On Feb 20, 12:37�am, "
wrote:
* *Oh, my, some SPITE was carried over to homebrew on
* *Presidents Day just because "CW" was discussed. *I am
* *bringing it back to policy where it should go until
* *the moderated newsgroup is open.

Len wants to be the moderator, IOW,

* *Be aware that this thread in RRAH started with a simple
* *question by another asking if FCC 06-178 would "eliminate
* *the CW bands" [in amateur radio operation] *That was
* *answered.

Buit it didn't end there.

*After that it segued into discussion of early
* *(pre-1900) use of morse code then it was triggered into
* *modern times by those who feel that "CW" MUST be given
* *ten kinds of attention than anything else.

No, that's not true. Len just can't stand to see nice things
written about Morse Code.

Here's what *really* happened:

Len made a lengthy post that contained comments
on the US railroad system, landline telegraph communications,
Knott's Berry Farm and other tourist attractions, stagecoaches,
wives-and-families, Len's lack of use of Morse Code in military
communications, 50plus years ago, Len's parents watching the
lunar landings on TV, keyless auto security systems and more.

I didn't see a single word from Len in his long posting
about amateur radio homebrew.

It also contained this personal policy statement from Len:

"I have nothing against telegraphic skills nor anyone using
those for personal pleasure. However, in the light of
advancement of the electronic arts, communications,
radio, methods that ALL of us can share, I think there
is an over-much emphasis by radio hobbyists on
telegraphic arts. Manual telegraphy IS a historic first
but it has been supplanted in practical communications
means at our disposal...on land, in the air, on the sea,
and in space.

I think we should be looking FORWARD to the future, not
back to the past. Others disagree. I leave it at that."

Sure sounds like a policy discussion to me!

Now there's nothing really wrong with a little thread
drift and getting a bit off topic.

So I replied with a post of my own, commenting on some
of what Len wrote. Free speech and all that:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.r...e=source&hl=en

But then Len got all upset and acted like a moderator:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.r...e=source&hl=en

Sure looks like Len has a double standard about who can post to
rrah and what they can post. It's OK for *him* to wander off topic
and make policy and opinion statements there, but when someone
rebuts his commentary, that's *not* OK with him.

Textbook case of Len's double standard.

Jim, N2EY

From: person J on 20 Feb 2007 16:42:59 -0800

? ?Oh, my, some SPITE was carried over to homebrew on
? ?Presidents Day just because "CW" was discussed. ?I am
? ?bringing it back to policy where it should go until
? ?the moderated newsgroup is open.

Len wants to be the moderator, IOW,

FACTUAL ERROR! Tsk, tsk...


? ?Be aware that this thread in RRAH started with a simple
? ?question by another asking if FCC 06-178 would "eliminate
? ?the CW bands" [in amateur radio operation] ?That was
? ?answered.

Buit it didn't end there.

What is a "buit?" Or did you make another FACTUAL ERROR?


?After that it segued into discussion of early
? ?(pre-1900) use of morse code then it was triggered into
? ?modern times by those who feel that "CW" MUST be given
? ?ten kinds of attention than anything else.

No, that's not true.

FACTUAL ERROR. IT IS VERY TRUE...with or without the "?"
additions YOU made to the quote.


Here's what *really* happened:

PERSON J MAKES ANOTHER FACTUAL ERROR...

HERE is what happened, visible by anyone at RRAH:

On Feb 12 'Julian814' asked about CW use in ham bands after
23 Feb 07.
On the same date about an hour later Michael Black stated
that this subject was not one for rec.radio.amateur.homebrew.
'Caveat Lector' made a comment next about 3 hours later.
On 13 Feb, 'GKB', Scott, John Siegel all made comments.
On 14 Feb, Geoffrey S. Mendelson made a comment from Israel.
About 3 hours later 'Julian814' posts again, followed by
Dee Flint two hours after that.
On 15 Feb Ken Scarf made a comment.
On 16 Feb Geoffrey Mendelson made another post and I replied
to that (about 3 hours later) stating some difference of
opinion on early telegraphy methods prior to 1900...based
on information obtained from several sources, including the
website of the descendents of Alfred Vail.
On 17 Feb Ken Scarf made a short comment about modern day
morse code use.
On 18 Feb I replied to that and stated that the commentary
between myself and Mendelson was about pre-1900 telegraphy.
About 2 hours later, Ian White made a long post objecting to
my comments about morse code being supplanted by other modes
and used his father-in-law and wife as "witnesses." According
to White, his father had taken his wife (and presumably the
rest of her family) to Knotts Berry Farm near Anaheim, CA,
where the father-in-law described an old railroad station
telegram station with its sounder tapping out "eat chicken
dinners" continually.
Also on 18 Feb 'Highland Ham' made a short comment.

In two posts that I made, 4 and 6 days after the first one,
the SUBJECT was addressed in some detail. There was no
overt expression of "dislike for 'CW'" by myself.

Seven days after the first post in the thread, Miccolis
just HAD to say something negative about my posting. :-)
What he 'read' is stated as follows:

Len made a lengthy post that contained comments
on the US railroad system, landline telegraph communications,
Knott's Berry Farm and other tourist attractions, stagecoaches,
wives-and-families, Len's lack of use of Morse Code in military
communications, 50plus years ago, Len's parents watching the
lunar landings on TV, keyless auto security systems and more.

The US railroad system, Knotts Berry Farm, wife and father-
in-law were first mentioned by Ian White. White's posting
made NO mention about "amateur radio homebrew" but focussed
on post-1900 telegraphy, particularly on the railroads, and
World War 2 where his father-in-law "pounded brass" while
in the military. Actually, NONE of the postings up to
18 Feb mentioned "amateur radio homebrew" except for the
second posting by Michael Black. Black correctly stated
that 'Julian814's' posting didn't belong in that newsgroup.

