|
Schlecks' Schlock!
On Jan 28, 1:39 am, John Smith I wrote: To Whom It May Concern: Just so you have a complete picture of Paul W. Schleck, I took the following from one of his posts in news.groups.proposals: "Mark Morgan, KB9RQZ, is correct that all of our proposed moderators and consultants hold the highest class of Amateur Radio Service license in their countries (Amateur Extra for the U.S. team members, Class A or similar in the case of Jack Cook, who holds both UK and Australian licenses). However, that doesn't mean that we would be judgemental or unfair to other classes of license. We would certainly be open to adding moderators to our team that hold other classes of license. We will certainly decline articles that are disrespectful to or prejudicial against other participants for any reason, including license class. We would prefer to judge ideas, and take posts at face value, rather than prejudge individuals and credentials in a vacuum." Now that just speaks volumes about this man, his caliber, his "ethical standards", etc. Now, doesn't it? Gawd! I feel sick ... Warmest regards, JS JS, I dunno. You have to recall that for the very longest time (and still) there has been prejudice against No-Code Technicians. They are "stupid, lazy, knuckledraggers with southern accents, welfare mothers of color with their hands out, etc, etc, etc." Only recently have people questioned the megalomania of certain Extras, their need to have a government crutch to maintain their self- worth and status, etc. So just as the sword began to cut both ways... What you won't be able to get to in this "judge ideas, and take posts at face value" is the motivations of individuals who present ideas, and make posts at face value. For example, we will never know why people would eat Robesin's excrement, only that he says they do. |
Schlecks' Schlock!
|
Schlecks' Schlock!
|
Schlecks' Schlock!
On Jan 28, 12:08 pm, John Smith I wrote: wrote: ... JS, I dunno. You have to recall that for the very longest time (and still) there has been prejudice against No-Code Technicians. They are "stupid, lazy, knuckledraggers with southern accents, welfare mothers of color with their hands out, etc, etc, etc." ...HHAC: I "over-complex-ified" my other response to this. Put simply, Einstein would still be Einstein, given an EXTRA CLASS license, or not ... of tech class I doubt if Einstein had become a ham he could have ever passed the code test at least not without depriving the world of a lot of what he did bring us I am the only that has read einstein and fathomed thorough his mind that way? Regards, JS |
Schlecks' Schlock!
an_old_friend wrote:
... I am the only that has read einstein and fathomed thorough his mind that way? Regards, JS AOF: It would be a lie to say I could "fathom" Einstein, I only attempt to stand within his shadow, possibly, someday, upon his shoulders ... well, I can dream ... Regards, JS |
Schlecks' Schlock!
On Jan 28, 1:23 pm, John Smith I wrote: an_old_friend wrote: ... I am the only that has read einstein and fathomed thorough his mind that way? Regards, JSAOF: It would be a lie to say I could "fathom" Einstein, I only attempt to stand within his shadow, possibly, someday, upon his shoulders ... well, I can dream ... I can fathom at least part of it I find interesting that Einstien and I do both suffer from/are gifted with dyslexia and some of it fellow travelers in what are LD's today because they do not fit well in our educational system I can understand and fathom what of his materail I can read ( and I have once gotten to read some of hand written stuff a truely taxing task with the depth of his dyslexia I can assure you, they are hand written and in some way worse in spelling and conventcail gramuar than much of my own writting indeed reading his work is one of things that convince me that the ability to spell is highly over rated esp by many posters here working through what he says gives an understand quite impossible in the polished drafted and somehwant flatened nature of his published work indeed reading einstain in few photocopies peiece of his original text is one of the reason i refuse to polish my own work further I suspect the reaction I get is in part due to the fact that in having to work for it they reader is getting my thoiought at a deeper and more distrubing level which is exactly what I want and likely something that would be banned by Pual et al I can't lead on to futher explorations in that feild which is why I moves from Physics to Geologigy and govt work Regards, JS |
Schlecks' Schlock!
