone from
hurting themselves, shows poor thinking process

Dee's doing the best she can with her self-imposed handicaps.


Well if you understood that garbled mess of a sentence, then my hat is off
to you. Perhaps you should get a job as his interpreter.
obviously moirse fails to improve your abilitesi as an all round
comicator

Mork, you should make that last...um, sentence your sig.

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

Dee Flint wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

Dee Flint wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

Slow Code wrote:

Larry, Dee and Me are the only pro 'Keep the code test' people in the
group anymore.

SC

Then the presentation of sound reasoning has been successful.

No most of them have left due to the spam created by Mark Morgan,

I see Mark Morgan as the necessary balance in the vicious postings by
Robesin.

He doesn't need to create dozens of posts to refute each one.

You don't get to decide that. Has Robesin accused you of lesbian
encounters or pedophilia?

When he does, I'll be sure to keep track of the ratio of Robesin
postings to Dee postings.

Many of
Mark's posts are and were quite vicious.

Um, yeh. It's really awful, isn't it? Almost as bad as accusing
people of rape.

I killfiled Morgan the day he made
unacceptable comments about Steve's deceased daughter.

Did you know that his daughter was severly retarded, and he makes jokes
about "the short bus" on RRAP? I doubt that his daughter was well off
enough to ride the short bus that Robesin pokes fun at..

We actually have very little in common. We both claim to be
amateur radio operator and military veterans. I got chopped to the US
Army twice, so I know a little bit about the Army. I also got chopped
to the US Navy once, and there and at service schools, and in Somalia,
was fairly close to the USMC.

As far as amateur radio goes, the only one of these bozos I've ever
QSO'd was Heil when I was DX on Guam.

the
interminable pontification of Len Anderson,

Yeh, well, we have Jim who served in other ways. I'm sure he has
something to be proud of, too, but so far he hasn't mentioned it in
other ways.

I happen to remember the post. He said that one can serve in other ways.
He did not say whether he himself served in the military or in other ways.

Even worse.

Yet based on that comment, Len Anderson and others have made ASSumptions.

Jim's had YEARS to clarify, and he's been questioned SPECIFICALLY about
that comment.

the compulsive responses that
some seem to feel that they must post to the spam, the vulgarity of
people
like Opus,

I guess you conveniently forgot Dan and Bruce's postings to Kim....

Long time ago, but I think I mentioned it was stupid of them.

Stupid? It was sexual harassment. That's illegal isn't it?

However,
she's an adult and is capable of dealing with these people on her own.

Yeh, right. You didn't like her politics, so she's on her own.

Talk about not just sexist, but bonifide sexual harassment (and Jim
never once chimed in to say boo)....

She chose the call sign.

I believe she did.

It's not up to him or me or any one else to defend
her other than to say it was her right. I believe that I commented that I
thought it was a poor choice but it was up to her.

I believe you did just that.

So when a YL wearing a slit skirt and a push-up bra gets raped...?

Was she asking for it and is she on her own?

the slamming that people like Slow Code do to those who licensed
or will license under the current system and so on.

He's only saying what the PCTA Extras would like to say without their
callsigns attached to it.

I'm a pro code test advocate and an Extra.

I would never have guessed.

I would never hide behind
anonymity.

Jim does.

And I do not hold the candidates responsible for the quality or
extent of the tests. They have no choice in the matter. What the new ham
does have a choice in is to either stagnate or progress. He can gain the
experience to then join in discussions and contribute or he can put his foot
in his mouth with such inexperienced statements as "you need an amplifier to
work DX" or "you can't work Texas from Michigan on VHF". However even then,
I try to avoid anything that could be taken as a put down because I want
them to stay in ham radio and grow and develop. I'll invite them over to
work a contest with my measly 100 watts or I'll introduce them to one of the
QRP enthusiasts. I'll invite them to work the VHF station at Field Day and
pair them up with one of our VHF experts. It's called being a good ham and
an Elmer.

No "shack on a belt" quips?

i.e. They left because it was impossible to have a good, spirited debate
without things getting out of hand.

I like spirited, and I like the dignity that you lend when things get
spirited...

I only drop in occasionally to see what's happening. Mostly I don't
bother
to respond as it has proven to be pointless with all the bad eggs on
line.

Dee, N8UZE

Is an egg that's come to room temp and incubating a little bit of
salmonella really all that bad?

Not if you enjoy being sick.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

I'll pass that one along to Robesin, then. He relishes spoiled eggs.

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

wrote in message
ups.com...

Dee Flint wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...


[snip]


Dee, place all presently licensed USA amateurs in front of stations
equipped with a manual key AND CWGET. Have them operate operate any CW
Only Contest with whichever is more comfortable for them to use. Total
the scores...

I think you get the point.


Can't tell what your point is. Those experienced with code and using
only
their ears and brain will beat CWGet in any contest you care to name.

I didn't say, "those experienced..." I said all presently licensed USA
amateur radio operators...


Those who learn code will beat those who try to make CWGet do a job
(contesting) for which it is ill-suited.

It
doesn't do the job when there are a multitude of operators calling at the
same time. Also CWGet cannot copy the average manually keyed Morse code.
So whatever your point is, you didn't prove anything.

Even you have claimed to be a user of CWGet.


