What Revolution?
On Apr 12, 10:34�am, wrote:
On 12 Apr 2007 11:24:43 -0700, "AF6AY" wrote: On Apr 11, 3:33?pm, wrote: On 11 Apr 2007 16:20:45 -0700, "AF6AY" wrote: From: Dave Heil on Wed, 11 Apr 2007 03:27:14 GMT AF6AY wrote: From: on 10 Apr 2007 03:56:54 -0700 On Apr 9, 1:05 pm, Dave Heil wrote: wrote: On Apr 9, 2:05 am, Dave Heil wrote: wrote: On Apr 7, 5:31 pm, wrote: On Apr 3, 1:34?pm, "AF6AY" wrote: On Mar 29, 6:24?pm, Dave Heil wrote a typical Hey, no sweat, Mark. *I didn't decide until February 17, 2007, seeing a very local test session available on February 25; I was busy with other things on Friday the 23rd. *For me it was just "cram time" just like college days or the impossible-to-do-in-assigned-time- frame work assignments...download the QPs fromwww.ncvec.org, do a bunch of on-line practice tests (all of passing grades). tell me *what could you use the vecctor stuf witht he imagainary number on in Ham radio I learned some that cstuff in college NEVER found a use for it at all The Real + jImaginary numbers are excellent for handling Impedance and Admittance when there is a requirement in equating the Imaginary part (Reactance or Susceptance) to zero as in antenna matching over a narrow frequency range. It is also excellent for Impedance/Admittance matching in interstage tuned circuits (both receivers and transmitters). The "vector stuff" lets one quickly visualize, for example, the frequency characteristics of any antenna on a Smith Chart. A Z or Y Bridge or "Noise Bridge" (low-cost version of the more classic bridges) tells one the Resistance or Conductance and the Reactance or Susceptance of an antenna or the input to either a transmitter stage or the input to a receiver. Usually a Noise Bridge yields Y and the value of the resistive component (G) and the Susceptive componet (B); that is the equivalent of a paralleled resistance and capacitance/inductance at one frequency. Knowing complex number handling allows easy conversion to Z (the series impedance form) and the equivalent value of R (resistance) and X (reactance). In one case a few decades ago, I was able to "rotate" the characteristics of 8 different SAW filters around a Smith Chart to equal a near-all-resistive correct value with the capacitive part cancelled to near-zero for best power transfer into the SAW filter...using the determined length of small coaxial cable. Saved a lot of space as opposed to an elaborate matching network. (indeed might make passing the exam easier if I had never seen it before studing it for an ham exam) Well, yes, but you (and I and everyone else) cannot know future requirements, can we? :-) Handling complex quantities is very basic and can come in very handy. The usual ham who doesn't build or bother to check antennas more than "open" or "closed' connections won't bother with it, An antenna tuner, manual or automatic, can do all that stuff of matching. But, is it better to remain ignorant of certain operating characteristics of one's station or try to know it in more specific detail? :-) 73, Len AF6AY |
What Revolution?
On Apr 12, 1:59�pm, wrote:
On Apr 12, 2:53 pm, "AF6AY" wrote: On Apr 12, 3:27?am, wrote: On Apr 11, 12:27 am, Dave Heil wrote: Dave, what was your AFSC? Brian, don't expect an answer...:-) I'm still trying to get him to answer what he meant by his *reap* remark. *My meaning was pefectly clear, but he pulled a Robesin, made a funny about something despicable, now he won't respond. Typical. :-) Heil isn't going to tell anyone directly. *He will cloud his "answer" in generalized, ambiguous terms without being specific. Yup. So far he's holding true to form. :-) He "knows where he was" but won't say where or what he was doing there. WE are "supposed" to take "His Word" for it without yielding anything (WE don't have to be supplied with detailed answers?). Any way one slices that it is olde-tyme "snake oil salesman" BS. Heil wants to argue for the sake of arguing, always with the intention of putting down those he perceives are his newsgroup "enemies." Yup. He's still true to form in that department. :-) I have yet to meet a veteran of military service who does not recall his unit, where he was, what he did. *I have also met a few who wish to cloud the issue with non- specific generalities in order to refuse to admit what their military jobs were...because they wished to elevate themselves as doing more than they actually did. Engaged in seven (7) hostile actions and stolen valor? A Robeson clone in action! :-) Second-hand smoke is being outlawed everywhere. His is old, worn-out obsolete smoke. koff koff I'd love to watch a shuttle launch. So would I! One SSME on a test stand is impressive enough...three plus the SRBs lighting off would be no less than spectacular! Welp, Dave won't talk about his directional loops anymore... must have come down with his tower Most regretable for him...snif, snif... 73, Len AF6AY |
What Revolution?