wrote:
JS, I dunno. You have to recall that for the very longest time (and still) there has been prejudice against No-Code Technicians. They are "stupid, lazy, knuckledraggers with southern accents, welfare mothers of color with their hands out, etc, etc, etc." Only recently have people questioned the megalomania of certain Extras, their need to have a government crutch to maintain their self- worth and status, etc. So just as the sword began to cut both ways... What you won't be able to get to in this "judge ideas, and take posts at face value" is the motivations of individuals who present ideas, and make posts at face value. For example, we will never know why people would eat Robesin's excrement, only that he says they do. HHAC: [BRIAN BURKE, N0IMD] Yes, there is "prejudice" and it has been there a long, long time, I kinda of like the ncts though (no code techs.) I think they may be individuals who have no talent for code, are busy supporting a family and use more of their time paying bills and medical expenses, more than anything else--yes, paul and his bunch call them names ... I disagree with your term "Paul and his bunch." I do not charge Paul Schleck with being anything other than an on-line politician, the type that thinks they know all the answers. That comes largely from: Past history of Schleck has him ocasionally wanting to get in the thick of a contentious discussion in public and, to some, trying to continue that in private e-mail in an effort to enforce his will on them. Shrug. Not any sort of felonious act. From a sizeable experience in moderating BBS (Bulletin Board Systems, the precursor to the Internet) public boards, a moderator SHOULD NOT EVER get "involved" publicly in any contentious subject where they side with one group or another. Trying to mix it up in a virtual tag- team match always results in FAILURE TO PROPERLY MODERATE. They are BIASED. The ONLY thing that moderators CAN do EFFECTIVELY is to issue notices, advise on behavior of all. Moderators should walk softly and silently, carrying a large fire extinguisher. That works. And, yes, EXTRA class license holders tend to think of that paper as a doctor degree--but, a doctorate degree in what, a darn hobby? It isn't ... The FCC was NEVER chartered to be an academic institution. Look, hot ham, let us put this in perspective, if Paul was my next door neighbor, we might have a cup of coffee in the morning and a beer in the evening over the fence. I might like the PERSON of Paul W. Schleck--I certainly consider him no monster. Here, I only refute his ideas, conceptions, constructs, methods and goals. I hold the man Paul away from his tactics--it is his tactics I have the bone to pick with here. Irrelevant to THIS ENVIRONMENT. This environment is solely composed of words on screens which are variously "colored" by the imaginations of the readers. Some readers attempt to "interpret the unspoken words" for their own nefarious purposes. MOST readers, I suspect, simply get the GIST of what is written in normal information interchange of in-person communications. However, the amount of interchange is itself limited to the ability of writers to convey their thoughts...there are no clues such as tone of voice nor additional expressions of emotion. Such normal in- person clues must be derived from the gist, the body of the words. Down here in the entertainment capitol of the world, one encounters ACTORS. Really good actors can have all the appearance of any range between saint and sinner, educated or woefully ignorant. At first one CANNOT distinguish their character from the real person lurking (or hiding) inside. With sufficient dialogue in-person one can begin to discern the person and differentiate them from the character. This usually leads to the discovery that they are supremely driven by EMOTION, not logical reasoning (emotion is the essence of their craft) with high degrees of EGO. It takes ego and chutzpah to get up in front of an audience and be someone entirely different...and be believable as that character. In computer-modem comms there is a strong analogy to ACTING in that most of the normal in-person clues are missing, nothing of sight or sound, a sort of perception twilight zone where the perceptor's imagination can run wild. Imaginations are triggered by what another writes, how they write it, and the ego-emotional overlay from the gist of the text. The writer may not be aware of the effect of what he/she writes has on readers. Professional wordsmiths and marketing ad copy writers are aware but those are rare in this somewhat homogenous grouping. Most simply write as they have spoken to others for years. Bottom line is that this medium is part "stage" but the egos and chutzpahs are generally doing the driving. One CANNOT EFFECTIVELY delve into the real personna of the writer without a great deal of message copy to serve as a basis of judgement. That has little to do with their in-person appearance-behavior-identification. Excuse me, I have to go off and read another "uphill- through-the-snow-both-ways-while-barefoot" tale of vast, heroic, struggle to get their ham license collitch degree. Such realism! We must honor all those who were on the Great March. Sigh. Diss regards, LA |
Schlecks' Schlock!