So what? When I'm in a contest, I use the best computer ever developed (the
human brain). When the person on the other end is sending manually keyed
code, again I use the good old brain. That I sometimes use CWGet is no
particular endorsement of it. It's a tool that I use when I'm tired and
still want to operate code. However unless the signal is of good quality
and volume, it ends up being necessary to go back to the good old human
brain. My decision then is to either put in the extra effort to focus or
just call it a night and go to bed.

I do NOT and never have believed in the arguments about "keeping out
the
riffraff", maintaining tradition, or the "I had to so you should to".

The "dumbing down" argument is just an extension of the "keeping out
the riff-raff" argument.

I've never mentioned the "dumbing down" argument. My point is that there
is
a body of basic knowledge that all should know. The difficulty arises in
determining what that basic knowledge should be. Generally, the
experienced
people should be the ones to define what constitutes basic knowledge.
The
beginners are too inexperienced to do so.

You couldn't be more wrong. The FCC should get to define what "basic
knowledge" is, and those that do the defining don't have a clue what
Morse Code is. But they've been buffaloed into believing that it tis
something magical.


Yes the FCC has the task of defining what that should be. However there is
NOTHING that prohibits them from consulting with people who have operating
experience.

It's basic knowledge, pure and simple. Most of the people I know
don't
use
any of the theory either but it is part of the basic knowledge set.
I've
used ohm's law only a couple of times in the 14 years I've been
licensed.
I've used the dipole equation half a dozen times. I've never used
smith
charts. One could get by without the theory but having learned it, I
can
choose where I want to focus my attention in amateur ration.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Dee, you have a Ham Husband to take care of the Ohm's Law and Theory
end of your station, so it's no wonder you have no real use for it..

Please do not insult me by stereotyping like that.

You do not have a Ham Husband?


You are choosing to be obtuse. Yes I have a Ham Husband but no he does not
take care of Ohm's law or Theory for me.

I happen to be a degreed
engineer (B.S. in Aerospace Engineering) with 20 years of applied
experience
in engineering (aerospace, nuclear, mechanical and automotive fields).

I can't help but think that all engineers, aerospace or civil or
otherwise, had to learn Ohm's Law as part of "thier" professional
certification. If I am wrong, then shame on the state of American
Engineerism, and shame on America. No wonder we're overrun with
engineers from India, Pakistan, China and Russia.


Mechanical engineers don't have a need for Ohm's law. They go hire the
electrical engineers. Aerospace engineering is a branch of mechanical
engineering (we don't get to drop the lesser terms in the equations since
they have a significant impact for our field). Again we go hire the
electrical engineers. Same with civil and structural engineers. On the
other hand electrical engineers generally do not study basic pressure vessal
theory but go hire the mechanical engineers for that.

Learning Oh,'s Law for a hobby is one thing, but a professional
engineer........


Again it depends on the field. We all studied common areas such as calculus
and fast fourier transforms but items unique to a field generally were not
taught across the board. We didn't study Ohms law and the electrical
engineers didn't study cantilever beam theory.

Should I happen to run into a need to use Ohms law and so on, I am
perfectly
capable of doing so. In addition, I was the one who taught the class for
our club members who wished to upgrade to Extra, a class which my husband
attended so that he could upgrade from General to Extra.

You have ASSumed and made a donkey of yourself.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Be kind enough to show where. Merely claiming to be an engineer
without a use for Ohm's Law or Radio Theory is not enough.

You assumed that I needed help from my OM on theory, etc. That is the area
to which I referred.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

Dee Flint wrote:
wrote in message

So who do you think "Slow Code" is? Coslo? Miccolis? Roll? Deignan?
Dan, Dan the CB Radio Man?

Haven't a clue on Slow Code. The style doesn't sound like Coslo or
Miccolis.

Obviously it's someone who's been here awhile.

Don't really know the style of the other fellows writing.

Troll was the racist poster ("My favorite black on the bus...," and
"Welfare mothers of Color with their hands out...").

Deignan was the vanity callsign collector and the original "RF
Commando." He called me a liar when I said he had collected 12
callsigns, but I was wrong - one of the callsigns actually belonged to
his wife at the same address. So I guess I was a liar after all. I
should have known that he had a Ham Wife that collected vanity
callsigns, too.

Deignan's buddy in Hawaii loaned him his PO Box number so he could scam
some Hawaiin calls, meanwhile, the Hawaiin PO Box owner was scamming a
Guam callsign. Never been to Guam and could have operated /KH2 like I
did for two years. I guess a Hawaiin Call Stroke Guam Call is a pretty
cool thing...

Anyway, these are the guys who pass judgement on me because I am too
fat, lazy, and stupid to buy into the whole Morse Exam stuff at 5, and
then 13, and then 20 WPM.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

That's the beauty of anon postings, they don't have to follow their own
"style."

I began posting as hot-ham when I gave up Billy Beeper at Hans request.
I'd prefer to not post with my name and/or call as I used to, as I
seem to get lots and lots of spam when I do.

Meanwhile, Robesin has posted my name, call and address much more than
I have.

That's so swell of him.

I guess when Mark posts Robesin's address and phone number, it's just
tit for tat. No?

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
On 28 Oct 2006 14:01:31 -0700, wrote:
wrote:
On 27 Oct 2006 16:43:42 -0700, wrote:
an_old_friend wrote:
wrote:
Dees coming around in her own way, but the brainwashing that she's
undergone is strong. Perhaps in another decade... if there's still an
amateur radio. If only she had been able to think spontaneously and
resist, the brainwashing wouldn't have been so well received.

thinking ability is not prised by our educational system by and large

The Catholics have done a commendable job in the educational department.