But, as stated, Miccolis HAD to vent his spite and make
noise while denigrating another WITHOUT addressing any
"homebrew" subjects.

I didn't see a single word from Len in his long posting
about amateur radio homebrew.

Awwww...you wanted PRAISE and HONOR just for morse code?
That's all you've been doing in the Policy newsgroup for
years, expressing your displeasure (ultimately) at the
FCC's elimination of the code test for an amateur radio
license.

Miccolis made a FACTUAL ERROR!

It also contained this personal policy statement from Len:

ANOTHER FACTUAL ERROR!

That is NOT a "personal policy statement." It is simply
a PERSONAL OPINION. Apparently NONE may have personal
OPINIONS with vetting them with Miccolis first? :-)

"I have nothing against telegraphic skills nor anyone using
those for personal pleasure. However, in the light of
advancement of the electronic arts, communications,
radio, methods that ALL of us can share, I think there
is an over-much emphasis by radio hobbyists on
telegraphic arts. Manual telegraphy IS a historic first
but it has been supplanted in practical communications
means at our disposal...on land, in the air, on the sea,
and in space.

Tsk, tsk, Miccolis "objects" to that. Unfortunately for
him it is all TRUE. The communications arts HAVE
advanced far from the pre-1900 times and technology.
Yes, manual telegraphy was the first electrical-means
communication mode over land. On wires. Using relatively
PRIMITIVE electrical technology. Yes, manual telegraphy
was the first mode for the public demonstrations of "radio"
as a communications medium in 1896...it was still as
PRIMITIVE as the technology of early radio...using no
active devices such as tubes or transistors (neither had
been invented in the first decade of "radio").

Radio is about 111 years old as a communications means.
No other radio service except amateur radio uses it for
communications, requires it to be used, and most US radio
services never bothered to require morse code when that
service was begun! Every day more than a hundred million
Americans are using some form of radio communications or
radio relay or radio telecommand that is NOT morse code.

The very last day of license testing requiring cognition
of low-rate morse code is 22 February 2007...only two
more days. After that, NO US amateur radio license exams
will require any morse code tests. Yes, US amateurs may
still USE morse code according to FCC regulations. That
will help ease their personal burdens of anger, rage, spite,
and other personal defects of behavior. They can re-enact
their dreams of "pioneering the airwaves" and "progressing
the state of the art of OOK CW" even though that had been
reached decades ago by predecessors. Let those poor soul
morsemen sweat and itch over the rightness of a federal
decision...something done not to ease THEIR self-important
delusions, but to benefit ALL. Morse code apparently
means more than life itself to some of those OOK CW
dreamers.

Miccolis, take your aggreived soul and mighty self-
importance and go somewhere where the code hive-mind is
desired. There you can bitch and moan about all the
upstarts, "error-making" persons who were doing actual
radio operating BEFORE you were born, the so-called
"moderators" who are upstaging YOUR constant attempts
at moderating them. Enjoy the company among the hive-
minds. It will be a comfort to you, a safety place
where you can be as ****ily pedantic as you were in
here. You will be applauded for such state-of-the-art
policy discussions such as "bandplans of 1940."

I don't expect you to correct all your own FACTUAL ERRORS
you made in your recent post. After all, you will "deny"
you EVER made an error! :-) That is iron-clad,
predictable. :-)

On 20 Feb 2007 23:03:07 -0800, "
wrote:

From: person J on 20 Feb 2007 16:42:59 -0800

snip

I don't expect you to correct all your own FACTUAL ERRORS
you made in your recent post. After all, you will "deny"
you EVER made an error! :-) That is iron-clad,
predictable. :-)

Of that you may rest assured, Len.....he's a few posts behind already!





73, Leo

On Feb 21, 1:40�pm, Leo wrote:
On 20 Feb 2007 23:03:07 -0800, "

wrote:
From: person J on 20 Feb 2007 16:42:59 -0800

snip

* I don't expect you to correct all your own FACTUAL ERRORS
* you made in your recent post. *After all, you will "deny"
* you EVER made an error! * :-) * That is iron-clad,
* predictable. *:-)

Of that you may rest assured, Len.....he's a few posts behind already!


I'd say a few YEARS...but others mileage may vary... :-)

LA

On 21 Feb 2007 13:53:17 -0800, "
wrote:

On Feb 21, 1:40?pm, Leo wrote:
On 20 Feb 2007 23:03:07 -0800, "

wrote:
From: person J on 20 Feb 2007 16:42:59 -0800

snip

I don't expect you to correct all your own FACTUAL ERRORS
you made in your recent post.
fter all, you will "deny"
you EVER made an error! :-) That is iron-clad,
predictable. :-)

Of that you may rest assured, Len.....he's a few posts behind already!


I'd say a few YEARS...but others mileage may vary... :-)

You're probably right....I was thinking more of recent posts that he's
chosen not to respond to!

Add 'em up....you've got years, alright.....


LA

73, Leo

wrote:
From: person J on 20 Feb 2007 16:42:59 -0800

Here's what *really* happened:

PERSON J MAKES ANOTHER FACTUAL ERROR...