On Jan 28, 11:44 am, John Smith I wrote: wrote: ... JS, I dunno. You have to recall that for the very longest time (and still) there has been prejudice against No-Code Technicians. They are "stupid, lazy, knuckledraggers with southern accents, welfare mothers of color with their hands out, etc, etc, etc." Only recently have people questioned the megalomania of certain Extras, their need to have a government crutch to maintain their self- worth and status, etc. So just as the sword began to cut both ways... What you won't be able to get to in this "judge ideas, and take posts at face value" is the motivations of individuals who present ideas, and make posts at face value. For example, we will never know why people would eat Robesin's excrement, only that he says they do.HHAC: Yes, there is "prejudice" and it has been there a long, long time, I kinda of like the ncts though (no code techs.) I think they may be individuals who have no talent for code, are busy supporting a family and use more of their time paying bills and medical expenses, more than anything else--yes, paul and his bunch call them names ... I haven't seen that from Paul. And, yes, EXTRA class license holders tend to think of that paper as a doctor degree--but, a doctorate degree in what, a darn hobby? It isn't ... When I see a ham behaving badly, it doesn't surprise me when I learn that the ham is an Extra. That isn't to say that all Extras behave badly. Look, hot ham, let us put this in perspective, if Paul was my next door neighbor, we might have a cup of coffee in the morning and a beer in the evening over the fence. I might like the PERSON of Paul W. Schleck--I certainly consider him no monster. KH2D for example. I consider him a friend. Most of the hams that I've agreed with and disagreed with on RRAP could be a friend should I ever meet them in person. There are several who I think are dangerous. Here, I only refute his ideas, conceptions, constructs, methods and goals. I hold the man Paul away from his tactics--it is his tactics I have the bone to pick with here. Fair enough. Pick away. I think after all the nicey-nice backslapping on the moderated group, they'll get sick of hearing the same-o, same-o from their cloned bretheren and be back on RRAP to hear what thinking people have to say. You comments are greatly appreciated, valid and a good example of how discussion should happen here--thanks! You're welcome. Warmest regards, JS- Hide quoted text -- Show quoted text - bb |
Schlecks' Schlock!
On Jan 28, 12:08 pm, John Smith I wrote: wrote: ... JS, I dunno. You have to recall that for the very longest time (and still) there has been prejudice against No-Code Technicians. They are "stupid, lazy, knuckledraggers with southern accents, welfare mothers of color with their hands out, etc, etc, etc." ...HHAC: I "over-complex-ified" my other response to this. Put simply, Einstein would still be Einstein, given an EXTRA CLASS license, or not ... Many Extras consider themselves Einsteins... They are not. |
Schlecks' Schlock!
|
Schlecks' Schlock!
On Jan 28, 2:09?pm, wrote: On Jan 28, 12:08 pm, John Smith I wrote: wrote: Many Extras consider themselves Einsteins... They are not. True...but they have Relatives! [relatively speaking, that is... :-) ] LA |
Schlecks' Schlock!
On Jan 28, 11:44 am, John Smith I wrote:
wrote: ... JS, I dunno. You have to recall that for the very longest time (and still) there has been prejudice against No-Code Technicians. They are "stupid, lazy, knuckledraggers with southern accents, welfare mothers of color with their hands out, etc, etc, etc." [and those were the least derogatory comments! :-) ] Only recently have people questioned the megalomania of certain Extras, their need to have a government crutch to maintain their self- worth and status, etc. [Okay, I'm not a "people"...I was saying that years ago :-)] So just as the sword began to cut both ways... What you won't be able to get to in this "judge ideas, and take posts at face value" is the motivations of individuals who present ideas, and make posts at face value. For example, we will never know why people would eat Robesin's excrement, only that he says they do. HHAC: Yes, there is "prejudice" and it has been there a long, long time, I kinda of like the ncts though (no code techs.) I think they may be individuals who have no talent for code, are busy supporting a family and use more of their time paying bills and medical expenses, more than anything else--yes, paul and his bunch call them names ... I haven't seen that from Paul. I agree but only part way. Schleck's explanations word it as if there was "never" any moderator activity anywhere else and his Usenet-Internet group is the "only" group that can handle it. That is, to put it most delicately, utter cow-flop. The BBSs were beginning to go national in networking in the early 1980s and hundreds of BBS Sysops were having to MODERATE thousands of users and subscribers. Their executive (main computer) software was already designed with Moderator's Controls to effect that moderation. I was there. I saw it. I used it. I've even talked to two different BBS software