Realy

No, not really.

No?

Yep, and for far less money than the public schools operate on.

That's because they can pick and choose their students, and the areas
they serve.

Nope. The Catholic School can only accept students that apply. No one
is forced to apply or attend. And there are no geographical
restrictions to the area that a Catholic School services, only the
ability of a parent to get their child to school on time.

Public schools cannot.

They can as much as any school can.

i honestly have no real dat on the subject NOT being catholic
and being from a religious background that frowns on Rome we have
tended to avoid thier school

That isn't to say that Catholics don't have a whole host of other
problems.

Some of which have made the headlines in recent years.

Protestant Churches have made EXACTLY the same headlines.

But serving in other ways hasn't made any headlines.

I do hope some schools are doing a better
job

In public schools? Rare!

Not in my experience. Of course, community support for the public
schools varies all over the place.

Just like community support for the military varies all over the place.


I mean Dee equates being able to do Morse Code (which she flasely
claims based on the lies she was taught is somehow related to basis of
Radio Maxwells equations to data that wtries to keep someone from
hurting themselves, shows poor thinking process

One does not need to know Maxwell's Equations to do radio safely.

Yet you speak of Maxwell's Equations often.

Dee says she has no use for the Smith Charts. What were you saying
about the smith charts?

Dee's doing the best she can with her self-imposed handicaps.

??

??

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

wrote:

Who is "Jimmie"? There's a "Jimmie D" who has posted to rrap recently.
I'm not him

Jimmie is the guy who diverts the subject when he is asked under what
other names he's posted to RRAP under. Jimmis is nobody at all.

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

wrote in message
ups.com...

Dee Flint wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

Dee Flint wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

Slow Code wrote:

Larry, Dee and Me are the only pro 'Keep the code test' people in
the
group anymore.

SC

Then the presentation of sound reasoning has been successful.

No most of them have left due to the spam created by Mark Morgan,

I see Mark Morgan as the necessary balance in the vicious postings by
Robesin.

He doesn't need to create dozens of posts to refute each one.

You don't get to decide that. Has Robesin accused you of lesbian
encounters or pedophilia?

When he does, I'll be sure to keep track of the ratio of Robesin
postings to Dee postings.


Well if such an odd thing should ever happen, I'll killfile him. I refuse
to get sucked into such stupidity.

Many of
Mark's posts are and were quite vicious.

Um, yeh. It's really awful, isn't it? Almost as bad as accusing
people of rape.

I killfiled Morgan the day he made
unacceptable comments about Steve's deceased daughter.

Did you know that his daughter was severly retarded, and he makes jokes
about "the short bus" on RRAP? I doubt that his daughter was well off
enough to ride the short bus that Robesin pokes fun at..


I don't particularly care for either one's tactics and stay out of that
mess.

We actually have very little in common. We both claim to be
amateur radio operator and military veterans. I got chopped to the US
Army twice, so I know a little bit about the Army. I also got chopped
to the US Navy once, and there and at service schools, and in Somalia,
was fairly close to the USMC.

As far as amateur radio goes, the only one of these bozos I've ever
QSO'd was Heil when I was DX on Guam.

the
interminable pontification of Len Anderson,

Yeh, well, we have Jim who served in other ways. I'm sure he has
something to be proud of, too, but so far he hasn't mentioned it in
other ways.

I happen to remember the post. He said that one can serve in other ways.
He did not say whether he himself served in the military or in other
ways.

Even worse.

Yet based on that comment, Len Anderson and others have made ASSumptions.

Jim's had YEARS to clarify, and he's been questioned SPECIFICALLY about
that comment.

the compulsive responses that
some seem to feel that they must post to the spam, the vulgarity of
people
like Opus,

I guess you conveniently forgot Dan and Bruce's postings to Kim....

Long time ago, but I think I mentioned it was stupid of them.

Stupid? It was sexual harassment. That's illegal isn't it?


Hard to say. One would have to weigh it against the specific wording of the
law and adjudicated cases to determine if it was or was not illegal.

However,
she's an adult and is capable of dealing with these people on her own.

Yeh, right. You didn't like her politics, so she's on her own.


How do you come to that conclusion? I know very little about her politics
and it wouldn't matter if I did. As I recall, she defended her choice far
better than I or anyone else could have done it for her. I supported her
right to choose a legally available call sign even though I thought her
choice a little strange. It's not within my power to make others accept it.

Talk about not just sexist, but bonifide sexual harassment (and Jim
never once chimed in to say boo)....

As tasteless and tacky as it was, it may not have actually meet the legal
definition of sexual harassment. She was not threatened with a job loss or
with an overall loss in her quality of life. Discussion groups are not for
the faint of heart, especially ones like these newsgroups. Participation in
these news groups does not contribute to quality of life in any significant
way. It is an idle and insignificant form of recreation.


She chose the call sign.

I believe she did.


Yup. A simple check of the call sign database shows that it is a vanity
call. So it was hers by choice. I don't recall for sure but didn't she say
she did it on a dare?

It's not up to him or me or any one else to defend
her other than to say it was her right. I believe that I commented that
I
thought it was a poor choice but it was up to her.

I believe you did just that.

So when a YL wearing a slit skirt and a push-up bra gets raped...?