HERE is what happened, visible by anyone at RRAH:

On Feb 12 'Julian814' asked about CW use in ham bands after
23 Feb 07.
On the same date about an hour later Michael Black stated
that this subject was not one for rec.radio.amateur.homebrew.
'Caveat Lector' made a comment next about 3 hours later.
On 13 Feb, 'GKB', Scott, John Siegel all made comments.
On 14 Feb, Geoffrey S. Mendelson made a comment from Israel.
About 3 hours later 'Julian814' posts again, followed by
Dee Flint two hours after that.
On 15 Feb Ken Scarf made a comment.
On 16 Feb Geoffrey Mendelson made another post and I replied
to that (about 3 hours later) stating some difference of
opinion on early telegraphy methods prior to 1900...based
on information obtained from several sources, including the
website of the descendents of Alfred Vail.
On 17 Feb Ken Scarf made a short comment about modern day
morse code use.
On 18 Feb I replied to that and stated that the commentary
between myself and Mendelson was about pre-1900 telegraphy.
About 2 hours later, Ian White made a long post objecting to
my comments about morse code being supplanted by other modes
and used his father-in-law and wife as "witnesses." According
to White, his father had taken his wife (and presumably the
rest of her family) to Knotts Berry Farm near Anaheim, CA,
where the father-in-law described an old railroad station
telegram station with its sounder tapping out "eat chicken
dinners" continually.
Also on 18 Feb 'Highland Ham' made a short comment.

In typical Len Anderson/Major Hoople style, you made numerous windy,
pontificating, condescending and rambling statements which were not
directed toward homebrewing anything, much less amateur radio homebrewing.

In two posts that I made, 4 and 6 days after the first one,
the SUBJECT was addressed in some detail.

Your posts were made long after Micheal Black advised the original
poster that the SUBJECT was off-topic for the newsgroup. What you did
was address a SUBJECT which didn't belong. That didn't stop Leonard H.
Anderson.

There was no
overt expression of "dislike for 'CW'" by myself.

Just covert expression, huh?

Seven days after the first post in the thread, Miccolis
just HAD to say something negative about my posting. :-)

You just HAD to say something negative or dismissive about the responses
of just about anyone who posted, but that was okay.

What he 'read' is stated as follows:

Len made a lengthy post that contained comments
on the US railroad system, landline telegraph communications,
Knott's Berry Farm and other tourist attractions, stagecoaches,
wives-and-families, Len's lack of use of Morse Code in military
communications, 50plus years ago, Len's parents watching the
lunar landings on TV, keyless auto security systems and more.

The US railroad system, Knotts Berry Farm, wife and father-
in-law were first mentioned by Ian White. White's posting
made NO mention about "amateur radio homebrew" but focussed
on post-1900 telegraphy, particularly on the railroads, and
World War 2 where his father-in-law "pounded brass" while
in the military. Actually, NONE of the postings up to
18 Feb mentioned "amateur radio homebrew" except for the
second posting by Michael Black. Black correctly stated
that 'Julian814's' posting didn't belong in that newsgroup.

But, as stated, Miccolis HAD to vent his spite and make
noise while denigrating another WITHOUT addressing any
"homebrew" subjects.

....while you made numerous lengthy, wandering responses and "made noise"
despite knowing that the subject was off-topic.

I didn't see a single word from Len in his long posting
about amateur radio homebrew.

Awwww...you wanted PRAISE and HONOR just for morse code?

Where was any such idea put forth?




The very last day of license testing requiring cognition
of low-rate morse code is 22 February 2007...only two
more days. After that, NO US amateur radio license exams
will require any morse code tests. Yes, US amateurs may
still USE morse code according to FCC regulations. That
will help ease their personal burdens of anger, rage, spite,
and other personal defects of behavior.

How will you ease your personal burdens of anger, rage, spite and other
personal defects of behavior as described in the N2EY profile of your
actions?

I'll be able to use Morse, FM, SSB, AM, RTTY and other digital modes on
the amateur radio bands today, on Friday and at any time after that
date. What will you be doing on the amateur radio bands after Friday,
Len? I assume it will be what you did last week or more than ten years
back--zip, zilch, nuthin'.

They can re-enact
their dreams of "pioneering the airwaves" and "progressing
the state of the art of OOK CW" even though that had been
reached decades ago by predecessors.

And you may play make-believe ham radio operator in internet newsgroups.

Let those poor soul
morsemen sweat and itch over the rightness of a federal
decision...

The decision may or may not have been "right". History will reveal
whether it was right or wrong. You may sweat, itch, live and die
without ever having been a part of amateur radio, Len.

...something done not to ease THEIR self-important
delusions, but to benefit ALL.

There has never been a fellow with more self-important delusions
participating in this newsgroup than Leonard H. Anderson,
non-participant in amateur radio.

Morse code apparently
means more than life itself to some of those OOK CW
dreamers.

That isn't apparent at all, Len. The only person to make such a
statement is you.

Miccolis, take your aggreived soul and mighty self-
importance and go somewhere where the code hive-mind is
desired.

You don't give orders here, Leonard.

The word is "aggrieved".

There you can bitch and moan about all the
upstarts, "error-making" persons who were doing actual
radio operating BEFORE you were born, the so-called
"moderators" who are upstaging YOUR constant attempts
at moderating them.

You weren't a radio amateur before Jim was born and you haven't become
one since Jim was born. You've not upstaged anyone, Len. You're
irrelevant to amateur radio.

Enjoy the company among the hive-
minds. It will be a comfort to you, a safety place
where you can be as ****ily pedantic as you were in
here. You will be applauded for such state-of-the-art
policy discussions such as "bandplans of 1940."

Along comes Major Hoople to stand on the sidewalk and tell us how
amateur radio should be regulated. Your comfort is usenet, Leonard.
You've found a place where you can tell those upstart radio amateurs
about your glory days of fifty-plus years ago. You can expound on your
past working years, describe your northern and southern homes, tell
folks about your car and prescribe sage advice about horizontally
mounted loops, shielded with Reynolds Wrap (coaxial cable must have been
in short supply).

Dave K8MN

From: Dave Heil on Thu, 22 Feb
2007 15:44:05 GMT

PERSON J MAKES ANOTHER FACTUAL ERROR...

WHO is "person J," red-hatted one?