writer- designers. I've been a moderator on three different BBSs. Apparently that doesn't "count." quizical look Not of academia (despite having macadmias) I am brushed aside. It SEEMS to be the usual academic NIT syndrome. It SEEMS like only THEY (the academics) have the "smarts" to do it. The usual brush-aside is mentioning USENET out of ARPANET, supposedly all academic institutions. Actually no, both involved BOTH academia and corporations involved in defense work as well as instrumentation makers. Tsk, I was there on ARPANET for a short while, on USENET for a short while. Be damned if I ever saw any "moderation" on either many years ago. :-( And, yes, EXTRA class license holders tend to think of that paper as a doctor degree--but, a doctorate degree in what, a darn hobby? It isn't ... When I see a ham behaving badly, it doesn't surprise me when I learn that the ham is an Extra. That isn't to say that all Extras behave badly. It's almost a truism that the visible percentage of voluble amateur extras in here are that way. They wound so easily, the poor dears. KH2D for example. I consider him a friend. Most of the hams that I've agreed with and disagreed with on RRAP could be a friend should I ever meet them in person. There are several who I think are dangerous. By example of early DeJaVu archives (now Google's), Jim Kehler was, in my honest opinion, one of the WORST of the sarcastic, arrogant, in-your-face sort in his postings to me. I'm sorry if that bothers you, Brian, but this target of his frustrations and sarcasm didn't much like him. I classify Cranky Spanky as a junior grade sissy version of Kehler. Too bad Cranky was never stuck on Guam for years...he would have loved being where all the comms to the rest of the world were by HF. Wonder if Cranky has ever taken up golf? :-) I think after all the nicey-nice backslapping on the moderated group, they'll get sick of hearing the same-o, same-o from their cloned bretheren and be back on RRAP to hear what thinking people have to say. HAR! Beautiful, Brian. :-) They will find, after a while, that their little clubhouse elite is a very small place after all. Claustrophobia will set in or they will get drunk on their own high-fives. Or, they might bail to other places like eham.net and make out like they single-handedly worked stations side by side with Maxim or Marconi doing "pioneering" adventures in radio...that none of them could possibly have done. 146s, LA |
Schlecks' Schlock!
On Jan 28, 8:36 pm, " wrote: On Jan 28, 11:44 am, John Smith I wrote: wrote: ... JS, I dunno. You have to recall that for the very longest time (and still) there has been prejudice against No-Code Technicians. They are "stupid, lazy, knuckledraggers with southern accents, welfare mothers of color with their hands out, etc, etc, etc." [and those were the least derogatory comments! :-) ] You gotta wonder which of the regulars are/were posting anonymously. Really hair-brained stuff. Only recently have people questioned the megalomania of certain Extras, their need to have a government crutch to maintain their self- worth and status, etc. [Okay, I'm not a "people"...I was saying that years ago :-)] Yep, without naming names... So just as the sword began to cut both ways... What you won't be able to get to in this "judge ideas, and take posts at face value" is the motivations of individuals who present ideas, and make posts at face value. For example, we will never know why people would eat Robesin's excrement, only that he says they do. HHAC: Yes, there is "prejudice" and it has been there a long, long time, I kinda of like the ncts though (no code techs.) I think they may be individuals who have no talent for code, are busy supporting a family and use more of their time paying bills and medical expenses, more than anything else--yes, paul and his bunch call them names ... I haven't seen that from Paul. I agree but only part way. Schleck's explanations word it as if there was "never" any moderator activity anywhere else and his Usenet-Internet group is the "only" group that can handle it. That is, to put it most delicately, utter cow-flop. The BBSs were beginning to go national in networking in the early 1980s and hundreds of BBS Sysops were having to MODERATE thousands of users and subscribers. Their executive (main computer) software was already designed with Moderator's Controls to effect that moderation. I was there. I saw it. I used it. I've even talked to two different BBS software writer- designers. I've been a moderator on three different BBSs. Apparently that doesn't "count." quizical look Not of academia (despite having macadmias) I am brushed aside. It SEEMS to be the usual academic NIT syndrome. It SEEMS like only THEY (the academics) have the "smarts" to do it. The usual brush-aside is mentioning USENET out of ARPANET, supposedly all academic institutions. Actually no, both involved BOTH academia and corporations involved in defense work as well as instrumentation makers. Tsk, I was there on ARPANET for a short while, on USENET for a short while. Be damned if I ever saw any "moderation" on either many years ago. :-( I'm disturbed