Not the same thing at all and you very well know it. Her overall quality of
life is seriously affected and her life could even be in danger. Besides
rapists don't care what the victim is wearing. They are looking for some
one they can successfully dominate and terrorize. The shy school girl in
the dowdy clothes hurrying home with her books clutched to her chest is just
as likely or even more likely to be raped than the brazen hookers down on
Eight Mile (that's a Detroit reference).

Was she asking for it and is she on her own?


See my comment above. If I saw some one being threatened with violence and
it were within my power to do something about it, I would. It wouldn't
matter if it were that shy school girl or that brazen hooker. Today, I'd
have to limit myself to calling for help but in my younger, more fit days,
I'd also have taken an active (i.e. physical) part in her defense.

the slamming that people like Slow Code do to those who licensed
or will license under the current system and so on.

He's only saying what the PCTA Extras would like to say without their
callsigns attached to it.

I'm a pro code test advocate and an Extra.

I would never have guessed.

I would never hide behind
anonymity.

Jim does.

And I do not hold the candidates responsible for the quality or
extent of the tests. They have no choice in the matter. What the new
ham
does have a choice in is to either stagnate or progress. He can gain the
experience to then join in discussions and contribute or he can put his
foot
in his mouth with such inexperienced statements as "you need an amplifier
to
work DX" or "you can't work Texas from Michigan on VHF". However even
then,
I try to avoid anything that could be taken as a put down because I want
them to stay in ham radio and grow and develop. I'll invite them over to
work a contest with my measly 100 watts or I'll introduce them to one of
the
QRP enthusiasts. I'll invite them to work the VHF station at Field Day
and
pair them up with one of our VHF experts. It's called being a good ham
and
an Elmer.

No "shack on a belt" quips?


Nope. Why should I? It accomplishes nothing. I want people to enjoy ham
radio. I want their motivation to develop to be based on the joy they get
out of it and the joy they see others get out of it. Sarcasm does not serve
that objective.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

wrote in message
oups.com...

Dee Flint wrote:
wrote in message

So who do you think "Slow Code" is? Coslo? Miccolis? Roll? Deignan?
Dan, Dan the CB Radio Man?

Haven't a clue on Slow Code. The style doesn't sound like Coslo or
Miccolis.

Obviously it's someone who's been here awhile.

Don't really know the style of the other fellows writing.

Troll was the racist poster ("My favorite black on the bus...," and
"Welfare mothers of Color with their hands out...").


I delete such without reading them and generally delete all the resulting
posts.

Deignan was the vanity callsign collector and the original "RF
Commando." He called me a liar when I said he had collected 12
callsigns, but I was wrong - one of the callsigns actually belonged to
his wife at the same address. So I guess I was a liar after all. I
should have known that he had a Ham Wife that collected vanity
callsigns, too.


There are way too many people that confuse honest mistakes with lying.
Don't be one of them. The FCC has been getting on people for doing that and
making them justify the calls or give them up.

Deignan's buddy in Hawaii loaned him his PO Box number so he could scam
some Hawaiin calls, meanwhile, the Hawaiin PO Box owner was scamming a
Guam callsign. Never been to Guam and could have operated /KH2 like I
did for two years. I guess a Hawaiin Call Stroke Guam Call is a pretty
cool thing...


Don't see why. But again the FCC is getting wise to such antics.

Anyway, these are the guys who pass judgement on me because I am too
fat, lazy, and stupid to buy into the whole Morse Exam stuff at 5, and
then 13, and then 20 WPM.


Depends on how bad you want the privileges. Just don't ask for something
for nothing. Originally I had no interest in ham radio but my husband at
the time dragged me to a class as something we could do together. As I got
involved, I found it interesting. I deduced very early on that what I
wanted to get out of ham radio would best be served by going all the way to
Extra. Since I wanted the privileges, I met the requirements including the
20 wpm.

Not everyone wants those privileges. Kim is a case in point. She is a Tech
Plus and could have gotten her General with just a written test and no
further code testing as of April 2000. She chose not to because she did not
really like HF operations. The typical background static of HF bothers her.
Her interests lie in VHF and up. Since she has full privileges there, the
General does not serve her goals.


That's the beauty of anon postings, they don't have to follow their own
"style."


Very true. But it takes a lot of discipline to consistently write in a
different style and not make tell tale slips. When Len Anderson was posting
as Avery Fineman, it was quite obvious they were the same person.

I began posting as hot-ham when I gave up Billy Beeper at Hans request.
I'd prefer to not post with my name and/or call as I used to, as I
seem to get lots and lots of spam when I do.

Meanwhile, Robesin has posted my name, call and address much more than
I have.

That's so swell of him.

I guess when Mark posts Robesin's address and phone number, it's just
tit for tat. No?

Doesn't really matter as with the internet this information is findable one
way or another if one cares to go after it. Posting it here only shows that
you have the internet search skills of any average user and get some kind of
juvenile thrill out of posting it.

Dee, N8UZE

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

wrote in message
oups.com...

Dee Flint wrote:
wrote in message

So who do you think "Slow Code" is? Coslo? Miccolis? Roll? Deignan?
Dan, Dan the CB Radio Man?

Haven't a clue on Slow Code. The style doesn't sound like Coslo or
Miccolis.

Obviously it's someone who's been here awhile.

Don't really know the style of the other fellows writing.

Troll was the racist poster ("My favorite black on the bus...," and
"Welfare mothers of Color with their hands out...").

Deignan was the vanity callsign collector and the original "RF
Commando." He called me a liar when I said he had collected 12
callsigns, but I was wrong - one of the callsigns actually belonged to
his wife at the same address. So I guess I was a liar after all. I
should have known that he had a Ham Wife that collected vanity
callsigns, too.

