|
People who aren't on RRAP
|
People who aren't on RRAP
|
People who aren't on RRAP
wrote: wrote: Dee Flint wrote: wrote in message oups.com... Dee Flint wrote: wrote in message oups.com... Dee Flint wrote: wrote in message ups.com... wrote: wrote: will be deciding what to do with it... http://www.qrz.com/ib-bin/ikonboard....T&f=3&t=142786 How will they do that? They will use the proposed method. What did you think? Those folks aren't proposing to shut down RRAP. They are simply proposing to create a moderated version. They are? People will have the choice to post to either or both newsgroups. They will? However, much of what gets posted to RRAP will not get through the moderation process on the other group. It won't? By your first question above, you indicate that you don't know very much about the process. Now you pretend to have all of the answers. Besides, why should it bother you if people who aren't on rrap decide what to do with it? They aren't doing anything to rrap. It will continue to exist and those who wish to do so will continue to post. Dee, N8UZE I think the express purpose is to limit those who would wish to continue to post. It does not stop anyone from posting to rrap. Dee, N8UZE I'm sure you'll enjoy your little cocoon where never is heard a dissenting opinion. Well that's interesting because the moderators will either have to block me or block everyone else since I've disagreed with most people at one time or another on something. The cross postings from outside the amateur radio groups the last few days have really been annoying. Dee, N8UZE Dee, it's no worse than Robesin's "excrement eating" posting, but no one seems to mind that. Robesin is a code-tested amateur extra. Those title-holders can do anything they want anywhere...according to them. Ahem...look at the list of "moderators" and the Titles they hold. QED. LA The new group will be like "Home, home on the range..." "Where never is heard a dissenting word..." |
People who aren't on RRAP
wrote in message oups.com... Dee Flint wrote: wrote in message oups.com... Dee Flint wrote: wrote in message oups.com... Dee Flint wrote: wrote in message ups.com... wrote: wrote: will be deciding what to do with it... http://www.qrz.com/ib-bin/ikonboard....T&f=3&t=142786 How will they do that? They will use the proposed method. What did you think? Those folks aren't proposing to shut down RRAP. They are simply proposing to create a moderated version. They are? People will have the choice to post to either or both newsgroups. They will? However, much of what gets posted to RRAP will not get through the moderation process on the other group. It won't? By your first question above, you indicate that you don't know very much about the process. Now you pretend to have all of the answers. Besides, why should it bother you if people who aren't on rrap decide what to do with it? They aren't doing anything to rrap. It will continue to exist and those who wish to do so will continue to post. Dee, N8UZE I think the express purpose is to limit those who would wish to continue to post. It does not stop anyone from posting to rrap. Dee, N8UZE I'm sure you'll enjoy your little cocoon where never is heard a dissenting opinion. Well that's interesting because the moderators will either have to block me or block everyone else since I've disagreed with most people at one time or another on something. The cross postings from outside the amateur radio groups the last few days have really been annoying. Dee, N8UZE Dee, it's no worse than Robesin's "excrement eating" posting, but no one seems to mind that. Well I've found that it's pointless and ineffective to admonish those who post objectionable material. I'm not going to waste my time. Much more fun to debate license classes. Dee, N8UZE |
People who aren't on RRAP
Dee Flint wrote: wrote in message oups.com... Dee Flint wrote: wrote in message oups.com... Dee, N8UZE Dee, it's no worse than Robesin's "excrement eating" posting, but no one seems to mind that. Well I've found that it's pointless and ineffective to admonish those who post objectionable material. Funny I more or less selinced him if I had had your help it could have been done easier and more effctively I'm not going to waste my time. Hmm I am member of what you term an iferioir can do something you can't? Much more fun to debate license classes. Dee, N8UZE |
People who aren't on RRAP