that there was little or no discussion, and suddenly we have a "solution," complete with with a list of moderators that no one has ever heard of, nevermind that they are all Extras. And, yes, EXTRA class license holders tend to think of that paper as a doctor degree--but, a doctorate degree in what, a darn hobby? It isn't ... When I see a ham behaving badly, it doesn't surprise me when I learn that the ham is an Extra. That isn't to say that all Extras behave badly. It's almost a truism that the visible percentage of voluble amateur extras in here are that way. They wound so easily, the poor dears. They wouldn't be good moderators. Skin too thin. KH2D for example. I consider him a friend. Most of the hams that I've agreed with and disagreed with on RRAP could be a friend should I ever meet them in person. There are several who I think are dangerous. By example of early DeJaVu archives (now Google's), Jim Kehler was, in my honest opinion, one of the WORST of the sarcastic, arrogant, in-your-face sort in his postings to me. He could be "grumpy" in person, too. I'm sorry if that bothers you, Brian, but this target of his frustrations and sarcasm didn't much like him. I classify Cranky Spanky as a junior grade sissy version of Kehler. Too bad Cranky was never stuck on Guam for years...he would have loved being where all the comms to the rest of the world were by HF. He couldn't have handled the pileups. Wonder if Cranky has ever taken up golf? :-) "They" built a big golf course on Guam. Seems it is cheaper to fly to Guam for a weekend of golf than to pay greens fees in Japan. Anyway, they needed a lot of sand for the constructions, and brought a barge load of it from China. Welp, in China, any flowing water is considered a mechanism of taking care of waste. The sand they dredged was full of e-coli, and this was deposited over our freshwater well... I think after all the nicey-nice backslapping on the moderated group, they'll get sick of hearing the same-o, same-o from their cloned bretheren and be back on RRAP to hear what thinking people have to say. HAR! Beautiful, Brian. :-) They will find, after a while, that their little clubhouse elite is a very small place after all. Claustrophobia will set in or they will get drunk on their own high-fives. Their "safe room" will have to get padding. Or, they might bail to other places like eham.net and make out like they single-handedly worked stations side by side with Maxim or Marconi doing "pioneering" adventures in radio...that none of them could possibly have done. They didn't? 146s, LA- Hide quoted text -- Show quoted text - 243s |
Schlecks' Schlock!
|
Schlecks' Schlock!
On Jan 29, 12:39 am, Dave Heil wrote: wrote: You gotta wonder which of the regulars are/were posting anonymously. Really hair-brained stuff. Hair-brained, was it? Did your mom ever take the "hare brush" to you? Dave K8MN Do you think Ed Hare is back, posting anonymously? |
Schlecks' Schlock!
|
Schlecks' Schlock!
On Jan 28, 4:09 pm, wrote: ...Many Extras consider themselves Einsteins... They are not. Yea, I would agree.. We are not above average as a group.... Personally, I took the test expecting to fail, having just taken the General to upgrade my Tech Plus. I figured, what the heck? It didn't cost anymore to try and I had studied some. I didn't think I was ready, but I passed so here I am, lucky to be an Extra in my estimation. So, do I consider myself an expert in all things Ham Radio by virtue of my license class? Nope, I got a lot to learn and I'm sure there are some folks out there who have a boat load more practical experience than I, but have less privileges. The two Elmers who are largely responsible for me getting my original license among them. Thanks guys! (WB0WMP, K4GRW ) -= Bob =- |
Schlecks' Schlock!
"KC4UAI" wrote:
So, do I consider myself an expert in all things Ham Radio by virtue of my license class? Nope Oddly enough, virtually all the "extras" I met during my tenure as a "non-extra" didn't consider themselves Einsteins either. Now that I'm an Extra, I do not consider myself an Einstein either. It seems that only a small subset of hams (and non-hams) who post to this forum seem to run into these self-proclaimed Einstein Extras. But then, if you read their postings long enough, you'll begin to understand that this bias towards Extras really isn't due to the fact these extras are self-proclaimed Einsteins, but rather the fact that these Extras passed a 20wpm code test at one point or another. 73 kh6hz |
Schlecks' Schlock!
|
Schlecks' Schlock!
On Jan 29, 10:20 am, Dave Heil wrote:
wrote: On Jan 29, 12:39 am, Dave Heil wrote: wrote: You gotta wonder which of the regulars are/were posting anonymously. Really hair-brained stuff. Hair-brained, was it? Did your mom ever take the "hare brush" to you? Dave K8MN Do you think Ed Hare is back, posting anonymously? I don't think so but if he was doing so anonymously, how could I be sure? The same as when a French Ham tells you he's operating more than 200 KHz out of band - you just have to take his word for it. Now, tell me about "hair-brained". Dave K8MN You tell me about it. |
Schlecks' Schlock!