Deignan's buddy in Hawaii loaned him his PO Box number so he could scam
some Hawaiin calls, meanwhile, the Hawaiin PO Box owner was scamming a
Guam callsign. Never been to Guam and could have operated /KH2 like I
did for two years. I guess a Hawaiin Call Stroke Guam Call is a pretty
cool thing...

Anyway, these are the guys who pass judgement on me because I am too
fat, lazy, and stupid to buy into the whole Morse Exam stuff at 5, and
then 13, and then 20 WPM.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

That's the beauty of anon postings, they don't have to follow their own
"style."

I began posting as hot-ham when I gave up Billy Beeper at Hans request.
I'd prefer to not post with my name and/or call as I used to, as I
seem to get lots and lots of spam when I do.

Meanwhile, Robesin has posted my name, call and address much more than
I have.

That's so swell of him.

I guess when Mark posts Robesin's address and phone number, it's just
tit for tat. No?

And when Roger Wiseman posts Mark's home address, phone number, etc., is
that just more "tit for tat"? Sorry, Billy, but I prefer to think of that as
maliciousness.

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

I don't particularly care for either one's tactics and stay out of that
mess.
no you supported him and hiss efort for the past few years by your
silence


Mark, you really DO crap on posts as SC says. Now this innocent woman
is"guilty" of supporting Steve through her silence? You truly are an idiot,
Mark. The fact that she has killfiled your and Steve's posts never entered
your convoluted mind, did it? In your twisted mind she is guilty if she
does, guilty if she doesn't.
No wonder you are so disliked by all in this group....




See my comment above. If I saw some one being threatened with violence and
it were within my power to do something about it, I would.
I was and am threatened with VIOLENCE on a regular basis and people
not in your killfile you say nothing you lift not the finger smallest
finger of your hand

How about if I raise a finger, Mark? Will my middle one do? Digital Salute!
The fact that you post ad-nauseum and call others "liers" never entered into
YOUR equation, did it?

then why do you employ it?

Why do you persist in continually butting in where you are clearly not
wanted?

www.marksspamblog.blogspot.com

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

wrote in message
...
On Sun, 29 Oct 2006 02:11:43 GMT, "U-Know-Who"
wrote:


wrote in message
. ..
On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 18:28:15 -0400, "Dee Flint"
wrote:


wrote in message
legroups.com...

wrote:
On 28 Oct 2006 14:01:31 -0700, wrote:


I mean Dee equates being able to do Morse Code (which she flasely
claims based on the lies she was taught is somehow related to basis
of
Radio Maxwells equations to data that wtries to keep someone from
hurting themselves, shows poor thinking process

Dee's doing the best she can with her self-imposed handicaps.


Well if you understood that garbled mess of a sentence, then my hat is
off
to you. Perhaps you should get a job as his interpreter.
obviously moirse fails to improve your abilitesi as an all round
comicator

Mork, you should make that last...um, sentence your sig.
why Tom?

Because it demonstrates just how pathetic your communication skills are.

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

How about if I raise a finger, Mark? Will my middle one do? Digital Salute!

Why do you persist in continually butting in where you are clearly not
wanted?

this a publice NG you certainly have no computction about "butting in
where you are not wanted"
...........
You didn't answer the question, Markie.

Why?

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

You didn't answer the question, Markie.
when you learn to quote properly I consider your questions and you
need to pove you are a real person with a name

I do not answer question to Persons unknown

/
You already did. And I do not "need to pove" anything to the likes of YOU,
Mark. You are, for the most part, an inconsequential flea, one that I toy
with at will.
Tell you what, Mark. When you learn to use a spell check program I'll use my
real name. Better yet. When you learn 5wpm and upgrade, I'll meet you on 17M
some afternoon and you can then learn my name AND callsign.

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

wrote in message
...
On Sun, 29 Oct 2006 00:48:53 -0500, "A. G. Bell" anon@anon wrote:


/
You already did.
learn to quote


....
Learn to spell.

--
"obviously moirse fails to improve your abilitesi as an all round comicator"

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

obviously moirse fails to improve your abilitesi as an all round
comicator

Mork, you should make that last...um, sentence your sig.
why Tom?

Because it demonstrates just how pathetic your communication skills are.
...........

Mark doesn't communicate. He obfuscates, argues, and butts in where he is
clearly not wanted.


--
"obviously moirse fails to improve your abilitesi as an all round comicator"

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

Dee Flint wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

Dee Flint wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...


[snip]


Dee, place all presently licensed USA amateurs in front of stations
equipped with a manual key AND CWGET. Have them operate operate any CW
Only Contest with whichever is more comfortable for them to use. Total
the scores...

I think you get the point.


Can't tell what your point is. Those experienced with code and using
only
their ears and brain will beat CWGet in any contest you care to name.

I didn't say, "those experienced..." I said all presently licensed USA
amateur radio operators...

Those who learn code will beat those who try to make CWGet do a job
(contesting) for which it is ill-suited.

And you keep changing the parameters of the challenge.

Are you saying that of those amateurs that learned the code, that they
are all still highly proficient in it? I think most learned the code
as a licensing hurdle, and never looked back.

Then there are the majority of hams who have no-code licenses...

It
doesn't do the job when there are a multitude of operators calling at the
same time. Also CWGet cannot copy the average manually keyed Morse code.
So whatever your point is, you didn't prove anything.