WHO are all the other "Persons" mentioned? :-)


Your posts were made long after Micheal Black advised the original
poster that the SUBJECT was off-topic for the newsgroup. What you did
was address a SUBJECT which didn't belong. That didn't stop Leonard H.
Anderson.

Feel free to address the Appelate Court of Internet Appeals,
file a Notice of Intent to Sue.

[Sue is the clerk of the court...]


There was no overt expression of "dislike for 'CW'" by myself.

Just covert expression, huh?

"Covert?!?" Did you find some developing fluid to make the
"secret hidden message" visible to all? :-)

Or have you drunk that "developing fluid" too hastily? :-)


You just HAD to say something negative or dismissive about the responses
of just about anyone who posted, but that was okay.

"Just about 'anyone' who posted?!?" Heh heh heh, only
about some organ grinders and their little red-hatted
morse monkeys who do bad imitations of Otto Preminger.


...while you made numerous lengthy, wandering responses and "made noise"
despite knowing that the subject was off-topic.

WHO established this "off-topic" status? YOU didn't.
Miccolis didn't. RRAH is an unmoderated newsgroup.


Awwww...you wanted PRAISE and HONOR just for morse code?

Where was any such idea put forth?

Oh, just in hundreds of past postings by the organ
grinder and his little red-hatted morse monkey for
years... :-)


How will you ease your personal burdens of anger, rage, spite and other
personal defects of behavior as described in the N2EY profile of your
actions?

Ooooooo! I have all those things? :-)

I will continue, as I've done before, of laughing my
head off at the FACTUAL ERROR-FILLED "profiles" your
organ grinder cranked out. :-)



I'll be able to use Morse, FM, SSB, AM, RTTY and other digital modes on
the amateur radio bands today, on Friday and at any time after that
date.

Wonderful...who was STOPPING you before? Hollingsworth?
Martin? The CIA?

What will you be doing on the amateur radio bands after Friday,
Len?

Was I supposed to be "doing something on the amateur radio
bands?" :-)

"On the bands?" No, you should have written "IN" the bands.

Tsk, tsk, factual English Error!

Hmmm...not that it's any of YOUR nosy business, but we (that
is, my wife and I) have plans and events for the week-end.
The AAA 500 is on at the California Speedway in Fontana on
Sunday...one example.


And you may play make-believe ham radio operator in internet newsgroups.

I do that?!? Oh, my, you DO have a terrible ability to
read...

Tsk, I've never claimed to be either an amateur radio
operator or a "ham radio" operator in real life or in
newsgroups, not on BBS or in correspondence with amateur
radio organizations. Don't even play one on TV.

You are confused and think I am someone else...


The decision may or may not have been "right". History will reveal
whether it was right or wrong.

We can rest assured that the organ grinder and his little
red-hatted morse monkey will OVER-RIDE any "decisions of
history!" :-)

THEY are always telling everyone what they should think!


You may sweat, itch, live and die
without ever having been a part of amateur radio, Len.

That isn't causing me any worry. :-)

It DOES seem to bother YOU a great deal! Have you sought
medical help for your condition?


There has never been a fellow with more self-important delusions
participating in this newsgroup than Leonard H. Anderson,
non-participant in amateur radio.

Now, now, don't put yourself and Miccolis down so much.
Either one of you are much more self-important than I.
It is and has been repeated by you two in here for years.

Did you know that "radio" is used in OTHER radio services
and by the military and government of the USA? Really.
"Amateur radio" isn't the sole user of radio. Really.


You don't give orders here, Leonard.

Jawhol! Gruss Gott herr Kommandant! click heels in
acknowledgement


You weren't a radio amateur before Jim was born and you haven't become
one since Jim was born.

Who is "Jim?" Is he the one cranking that rusty organ?

Tsk, tsk, and doing that in public view, too!!


You're irrelevant to amateur radio.

So you keep saying! Well, say it enough times and maybe
someone besides this "Jim" will believe you. That's the
spirit of using the "Big Lie" technique of propaganda.


Along comes Major Hoople to stand on the sidewalk and tell us how
amateur radio should be regulated.

Who is this "Major Hoople?" I don't know any "Major
Hoople." You say he was in the newspaper comic strips?
I never saw that strip. Did you have it mixed up with
Hal Foster's "Prince Valiant?" Or Milton Caniff's
"Terry and the Pirates?" "The Katzenjammer Kids?"

I know of a "Major Bowes" who used to host an old, old
radio broadcast show called "Major Bowes' Amateur Hour."
The few times I heard that did not include anything
about radio amateurs. I didn't listen to it much, so
maybe other airings of that program had something about
amateur radio?

Your comfort is usenet, Leonard.

It is? I don't think so. My comfort is my wife, a nice
home (two of them, debt free), good food, good health,
and a nice collection of money earned at a profession
I've chosen and enjoyed in my working career. Others'
mileage obviously varies...

You've found a place where you can tell those upstart radio amateurs
about your glory days of fifty-plus years ago.

"Glory days?" Nah. Just a citizen volunteering for
military service, serving and doing what he was told
to do. Your organ grinding master never did that.

Anyone can see it at:

http://sujan.hallikainen.org/Broadca...s/My3Years.pdf

About 6 MB file size, may take 18 minutes download on a
dial-up connection. 20 pages, lots of photos, mostly
ones I took.


You can expound on your
past working years, describe your northern and southern homes, tell
folks about your car and prescribe sage advice about horizontally
mounted loops, shielded with Reynolds Wrap (coaxial cable must have been
in short supply).

I can? Oh, my, you said at the beginning that I COULDN'T!

Please make up your mind.