Dee Flint wrote: wrote in message oups.com... Dee Flint wrote: wrote in message oups.com... Dee Flint wrote: wrote in message oups.com... Dee Flint wrote: wrote in message ups.com... wrote: wrote: will be deciding what to do with it... http://www.qrz.com/ib-bin/ikonboard....T&f=3&t=142786 How will they do that? They will use the proposed method. What did you think? Those folks aren't proposing to shut down RRAP. They are simply proposing to create a moderated version. They are? People will have the choice to post to either or both newsgroups. They will? However, much of what gets posted to RRAP will not get through the moderation process on the other group. It won't? By your first question above, you indicate that you don't know very much about the process. Now you pretend to have all of the answers. Besides, why should it bother you if people who aren't on rrap decide what to do with it? They aren't doing anything to rrap. It will continue to exist and those who wish to do so will continue to post. Dee, N8UZE I think the express purpose is to limit those who would wish to continue to post. It does not stop anyone from posting to rrap. Dee, N8UZE I'm sure you'll enjoy your little cocoon where never is heard a dissenting opinion. Well that's interesting because the moderators will either have to block me or block everyone else since I've disagreed with most people at one time or another on something. The cross postings from outside the amateur radio groups the last few days have really been annoying. Dee, N8UZE Dee, it's no worse than Robesin's "excrement eating" posting, but no one seems to mind that. Well I've found that it's pointless and ineffective to admonish those who post objectionable material. I'm not going to waste my time. Robesin interprets that as "approval." Much more fun to debate license classes. Dee, N8UZE |
People who aren't on RRAP
|
People who aren't on RRAP
|
People who aren't on RRAP
From: Dave Heil on Fri, Jan 19 2007 4:26 pm
wrote: It's been the style of the morsemen on this newsgroup... There's no such thing as "morsemen", Len. Then YOU "don't exist" morseman Heil. :-) ...to belittle, denigrate, enage in prissy little pedantic diatribes... It is amazing that those very words fit your own style, Leonard. Awwww...feeling snarly again, Colonel Klunk? :-) Oh, my, you still can't lose your arrogant sneering, can you? Maybe you dislike being a little red-hatted monkey dancing for organ grinder Miccolis? You want to "grind his organ," do you? :-) ...over words that do not fit in the code-tested amateur extra "expertise" opinions on What Is Good For [US] Amateur Radio. You have lots of opinions on what is good for amateur radio. No, Herr Robust, I've been advocating subjects concerning GETTING INTO US amateur radio. GETTING INTO. As in the TESTS necessary for GETTING INTO it. That change of law (regulations) is about to be realized about the middle of next week (if we can believe the 'insiders' at the ARRL - Chris Imlay and his partners/staff probably). You've never in your life had an amateur radio license. RIIIIIGHT!!! My, my, aren't you so schmardtt! Must have taken your poor little 16 synapses all day to calculate that! Oh, but wait...you were BORN with an amateur radio license? Don't tell us you did the "USAF thing" and "never went to school" on that? Last I looked, absolutely NOBODY was born with a ham radio license. Everyone who has an amateur radio license NEVER HAD ONE IN THEIR LIFE before the were granted one! Really. Funny thing, Herr Robust Oberst, but NOBODY AT THE FCC IS *REQUIRED* TO HAVE AN AMATEUR RADIO LICENSE! Those are the folks who grant ham licenses, remember? Those are the folks who decide the law on US amateur radio! Sunnuvagun! Ain't that somethin' tho? Herr Oberst, did you think that *I* "swung" the FCC into their decision on 06-178? I don't think so. Half of the document containing FCC 06-178 is devoted to nothing but names of those who commented on the NPRM. Not all of those had ham licenses...or even amateur radio licenses! Really! You see, it's one of the really neat things about American government and the RIGHTS of citizens...we can ALL comment to our government. Really. It's a guarantee of our Constitution. Really. Now, Herr Robust, you LOSE that threadbare Waffen SS uniform and the silly monocle. Your tuff guy act is trite, old, and out of place. Don't try to intimidate anyone with your bluster and bluff. It may work on teen-agers but not with us adults. We see through your pathetic little attempts at mind games. Those just don't work. Get a new act...like imitating a human being...then others wouldn't think you were such a prick. FCC 06-178 has been decided. The code test will be GONE. Your "operator expertise" schtick is going to be broken. All you will be able to do is cry in your pablum and prune juice about "your" good old days when "you were tall dog in the pound" with your "CW" skills and your amateur Titles. Fork you and the hearse you rode in on... |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:42 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com