Even you have claimed to be a user of CWGet.

So what? When I'm in a contest, I use the best computer ever developed (the
human brain). When the person on the other end is sending manually keyed
code, again I use the good old brain. That I sometimes use CWGet is no
particular endorsement of it. It's a tool that I use when I'm tired and
still want to operate code. However unless the signal is of good quality
and volume, it ends up being necessary to go back to the good old human
brain. My decision then is to either put in the extra effort to focus or
just call it a night and go to bed.

OK.

I do NOT and never have believed in the arguments about "keeping out
the
riffraff", maintaining tradition, or the "I had to so you should to".

The "dumbing down" argument is just an extension of the "keeping out
the riff-raff" argument.

I've never mentioned the "dumbing down" argument. My point is that there
is
a body of basic knowledge that all should know. The difficulty arises in
determining what that basic knowledge should be. Generally, the
experienced
people should be the ones to define what constitutes basic knowledge.
The
beginners are too inexperienced to do so.

You couldn't be more wrong. The FCC should get to define what "basic
knowledge" is, and those that do the defining don't have a clue what
Morse Code is. But they've been buffaloed into believing that it tis
something magical.

Yes the FCC has the task of defining what that should be. However there is
NOTHING that prohibits them from consulting with people who have operating
experience.

They don't even have a definition of what Morse Code is within the
rules of the last service required to have a Morse Code exam. I think
that tells the story.

It's basic knowledge, pure and simple. Most of the people I know
don't
use
any of the theory either but it is part of the basic knowledge set.
I've
used ohm's law only a couple of times in the 14 years I've been
licensed.
I've used the dipole equation half a dozen times. I've never used
smith
charts. One could get by without the theory but having learned it, I
can
choose where I want to focus my attention in amateur ration.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Dee, you have a Ham Husband to take care of the Ohm's Law and Theory
end of your station, so it's no wonder you have no real use for it..

Please do not insult me by stereotyping like that.

You do not have a Ham Husband?

You are choosing to be obtuse.

I tell David Heil/K8MN that allatime.

Yes I have a Ham Husband but no he does not
take care of Ohm's law or Theory for me.

OK.

I happen to be a degreed
engineer (B.S. in Aerospace Engineering) with 20 years of applied
experience
in engineering (aerospace, nuclear, mechanical and automotive fields).

I can't help but think that all engineers, aerospace or civil or
otherwise, had to learn Ohm's Law as part of "thier" professional
certification. If I am wrong, then shame on the state of American
Engineerism, and shame on America. No wonder we're overrun with
engineers from India, Pakistan, China and Russia.

Mechanical engineers don't have a need for Ohm's law. They go hire the
electrical engineers. Aerospace engineering is a branch of mechanical
engineering (we don't get to drop the lesser terms in the equations since
they have a significant impact for our field). Again we go hire the
electrical engineers. Same with civil and structural engineers. On the
other hand electrical engineers generally do not study basic pressure vessal
theory but go hire the mechanical engineers for that.

You're talking about the working world.

Were you able to hire out your studies in college?

Were you able to hire out your PE exams?

Learning Oh,'s Law for a hobby is one thing, but a professional
engineer........

Again it depends on the field. We all studied common areas such as calculus
and fast fourier transforms but items unique to a field generally were not
taught across the board. We didn't study Ohms law and the electrical
engineers didn't study cantilever beam theory.

OK.

Should I happen to run into a need to use Ohms law and so on, I am
perfectly
capable of doing so. In addition, I was the one who taught the class for
our club members who wished to upgrade to Extra, a class which my husband
attended so that he could upgrade from General to Extra.

You have ASSumed and made a donkey of yourself.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Be kind enough to show where. Merely claiming to be an engineer
without a use for Ohm's Law or Radio Theory is not enough.

You assumed that I needed help from my OM on theory, etc. That is the area
to which I referred.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

So you do use ohm's law and theory, you just don't think it belongs in
amateur licensing?

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

Dee Flint wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

wrote:

The ONLY separate pass-fail TEST is for manual telegraphy.

Wow! I guess CW is more valued than ALL OF THE OTHER MODES COMBINED!

Not so. However, all the digital and image modes are merely a matter of
connecting the radio to the computer and running the appropriate software.

Then why do the military service have technical schools to do somehting
so very simple?

Why aren't the communications billets merely a direct duty assignment
after basic training?

Once I decided to try the digital thing, I made the interface and was up and
running in an hour. After a couple of months, it became rather boring.

Do you suppose that there are licensed amateurs that find CW boring?

On
the other hand, code needs to be learned before it can be tried. Many
people will give up learning before they've had a chance to try it if there
is not a test for it.

Whole government agencies gave up on code. Commercial businesses gave
up on code.

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

Slow Code wrote:

I expect you'll say the same thing about the written exam in ten years too.

SC

Not me. Jim/N2EY is the one who trotted out that strawman. I guess if
he can't have amateur radio the way he wants it, he'll make sure it
becomes a non-technical hobby.

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

A. G. Bell wrote:

Sorry, Billy, but I prefer to think of that as
maliciousness.

Agreed. Especially when he expresses a desire to get to someone's wife
or children.

Bell, what are you using to post with? It's not attributing correctly.
bb

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

Dee Flint wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

Dee Flint wrote:
wrote in message

So who do you think "Slow Code" is? Coslo? Miccolis? Roll? Deignan?
Dan, Dan the CB Radio Man?