The late-1960s horizontal loop was an experiment that didn't
work out too well. Too much inductance, too many turns of
wire...with too much inductance the resonating capacity was
too small to allow fixed tuning at 60 KHz. A later version
used 55 turns of #14 THHN insulation electric power wire
(solid) on a 2 1/2-foot circular form (again for 60 KHz,
the carrier frequency of WWVB out of Ft. Collins, CO),
wrapped with twine and varnished. That was wrapped with
aluminum foil for an electrostatic shield, not a continuous
connection. That was wrapped in more twine and varnished
three times. Two 10-foot 75 Ohm "TV cable" sections were
connected to it in balanced configuration, the two coax
cables' ground at the center-tap. The cable capacity makes
up part of the 60 KHz resonant tuning, final trimming done
by a 2-section "BC band" variable capacitor. Input below
the vertically-oriented loop is to a differential FET
source-follower pair to a voltage-controlled-gain
differential amplifier. Oriented NE towards Ft. Collins,
it provides a good signal from WWVB which is then limited
as well as mildly bandpass filtered. The limiter output
provides a fairly steady carrier at 60 KHz which feeds a
phase-frequency-detector comparing a 60 KHz quartz-crystal
oscillator which is electronically trimmed through the PLL
loop filter (time-constant about 2 seconds) so that the
crystal oscillator remains in phase with the WWVB carrier.
Overall receiving bandwidth is narrower than 0.5 Hz so the
equivalent signal-to-noise ratio is high. A second PLL
uses the 60 KHz crystal oscillator as reference to compare
the 10 MHz time-base oscillator of a frequency counter,
both divided down to 1 Second period for the second phase-
frequency detector. That way I am always assured of an
accurate frequency counter reading good to better than
100 Parts Per Billion (not Million).

Note: The "receiver" (a basic TRF configuration) is held
stabilized in a slow-speed AGC loop with a small meter
readout of carrier level. Limiter action is about 55 db
compression so the AGC loop turned out to be redundant.
The observed maximum-to-minimum signal strength from WWVB
(about 1 KMile distant) has been less than 10 db (in
power) during about two years of use. This is less than
the predicted variations published by NIST on their time-
frequency pages at www.nist.gov. Observed transients
and noise at the limiter output from all other electrical
sources in the household are no more than about -30 dbm
of minimum received carrier level. Internal DC supply
is double and triple series-regulated to obtain +12 and
+5 VDC operating voltages. I may add a battery-backup
inside the 1/10th cubic foot enclosure later to
replace the external small UPS. It would be nice to
compare the 10 KHz internal divider signal agains a
rubidium oscillator standard in the future. Right now
I am satisfied with the accuracy checked in several
other ways, no need for doing an Allan Variance.

Thanks for asking...

wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Thu, 22 Feb
2007 15:44:05 GMT

PERSON J MAKES ANOTHER FACTUAL ERROR...

WHO is "person J," red-hatted one?

Oh, you've mistaken me for Brian. You used the term "PERSON J". Don't
you know?


Your posts were made long after Micheal Black advised the original
poster that the SUBJECT was off-topic for the newsgroup. What you did
was address a SUBJECT which didn't belong. That didn't stop Leonard H.
Anderson.

Feel free to address the Appelate Court of Internet Appeals,
file a Notice of Intent to Sue.

[Sue is the clerk of the court...]

Maybe you didn't understand my statements. You made posts long after
Michael Black advised the original poster that the SUBJECT was off-topic
for the rec.radio.amateur.homebrew newsgroup.


There was no overt expression of "dislike for 'CW'" by myself.
Just covert expression, huh?

"Covert?!?" Did you find some developing fluid to make the
"secret hidden message" visible to all? :-)

That's right, covert. If something isn't done overtly, it is done covertly.

You just HAD to say something negative or dismissive about the responses
of just about anyone who posted, but that was okay.

"Just about 'anyone' who posted?!?" Heh heh heh, only
about some organ grinders and their little red-hatted
morse monkeys who do bad imitations of Otto Preminger.

You're the old organ grinder. Brian is your little red-hatted monkey.
In fact, you're the fellow who likes using the Germanic lingo and who
keeps Godwin's name alive in this newsgroup.


...while you made numerous lengthy, wandering responses and "made noise"
despite knowing that the subject was off-topic.

WHO established this "off-topic" status?

I've told you twice now: Michael Black did.

YOU didn't.

No, I didn't. Michael Black did.

Miccolis didn't.

No, Jim didn't do it. Michael Black did.

RRAH is an unmoderated newsgroup.

Yes, it is.

Awwww...you wanted PRAISE and HONOR just for morse code?
Where was any such idea put forth?

Oh, just in hundreds of past postings by the organ
grinder and his little red-hatted morse monkey for
years... :-)

I know you read Brian's stuff but I wasn't aware that you were reading
your own voluminous output. Your eyes must be glazed over by now.


How will you ease your personal burdens of anger, rage, spite and other
personal defects of behavior as described in the N2EY profile of your
actions?

Ooooooo! I have all those things? :-)

It is evident from your posts.

I will continue, as I've done before, of laughing my
head off at the FACTUAL ERROR-FILLED "profiles" your
organ grinder cranked out. :-)

Organ grinder: You
Little red-hatted monkey: Brian

I don't think you find the very accurate N2EY profile of your actions to
be humorous, Len. I don't think you like it one bit.

I'll be able to use Morse, FM, SSB, AM, RTTY and other digital modes on
the amateur radio bands today, on Friday and at any time after that
date.

Wonderful...who was STOPPING you before?

Nothing at all stopped me before. Nothing will stop me afterward.

What will you be doing on the amateur radio bands after Friday,
Len?

Was I supposed to be "doing something on the amateur radio
bands?" :-)

Well, you were going to have an Extra Class license "right out of the
box" seven years ago.


"On the bands?" No, you should have written "IN" the bands.

Tsk, tsk, factual English Error!