On Jan 29, 2:12 pm, wrote:
On 29 Jan 2007 03:45:35 -0800, wrote: On Jan 29, 12:39 am, Dave Heil wrote: wrote: You gotta wonder which of the regulars are/were posting anonymously. Really hair-brained stuff. Hair-brained, was it? Did your mom ever take the "hare brush" to you? Dave K8MN Do you think Ed Hare is back, posting anonymously? could be I supose but not liked unless his once decent sence has burned out by his working with BPLhttp://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ I'm supposed to be bowing to Dave's superior ability at splitting hairs. I can only hope he didn't skin his knee. |
Schlecks' Schlock!
On Jan 29, 7:06 pm, "
wrote: From: on Sun, Jan 28 2007 7:06 pm On Jan 28, 8:36 pm, " wrote: On Jan 28, 11:44 am, John Smith I wrote: wrote: ... I'm disturbed that there was little or no discussion, and suddenly we have a "solution," complete with with a list of moderators that no one has ever heard of, nevermind that they are all Extras. After at least three years of some of the total crap in here had been going on. WHERE were the "powers-that- be"? Sleeping? Somehow it is in style to criticize Mark's reactions to Robesin, but A- OK for Robesin to characterize some people as rapists, homos and pedo's. "That darned Mark... Now we're gonna hafto moderate the group..." The Google folks were unresponsive to "objectionable posting." They just let it accumulate. Asleep at the key. Since every newsgroup was created by humankind, it can ALSO be "un-created" by humankind. Nobody in power apparently wanted to delete any group...so very un-liberal and "anti-democratic" or something. Like getting something delisted from the endangered species list... "Oh, we can't impinge on the freedom of speech!" seemed to be the "Powers" shine-off. No, no, no, NO we can't remove, halt, or put ANY stoppage on freedom of speech! What of the massive cross-posting? Vince Fiscus under his nom-deguerre of "Slow Code" deliberately (and with malice aforethought) mass-posted to many amateur newsgroups knowing full well that most browsers would automatically mass-post replies. Filled up all kinds of computer mass storage at many ISPs, all with dupes. "At's OK. His heart was in the right place..." Had this been a BBS or BBS network, the offenders would have been summarily yanked, terminated without prejudice, and the blessed freedom-of-speech WOULD HAVE CONTINUED, but without troublemakers. I've seen that done, been a party to it in a few cases. Free speech went on. Ordinary folk could tell the difference between real freedom and deliberate one-sidedness overlaid by arrogant self-defined "superiority." "Know Code VS No Code" No collitsch degrease needed to tell the difference. But, here we have the academia nuts telling us they all but invented "moderating." :-( Then we've got a bunch of "movers and shakers" recently listed which all but says out loud they "made it all possible." I thought Coslo was going to make it all possible with his BBS? Pfooey, a decade before the Internet went public there were BBSs and BBS nets with amateur radio "pubs" (public boards, common name of what are called "newsgroups" now) in the USA, a few interconnecting with other continents. Wasn't my cuppa but I knew of them, looked in a few. Some of those conversations got wild and wooly but outright miscreants, filth- spouters, and attempted take-over artists were summarily deleted. Gone. Fini. Full thirty. Not to worry now. We have the "third RFD" in progress. By the time of the eleventh (when, in 2011?) there might - finally - be a decision. The "moderated group" may then become a reality. This is JUST LIKE some of those "study groups" on local government projects where a "study" might as for an "action committee" to be formed, which then leads to another "study group" be formed to "study" the problem. :-( Idiocy in action...with "credentials." LA They'll be back once they get sick of themselves. |
Schlecks' Schlock!
On Jan 29, 3:36 pm, "KC4UAI" wrote:
On Jan 28, 4:09 pm, wrote: ...Many Extras consider themselves Einsteins... They are not. Yea, I would agree.. We are not above average as a group.... Personally, I took the test expecting to fail, having just taken the General to upgrade my Tech Plus. I figured, what the heck? It didn't cost anymore to try and I had studied some. I didn't think I was ready, but I passed so here I am, lucky to be an Extra in my estimation. So, do I consider myself an expert in all things Ham Radio by virtue of my license class? Nope, I got a lot to learn and I'm sure there are some folks out there who have a boat load more practical experience than I, but have less privileges. The two Elmers who are largely responsible for me getting my original license among them. Thanks guys! (WB0WMP, K4GRW ) -= Bob =- Fair enough. |
Schlecks' Schlock!