Haven't a clue on Slow Code. The style doesn't sound like Coslo or
Miccolis.

Obviously it's someone who's been here awhile.

Don't really know the style of the other fellows writing.

Troll was the racist poster ("My favorite black on the bus...," and
"Welfare mothers of Color with their hands out...").

I delete such without reading them and generally delete all the resulting
posts.

Yep. That's a helluva thing for a 20 year veteran to be saying. I'm
sure he had to spend a fair amount of time in the "Social Actions"
office with them trying to reeducate him. And the totally laughable
part of all that was that he said he had a degree in human resources
and was trying to land a position in that field.

Deignan was the vanity callsign collector and the original "RF
Commando." He called me a liar when I said he had collected 12
callsigns, but I was wrong - one of the callsigns actually belonged to
his wife at the same address. So I guess I was a liar after all. I
should have known that he had a Ham Wife that collected vanity
callsigns, too.

There are way too many people that confuse honest mistakes with lying.
Don't be one of them.

I'm not, though I do throw it in Robesin's face when he call an opinion
that differes from his "A LIE!"

The FCC has been getting on people for doing that and
making them justify the calls or give them up.

They got on Deignan, too.

Deignan's buddy in Hawaii loaned him his PO Box number so he could scam
some Hawaiin calls, meanwhile, the Hawaiin PO Box owner was scamming a
Guam callsign. Never been to Guam and could have operated /KH2 like I
did for two years. I guess a Hawaiin Call Stroke Guam Call is a pretty
cool thing...

Don't see why. But again the FCC is getting wise to such antics.

With some of these guys they think it adds to their credential. It's
like the JA's using a JA owned hotel address on Guam to get the Guam
1x2 calls.

But collecting 11 different call and then turning some of them into
Hawaiin calls is just another form of megalomania that we see on RRAP.

In QRZ.com, in the name search, type in "RF Commando" or something like
that. Nevermind, I'll do it...

There are 1 records matching +rf* +commando*

KB1CCE RF COMMANDOS RHODE ISLAND CHAPTER

There are 3 records matching +Deignan*

KH6HZ DEIGNAN MICHAEL P (This one is a Hawaiin call with a MA addy)
WE1RD MICHAEL P DEIGNAN REPEATER ASSOCIATION (This one in Rhode Island,
weird)

The 3rd is a yl in Canada, so I'm not posting that.

Anyway, all three of the above calls are at different addresses.

Anyway, these are the guys who pass judgement on me because I am too
fat, lazy, and stupid to buy into the whole Morse Exam stuff at 5, and
then 13, and then 20 WPM.

Depends on how bad you want the privileges. Just don't ask for something
for nothing. Originally I had no interest in ham radio but my husband at
the time dragged me to a class as something we could do together. As I got
involved, I found it interesting. I deduced very early on that what I
wanted to get out of ham radio would best be served by going all the way to
Extra. Since I wanted the privileges, I met the requirements including the
20 wpm.

So if he dragged you to a class, how did you end up presiding over the
class that took him to Extra?

Not everyone wants those privileges. Kim is a case in point. She is a Tech
Plus and could have gotten her General with just a written test and no
further code testing as of April 2000. She chose not to because she did not
really like HF operations. The typical background static of HF bothers her.
Her interests lie in VHF and up. Since she has full privileges there, the
General does not serve her goals.

Yep. Technician is a whole lot of priveleges.

That's the beauty of anon postings, they don't have to follow their own
"style."

Very true. But it takes a lot of discipline to consistently write in a
different style and not make tell tale slips. When Len Anderson was posting
as Avery Fineman, it was quite obvious they were the same person.

When I post as Hot-Ham, there's no intent to deceive. There is an
intent to have a throw-away email address that I've checked the mailbox
content about twice. It can fill up with all that spam that the
spammers desire.

I Am What I Am. That a famous quote of Popeye.

I began posting as hot-ham when I gave up Billy Beeper at Hans request.
I'd prefer to not post with my name and/or call as I used to, as I
seem to get lots and lots of spam when I do.

Meanwhile, Robesin has posted my name, call and address much more than
I have.

That's so swell of him.

I guess when Mark posts Robesin's address and phone number, it's just
tit for tat. No?

Doesn't really matter as with the internet this information is findable one
way or another if one cares to go after it. Posting it here only shows that
you have the internet search skills of any average user and get some kind of
juvenile thrill out of posting it.

Dee, N8UZE

The intent is to intimidate.

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

Dee Flint wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

Dee Flint wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

Dee Flint wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

Slow Code wrote:

Larry, Dee and Me are the only pro 'Keep the code test' people in
the
group anymore.

SC

Then the presentation of sound reasoning has been successful.

No most of them have left due to the spam created by Mark Morgan,

I see Mark Morgan as the necessary balance in the vicious postings by
Robesin.

He doesn't need to create dozens of posts to refute each one.

You don't get to decide that. Has Robesin accused you of lesbian
encounters or pedophilia?

When he does, I'll be sure to keep track of the ratio of Robesin
postings to Dee postings.

Well if such an odd thing should ever happen, I'll killfile him. I refuse
to get sucked into such stupidity.

And one day when your job depends on a security background
investigation and accusations of homosexuality, pedophilia, and rape...



Many of
Mark's posts are and were quite vicious.

Um, yeh. It's really awful, isn't it? Almost as bad as accusing
people of rape.