I made no error, Len. I frequently ask my friend John, "what's on the
bands?" I might ask, "what's on TV?" If I asked, "what's in TV?", that
wouldn't be the same question.

Hmmm...not that it's any of YOUR nosy business, but we (that
is, my wife and I) have plans and events for the week-end.

Awwwww! Isn't that nice.

The AAA 500 is on at the California Speedway in Fontana on
Sunday...one example.

Is that a plan or an event?


And you may play make-believe ham radio operator in internet newsgroups.

I do that?!? Oh, my, you DO have a terrible ability to
read...

Tsk, I've never claimed to be either an amateur radio
operator or a "ham radio" operator in real life or in
newsgroups, not on BBS or in correspondence with amateur
radio organizations. Don't even play one on TV.

I wrote "make-believe", Len. I know you aren't a real radio amateur.

You are confused and think I am someone else...

I couldn't make that mistake.


The decision may or may not have been "right". History will reveal
whether it was right or wrong.

We can rest assured that the organ grinder and his little
red-hatted morse monkey will OVER-RIDE any "decisions of
history!" :-)

So you and Brian are still a duo?

THEY are always telling everyone what they should think!

Yes, you do.


You may sweat, itch, live and die
without ever having been a part of amateur radio, Len.

That isn't causing me any worry. :-)

You write like a very formal Alfred E. Neuman.

It DOES seem to bother YOU a great deal!

Let's examine that idea: You believe that it bothers me that you won't
be a part of amateur radio?

Have you sought
medical help for your condition?

Help? I may drink a toast!


There has never been a fellow with more self-important delusions
participating in this newsgroup than Leonard H. Anderson,
non-participant in amateur radio.

Now, now, don't put yourself and Miccolis down so much.

Jim's name isn't Leonard H. Anderson. My name isn't Leonard H. Anderson.

Either one of you are much more self-important than I.

....but neither of us would dream of attempting to change the regulations
governing something in which we are not involved.

It is and has been repeated by you two in here for years.

Actually, it has not. Such statements have come from the likes of you.

Did you know that "radio" is used in OTHER radio services
and by the military and government of the USA? Really.

Did you know that this is an amateur radio newsgroup? Really.

"Amateur radio" isn't the sole user of radio. Really.

Were you aware that this newsgroup is about amateur radio? Did you know
that I'd be in a different radio newsgroup if I were interested in
discussion other users of the radio spectrum?


You don't give orders here, Leonard.

Jawhol! Gruss Gott herr Kommandant! click heels in
acknowledgement

Why'd you snip the part where you were telling others to go away?


You weren't a radio amateur before Jim was born and you haven't become
one since Jim was born.

Who is "Jim?" Is he the one cranking that rusty organ?

It'd be my guess that you've got the rustiest organ here, Len.

You're irrelevant to amateur radio.

So you keep saying!

I surely do. I write it because it happens to be true. All I have to
do is wait and see if I'm prescient.

Well, say it enough times and maybe
someone besides this "Jim" will believe you.

Numerous folks already believe it. They do so because it is the truth.

That's the spirit of using the "Big Lie" technique of propaganda.

No, it isn't. That technique does not involve stating a truth over and
over until people begin to believe that it is a lie. In that technique,
the inverse is the case.

Along comes Major Hoople to stand on the sidewalk and tell us how
amateur radio should be regulated.

Who is this "Major Hoople?" I don't know any "Major
Hoople." You say he was in the newspaper comic strips?
I never saw that strip. Did you have it mixed up with
Hal Foster's "Prince Valiant?" Or Milton Caniff's
"Terry and the Pirates?" "The Katzenjammer Kids?"

http://www.toonopedia.com/hoople.htm


Your comfort is usenet, Leonard.

It is? I don't think so.

....but it is.

You've found a place where you can tell those upstart radio amateurs
about your glory days of fifty-plus years ago.

"Glory days?" Nah. Just a citizen volunteering for
military service, serving and doing what he was told
to do. Your organ grinding master never did that.

Anyone can see it at:

http://sujan.hallikainen.org/Broadca...s/My3Years.pdf

About 6 MB file size, may take 18 minutes download on a
dial-up connection. 20 pages, lots of photos, mostly
ones I took.

Your glory days.


You can expound on your
past working years, describe your northern and southern homes, tell
folks about your car and prescribe sage advice about horizontally
mounted loops, shielded with Reynolds Wrap (coaxial cable must have been
in short supply).

I can? Oh, my, you said at the beginning that I COULDN'T!

No, I don't believe I did. There are places where you shouldn't.
That doesn't mean that you couldn't.

Please make up your mind.

The late-1960s horizontal loop was an experiment that didn't
work out too well. Too much inductance, too many turns of
wire...with too much inductance the resonating capacity was
too small to allow fixed tuning at 60 KHz. A later version
used 55 turns of #14 THHN insulation electric power wire
(solid) on a 2 1/2-foot circular form (again for 60 KHz,
the carrier frequency of WWVB out of Ft. Collins, CO),
wrapped with twine and varnished. That was wrapped with
aluminum foil for an electrostatic shield, not a continuous
connection. much snipped

Okay, I understand that your problem was that you didn't know much about
shielded loops.

You could have easily made the loop from coaxial cable. All you'd have
needed to do was leave about a one-inch gap in the shield. A single
turn "sense" loop may or may not be placed inside the windings of the
shielded loop. As the loop is a loss antenna, it is very likely that a
preamp would have been needed. I have a two-turn 5 foot diameter
version mounted about a foot off the ground. It is resonant at 1.850
MHz. With a preamp it does a good job of minimizing local noise. It is
not as good at providing readable copy as a 565 foot long terminated
beverage without a preamp. At no time was the use of any Reynolds Wrap
required.