On Jan 29, 4:33 pm, "KH6HZ" wrote:
"KC4UAI" wrote: So, do I consider myself an expert in all things Ham Radio by virtue of my license class? Nope Oddly enough, virtually all the "extras" I met during my tenure as a "non-extra" didn't consider themselves Einsteins either. Now that I'm an Extra, I do not consider myself an Einstein either. It seems that only a small subset of hams (and non-hams) who post to this forum seem to run into these self-proclaimed Einstein Extras. But then, if you read their postings long enough, you'll begin to understand that this bias towards Extras really isn't due to the fact these extras are self-proclaimed Einsteins, but rather the fact that these Extras passed a 20wpm code test at one point or another. 73 kh6hz Not at all. Your 20WPM code tape Extra License is irrelevant. When certain Extras tell me how to conduct my amateur life all the while scarfing up a bunch of "club" calls, DX calls, and vanity calls, then I see them as thinking they are somehow much more priveleged than the next guy, AKA they're smarter than everyone else because they "Got Over on The Man!" When a Coast Guard Extra Lecturer aids and abets the scarfing up and grabs one for himself, I have a problem with that, too. It's just a case of people telling others what to do while being inconsistent in their own lives... So get over yourselves. |
Schlecks' Schlock!
"KC4UAI" wrote in message oups.com... On Jan 28, 4:09 pm, wrote: ...Many Extras consider themselves Einsteins... They are not. Yea, I would agree.. We are not above average as a group.... Personally, I took the test expecting to fail, having just taken the General to upgrade my Tech Plus. I figured, what the heck? It didn't cost anymore to try and I had studied some. I didn't think I was ready, but I passed so here I am, lucky to be an Extra in my estimation. So, do I consider myself an expert in all things Ham Radio by virtue of my license class? Nope, I got a lot to learn and I'm sure there are some folks out there who have a boat load more practical experience than I, but have less privileges. The two Elmers who are largely responsible for me getting my original license among them. Thanks guys! (WB0WMP, K4GRW ) -= Bob =- Nothing wrong with that. For many years, our club satellite "guru" and our club VHF/UHF "guru" were Technician's or Tech Pluses. The VHF/UHF guy had been a Tech Plus for over 10 years. Everyone in the club (as far as I know) respected their expertise in these areas. In the last couple of years they've both upgraded to General and then Extra. Dee, N8UZE |
Schlecks' Schlock!
"KH6HZ" wrote in message ... "KC4UAI" wrote: So, do I consider myself an expert in all things Ham Radio by virtue of my license class? Nope Oddly enough, virtually all the "extras" I met during my tenure as a "non-extra" didn't consider themselves Einsteins either. Now that I'm an Extra, I do not consider myself an Einstein either. It seems that only a small subset of hams (and non-hams) who post to this forum seem to run into these self-proclaimed Einstein Extras. But then, if you read their postings long enough, you'll begin to understand that this bias towards Extras really isn't due to the fact these extras are self-proclaimed Einsteins, but rather the fact that these Extras passed a 20wpm code test at one point or another. 73 kh6hz I believe the bias goes even deeper. Even if code were not an issue, that bias would still exist simply because the Extra has met a higher written requirement too. In today's society, it seems to be politically incorrect to have acquired more knowledge than someone else. Dee, N8UZE |
Schlecks' Schlock!
|
Schlecks' Schlock!
|
Schlecks' Schlock!
|
Schlecks' Schlock!
"an old friend" spewed forth the following excrement:
please stop the flowing of of the Bull**** If I knew of a way to shut off your ISP, I would. |
Schlecks' Schlock!
On Jan 30, 12:28 am, Dave Heil wrote:
wrote: When certain Extras tell me how to conduct my amateur life all the while scarfing up a bunch of "club" calls, DX calls, and vanity calls, then I see them as thinking they are somehow much more priveleged than the next guy... If you're the next guy, I'm much more privileged than you. Pass the exams, Mr. Cheese. You too can be more privileged. Mr Deignan's priveleges went beyond those authorized. Riley had to reel him back in. Put him on the straight and narrow... but he's still got a big mouth and a Hawaiin callsign. By the way, I scarfed up a number of DX calls. I hope you don't mind. Not at all. You were there, Mr DX. I approve. Mr Deignan was there in PO Box only. Did you loan out your PO Box to folks who wanted a cool Tanzanian call sign? Did you get a cool Guam call sign having never been to Guam, then pretend to Lecture people on how to run their amateur lives? |
Schlecks' Schlock!