I killfiled Morgan the day he made
unacceptable comments about Steve's deceased daughter.

Did you know that his daughter was severly retarded, and he makes jokes
about "the short bus" on RRAP? I doubt that his daughter was well off
enough to ride the short bus that Robesin pokes fun at..

I don't particularly care for either one's tactics and stay out of that
mess.

Fair enough.

We actually have very little in common. We both claim to be
amateur radio operator and military veterans. I got chopped to the US
Army twice, so I know a little bit about the Army. I also got chopped
to the US Navy once, and there and at service schools, and in Somalia,
was fairly close to the USMC.

As far as amateur radio goes, the only one of these bozos I've ever
QSO'd was Heil when I was DX on Guam.

the
interminable pontification of Len Anderson,

Yeh, well, we have Jim who served in other ways. I'm sure he has
something to be proud of, too, but so far he hasn't mentioned it in
other ways.

I happen to remember the post. He said that one can serve in other ways.
He did not say whether he himself served in the military or in other
ways.

Even worse.

Yet based on that comment, Len Anderson and others have made ASSumptions.

Jim's had YEARS to clarify, and he's been questioned SPECIFICALLY about
that comment.

the compulsive responses that
some seem to feel that they must post to the spam, the vulgarity of
people
like Opus,

I guess you conveniently forgot Dan and Bruce's postings to Kim....

Long time ago, but I think I mentioned it was stupid of them.

Stupid? It was sexual harassment. That's illegal isn't it?

Hard to say. One would have to weigh it against the specific wording of the
law and adjudicated cases to determine if it was or was not illegal.

Good side-step.

Are Bruce and Dan in your killfile? Are "thier" anonymous characters
in your killfile?

However,
she's an adult and is capable of dealing with these people on her own.

Yeh, right. You didn't like her politics, so she's on her own.

How do you come to that conclusion? I know very little about her politics
and it wouldn't matter if I did. As I recall, she defended her choice far
better than I or anyone else could have done it for her. I supported her
right to choose a legally available call sign even though I thought her
choice a little strange. It's not within my power to make others accept it.

Talk about not just sexist, but bonifide sexual harassment (and Jim
never once chimed in to say boo)....

As tasteless and tacky as it was, it may not have actually meet the legal
definition of sexual harassment. She was not threatened with a job loss or
with an overall loss in her quality of life. Discussion groups are not for
the faint of heart, especially ones like these newsgroups. Participation in
these news groups does not contribute to quality of life in any significant
way. It is an idle and insignificant form of recreation.

She chose the call sign.

I believe she did.

Yup. A simple check of the call sign database shows that it is a vanity
call. So it was hers by choice. I don't recall for sure but didn't she say
she did it on a dare?

Never filled out a Form 610 while drunk? Me either.

It's not up to him or me or any one else to defend
her other than to say it was her right. I believe that I commented that
I
thought it was a poor choice but it was up to her.

I believe you did just that.

So when a YL wearing a slit skirt and a push-up bra gets raped...?

Not the same thing at all and you very well know it.

True, by magnitudes. But it's still abuse.

Her overall quality of
life is seriously affected and her life could even be in danger. Besides
rapists don't care what the victim is wearing. They are looking for some
one they can successfully dominate and terrorize. The shy school girl in
the dowdy clothes hurrying home with her books clutched to her chest is just
as likely or even more likely to be raped than the brazen hookers down on
Eight Mile (that's a Detroit reference).

Dee from Deetroit? I like Michigan but Detroit isn't my favorite
place.

Was she asking for it and is she on her own?

See my comment above. If I saw some one being threatened with violence and
it were within my power to do something about it, I would. It wouldn't
matter if it were that shy school girl or that brazen hooker. Today, I'd
have to limit myself to calling for help but in my younger, more fit days,
I'd also have taken an active (i.e. physical) part in her defense.

Fair enough.

the slamming that people like Slow Code do to those who licensed
or will license under the current system and so on.

He's only saying what the PCTA Extras would like to say without their
callsigns attached to it.

I'm a pro code test advocate and an Extra.

I would never have guessed.

I would never hide behind
anonymity.

Jim does.

And I do not hold the candidates responsible for the quality or
extent of the tests. They have no choice in the matter. What the new
ham
does have a choice in is to either stagnate or progress. He can gain the
experience to then join in discussions and contribute or he can put his
foot
in his mouth with such inexperienced statements as "you need an amplifier
to
work DX" or "you can't work Texas from Michigan on VHF". However even
then,
I try to avoid anything that could be taken as a put down because I want
them to stay in ham radio and grow and develop. I'll invite them over to
work a contest with my measly 100 watts or I'll introduce them to one of
the
QRP enthusiasts. I'll invite them to work the VHF station at Field Day
and
pair them up with one of our VHF experts. It's called being a good ham
and
an Elmer.

No "shack on a belt" quips?

Nope. Why should I? It accomplishes nothing. I want people to enjoy ham
radio. I want their motivation to develop to be based on the joy they get
out of it and the joy they see others get out of it. Sarcasm does not serve
that objective.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

I think amateur radio is one of the best hobbies ever, and it can also
serve in an emergency communications roll.

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

wrote:

no you supported him and hiss efort for the past few years by your
silence

Don't know about this

if you will be going out to eat with him I will be glad to spring
for the $ and would love to tag along to discuss all this

mk5000

"Hey George, I'm a double rapper. I rap them with my mouth and then I
rap them in the mouth.' --Muhamad Ali

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?