Dave K8MN

From: Dave Heil on Fri, Feb 23 2007 4:44 am

wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Thu, 22 Feb

PERSON J MAKES ANOTHER FACTUAL ERROR...

WHO is "person J," red-hatted one?

Oh, you've mistaken me for Brian.

Tsk, tsk, there is only ONE red-hatted-morse-monkey. It is YOU.


Feel free to address the Appelate Court of Internet Appeals,
file a Notice of Intent to Sue.

[Sue is the clerk of the court...]

Maybe you didn't understand my statements.

Oh, they are prefectly CLEAR, humorless pedantic prussian.

You have only ONE "intent" in your postings "to" me...
that of attempting to assassinate my personal character
any way you can. No sweat to me. Others have attempted
that...and FAILED, just like you are FAILING.


You're the old organ grinder.

I'm not a musician. Don't even play one on TV.

AFTRA, the American Federation of Television and Radio Artists,
does not require "organ grinding" as a membership skill.

Brian is your little red-hatted monkey.

No. FACTUAL ERROR. Brian Burke, N0IMD, is a husband, father,
USAF veteran and very much his own person. That we think
similarly on many subjects is because we share those
similarities with thousands of others who do not post in
here regularly. We do have differences of opinion on many
things without incurring any rancor or visible displeasure
expressed one to the other.

You insist on making caricatures of those who disagree with
you...on the slightest provocation. That is part of YOUR
behavior pattern that has been visible in this newsgroup
since the first person disagreed with you. [actually,
several persons...I was not the first]

One problem for caricaturists is that they bitterly resent
being used as a subject for such caricatures. You are one
such.


In fact, you're the fellow who likes using the Germanic lingo and who
keeps Godwin's name alive in this newsgroup.

Not "Germanic lingo," simply old German Army terms. "Heil"
is a salute-greeting in the German language. You desire
respect-admiration all the time, then bitterly object when
you cannot recognize someone saluting you. Do you think
ALL salute you with a single finger?

I do not worship 'godwin,' only GOD of the Judeo-Christian
faith. Try tolerating ecuminism once in a while...it will
not hurt you.


I will continue, as I've done before, of laughing my
head off at the FACTUAL ERROR-FILLED "profiles" your
organ grinder cranked out. :-)

Organ grinder: You
Little red-hatted monkey: Brian

FACTUAL ERROR.

I don't think you find the very accurate N2EY profile of your actions to
be humorous, Len.

It isn't even 'humerous' nor does it break my bones.

The "N2EY profile" is just an example of a common, one-sided,
self-righteous olde-tymer amateur morseman who desperately
desires to be some kind of 'chieftan' in a newsgroup yet has
NO qualifications nor anything but layman's quaint ideas of
basic psychology. His "profile" is nothing more than a
disguised personal character assassination statement. Not
rare in this newsgroup, only worded so as to APPEAR civil
and "informed."

I'll be able to use Morse, FM, SSB, AM, RTTY and other digital modes on
the amateur radio bands today, on Friday and at any time after that
date.

Wonderful...who was STOPPING you before?

Nothing at all stopped me before. Nothing will stop me afterward.

The FCC and some Federal Marshals can...if you continue
to operate illegally.

The "stopper" exists.



"On the bands?" No, you should have written "IN" the bands.

Tsk, tsk, factual English Error!

I made no error, Len. I frequently ask my friend John, "what's on the
bands?" I might ask, "what's on TV?" If I asked, "what's in TV?", that
wouldn't be the same question.

You have a friend who is a john? Most unusual fetish...

I can get ON any radio. I can't get INTO them except for
very large ones such as the Channel 13 transmitter up on
Mount Wilson (serving the LA area). I have literally and
physically stepped INTO that transmitter to examine its
aural-visual diplexer.

But, you say you can get INTO "the bands." That requires
a physical transformation that is unknown to modern science.
Perhaps you wish to share this unique paranormal ability
with the rest of us normals? Is it like an "out of body
experience?"


The AAA 500 is on at the California Speedway in Fontana on
Sunday...one example.

Is that a plan or an event?

Both. Obviously you are unaquainted with NASCAR. There's
no requirement that anyone in here be familiar with auto
racing. NASCAR drivers and crew are able to use two-way
radios before, during, and after a race, all without having
to take any amateur radio license tests. They don't even
have to know morse code!

Step away from working Frenchmen out of band on 6 meters
and imagine you are driving 180+ MPH on any big track such
as Daytona or Talladega...AND using "CW" to communicate
with the pits. Do you think you could finish one short
transmission on "CW" during any straight-away section of
the track? Avoiding crashes all the way, of course. :-)


I wrote "make-believe", Len. I know you aren't a real radio amateur.

Amazing! After all these years Heil FINALLY realizes that!

Well, you are still in "make-believe" in here thinking
you can CONTROL and order-around anyone you wish. I doubt
that will ever go away. :-)


THEY are always telling everyone what they should think!

Yes, you do.

FACTUAL ERROR.

Advocacy of consideration for others and their differing
opinions is in regards to DISCUSSION behavior. There is
NO REQUIREMENT that all be of like mind ("hive mind"
intellectual clone-coupling of thoughts) such as obeying
ALL that the League has said-dictated about amateur radio
activity in the United States.


Let's examine that idea: You believe that it bothers me that you won't
be a part of amateur radio?

Irrelevant. What you continue to think is predictable based
on previous archived behavior in here. That behavior is
indicated by the usual denigration of personal character of
anyone disagreeing with you about any subject. QED.

You seem to be adamant about your undemonstrated prescient
abilities. You can no more predict the future with any
accuracy than some back-of-the-newspaper "astrologer." :-)


Help? I may drink a toast!

One can only "drink" toast if it has been dissolved in
some liquid. I prefer mine chewed, fresh from the
toaster with margarine, perhaps with some marmalade.
Others mileage may vary.