On Jan 29, 10:40 pm, "Dee Flint" wrote:
"KH6HZ" wrote in message ... "KC4UAI" wrote: So, do I consider myself an expert in all things Ham Radio by virtue of my license class? Nope Oddly enough, virtually all the "extras" I met during my tenure as a "non-extra" didn't consider themselves Einsteins either. Now that I'm an Extra, I do not consider myself an Einstein either. It seems that only a small subset of hams (and non-hams) who post to this forum seem to run into these self-proclaimed Einstein Extras. But then, if you read their postings long enough, you'll begin to understand that this bias towards Extras really isn't due to the fact these extras are self-proclaimed Einsteins, but rather the fact that these Extras passed a 20wpm code test at one point or another. 73 kh6hz I believe the bias goes even deeper. Even if code were not an issue, that bias would still exist simply because the Extra has met a higher written requirement too. Dee, I believe you are the first Extra to recognize that not all writtens are the same. Since the beginning of the code debate, and now with the passing of the code exam, we are made to believe that the writtens are a mere insignificant formality and all the real content was in the code exam. Of course that's not true. Thank you for being and Extra and pointing that out. You are a No Code Technician in spirit! In today's society, it seems to be politically incorrect to have acquired more knowledge than someone else. Dee, N8UZE Never. Just don't equate the Extra exam or having Extraness as if it were an engineering degree. We'll get along Quitefine. |
Schlecks' Schlock!
On Jan 30, 12:23 am, Dave Heil wrote:
That doesn't make any sense, Mr. Cheese. I've never had a French radio amateur tell me that he is operating outside his authorized frequency allocation. That's good because it would make no difference to you. You'd tell him where to send the greenstamp(s). In fact, I've never had a French (or any other nationality) radio amateur make a point of telling me that he is operating *inside* his authorized allocation. I'll bet you've never had one tell you that he's operating outside his frequency allocation, either. |
Schlecks' Schlock!
On Jan 30, 12:23 am, Dave Heil wrote:
wrote: On Jan 29, 2:12 pm, wrote: On 29 Jan 2007 03:45:35 -0800, wrote: On Jan 29, 12:39 am, Dave Heil wrote: wrote: You gotta wonder which of the regulars are/were posting anonymously. Really hair-brained stuff. Hair-brained, was it? Did your mom ever take the "hare brush" to you? Dave K8MN Do you think Ed Hare is back, posting anonymously? could be I supose but not liked unless his once decent sence has burned out by his working with BPL I'm supposed to be bowing to Dave's superior ability at splitting hairs. I can only hope he didn't skin his knee. I've split a few hares in my time. Dave K8MN Some think that's all you do. |
Schlecks' Schlock!
"KH6HZ" wrote in message ... "an old friend" spewed forth the following excrement: please stop the flowing of of the Bull**** If I knew of a way to shut off your ISP, I would. tey want me two led man intwo batle -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
Schlecks' Schlock!
"KH6HZ" wrote in message ... "an old friend" spewed forth the following excrement: please stop the flowing of of the Bull**** If I knew of a way to shut off your ISP, I would. tey want me two led man intwo batle -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
Schlecks' Schlock!
"KH6HZ" wrote in message ... "an old friend" spewed forth the following excrement: please stop the flowing of of the Bull**** If I knew of a way to shut off your ISP, I would. tey want me two led man intwo batle -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
Schlecks' Schlock!
"Dee Flint" wrote
I believe the bias goes even deeper. Even if code were not an issue, that bias would still exist simply because the Extra has met a higher written requirement too. In today's society, it seems to be politically incorrect to have acquired more knowledge than someone else. You're probably correct. Now that the morse requirement is gone, the focus will turn towards something else. What I've observed (particularly in this forum) is a great deal of resentment towards extra-class operators, coupled with derogatory comments regarding morse-code and its use as a licensing requirement. The whole claim of "Einstein Extras" is one mere example. There are people who are in all walks of life who think they know everything. That some of those people are bound to have extra-class ham licenses. 99.99% of the time when I encounter those types of people, I do my best to avoid them, and do not let their ignorance cloud my judgement against an entire class of person. It is too bad some folks in this forum cannot do the same, and enjoy interacting with others, rather than going out of their way to be combative and antagonistic. 73 kh6hz |
Schlecks' Schlock!
|
Schlecks' Schlock!
|
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:28 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com