Jim's name isn't Leonard H. Anderson. My name isn't Leonard H. Anderson.

That's good. I'm glad you have settled your duo's
character-identity crises! :-)


Were you aware that this newsgroup is about amateur radio? Did you know
that I'd be in a different radio newsgroup if I were interested in
discussion other users of the radio spectrum?

You are unstoppable! :-)


It'd be my guess that you've got the rustiest organ here, Len.

Tsk, my heart, lungs, liver, kidneys, pancreas, and
general genitalia are in working order. That's according
to a licensed, certified, experienced medical doctor.

He tells me that humans can't "rust." Not even if they
take too many iron pills. [a little 'medical humor' there]

My medical doctor doesn't know morse code, hasn't been
tested for that. No doubt you object to that and consider
him "unqualified!" :-)


You're irrelevant to amateur radio.

So you keep saying!

I surely do. I write it because it happens to be true.

Tsk, FACTUAL ERROR.

That YOU imagine something and express an opinion about that
imagining is NOT "truth." That is the "Robeson ploy" and
behavior pattern. Have you joined your local CAP group?
Had your picture on www.qrz.com wearing a worn flight suit?


You can expound on your
past working years, describe your northern and southern homes, tell
folks about your car and prescribe sage advice about horizontally
mounted loops, shielded with Reynolds Wrap (coaxial cable must have been
in short supply).

I can? Oh, my, you said at the beginning that I COULDN'T!

No, I don't believe I did.

Your belief system needs an over-haul. That you IMAGINE
something is not related to actual, observable-by-others
behavior.

There are places where you shouldn't.

I "shouldn't?" Are you one of the usual advocates of
elimination of the First Amendment of the US Constitution?
You must be. You are no longer in government employ and
therefore have NO official status to tell others what to
do and not do.

Why are you so afraid of Free Speech?



Okay, I understand that your problem was that you didn't know much about
shielded loops.

You could have easily made the loop from coaxial cable. All you'd have
needed to do was leave about a one-inch gap in the shield. A single
turn "sense" loop may or may not be placed inside the windings of the
shielded loop.

Tsk, your theory of voltage induction of an electromagnetic
LONG wavelength to a physically SMALL loop is FAULTY.

The induced RF voltage amplitude is dependent on the NUMBER
OF TURNS in the loop. Hello? That's very basic data. The
electrostatic shield was NOT any absolute necessity but
serves to reduce transients induced from nearby wideband
RFI impulses; i.e., it helps the signal-to-noise ratio.

Example: Of two radio clocks in this southern house, both
have "antennas" similar to an AM BC band receiver "loopstick."
[ferrite-core solenoidal coil, resonant with a fixed
capacity at 60 KHz] Neither one has a shielded "antenna,"
yet all operate very well, correcting their time after
midnight each 24-hour period according to received NIST
data.

You have failed to grasp the INTENT of my 60 KHz loop and
receiver: To lock onto the CARRIER frequency of WWVB and
to maintain that phase lock stably, despite external
transients common in households. Note: The carrier
frequency stability is given at the NIST time-frequency
pages on the 'web and it is to "atomic" references.

As the loop is a loss antenna, it is very likely that a
preamp would have been needed.

NO KIDDING?!? :-)

Tsk, you've not presented any factual data, calculations
or measured, to support your theory, let alone provided
anything in the way of guesses as to induced RF power
in your 160m loop from any known emitter power level
and distance.

I have a two-turn 5 foot diameter
version mounted about a foot off the ground. It is resonant at 1.850
MHz.

...which has a wavelength about 1/31st that of 60 KHz.

With a preamp it does a good job of minimizing local noise.

Must be one of those MAGIC preamplifiers that can
automatically discriminate between desired and non-
desired signals! I've seen such claims before and
have never seen it proven. :-)

Tsk, tsk, to provide the better signal-to-noise ratio
in a receiving loop antenna, several steps are necessary
in the real world. In order of importance:
1. Increase the loop plane area as much as practical.
2. Increase the number of conductor turns in the loop.*
3. Mount the loop plane vertically to reduce omni-
directional wideband transient impulse pickup,
plane in the direction of distant emitter ("edge-
on").
4. Resonate the loop inductance at the carrier
frequency to minimize adjacent-frequency response.
5. Add electrostatic shielding to reduce omni-
directional transient/wideband impulse response.

* Increasing the number of turns also increases the
loop inductance. That inductance will dictate the
resonating capacitance of item (5). Increasing the
number of turns will increase the series resistance
of the total conducting material which, in turn,
will decrease the resonant Q and adjacent-frequency
response. That is a compromise situation which is
dictated by the application and site.

It is
not as good at providing readable copy as a 565 foot long terminated
beverage without a preamp.

How do you terminate your beverages? Using a cork or
conventional bottle cap? Or do you drink all of it at
once? Do you do that when "drinking toast?"

Can you provide "readable copy" of anything after all
that beveraging? Do you know your state's DUI regulation
blood alcohol levels?

Is an amateur radio licensee residence REQUIRED to have
a 565-foot length of their property? What will they do
when and if amateur bands are allocated below 550 KHz?

At no time was the use of any Reynolds Wrap required.

You express antipathy about aluminum foil. Why? Are
you still an amateur at cooking food? Have you analyzed
the monetary difference between "kitchen" foil and
coaxial cable? Or haven't you been following advice
over on Jack Stone's Antennex web site?

Oh, yes, you once passed a 20-WPM code test for your
amateur radio license, became an amateur extra, and are
now the ne-plus-ultra EXPERT on ALL RADIO-ELECTRONICS
THEORY! Yes, that must be your "qualifications." :-)

You may be "over-qualified?" In your mind at least. :-)