On Apr 12, 11:56�am, wrote:
On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 14:54:42 -0400, "KH6HZ" wrote: "Dave Heil" wrote: * *In ONE EXAM SESSION. ...but not "right out of the box." Let's cut Windy some slack. Had he waited any longer to take those examinations, the "box" he was referring to might have been a coffin! realy I guess you are a dumb as you sound MD What can one say to a Callsign Thief & Collector? One who tried to defraud the U.S. government? Not a helluva lot. 73, Len AF6AY |
What Revolution?
From: Dave Heil on Thu, 12 Apr 2007 05:13:47 GMT
AF6AY wrote: From: Dave Heil on Wed, 11 Apr 2007 03:57:35 GMT I've told you a number of times that YOU are NOT the FCC and HAVE NO AUTHORITY over amateur radio. Are you losing control of yourself, Leonard? I wrote nothing about my being the FCC. You ACT like it. I told you that the FCC does not use the word "hobby" to define amateur radio. It's a fact! Incorrect as to everyone's INTERPRETATION of regulations. Any activity receiving NO MONETARY COMPENSATION is generally considered as a HOBBY. Of course that could be a CHARITABLE activity...but the IRS can interpret charitable work as the equivalent of monetary compensation and demand some tax payment on that. Amateur Radio MIGHT be considered RELIGIOUS. Cerainly many are devoted to amateur radio AS IF it were a religion, especially morse code skill. :-) What do you define amateur radio as? It can't be "broad- casting" because that is forbidden in regulations (very few exceptions there). It can't be for business purposes because that is not allowed by regulations. Are you thinking that amateur radio is a national "service?" The word "service" as used throughout Title 47 C.F.R. is a regulatory term denoting type and kind of radio activity being regulated; i.e., Private Land Mobile Radio SERVICE, Radio Control Radio SERVICE, Citizens Band Radio SERVICE. The FCC does NOT use the terms "green," "tyro," "beginner," "newbie," "neophyte," or "brand new" anywhere in Title 47 C.F.R. (including Part 97) as any sort of "classification" or other identification of radio amateurs. But...a long time ago the "amateur community" decided it wanted (terribly) the RANK-STATUS-PRIVILEGES of multiple classes, especially the morsemen holding on (with dear life) to their beloved morse code. The "upper" classes could then look down (and put down) the "lower" classes in great personal glee. That seems to be your version of events and it seems that, despite of reality, you're sticking to it. It IS reality. No, Leonard, it is not. Prove it. Show your work. In fact, if you'll read your own words, just down the page, you'll see a guy with a brand new callsign acting as if he were very conscious of his new found RANK-STATUS-PRIVILEGES. Tsk. Sarcasm to the Elite code-tested "Extras" who think they are the hottest snit in town. :-) I wrote nothing of NOBILITY or God. You are NOT nobility or God, yet you act as if you were. :-) So? I took and passed all the test elements for a US amateur radio license on 25 Feb 07. The FCC (not your royal asshole self) granted me an AMATEUR EXTRA class license on 7 Mar 07. So I've noted. I've noted written that I handed you your new license. "You handed me [any] license?" GREAT BIG *FACTUAL ERROR* BY HEIL !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Well, when you're an unbearable horse's patoot *without* an amateur radio license and an unbearable horse's patoot *with* an amateur radio license, it couldn't have been much of a surprise to you. Tsk, still have that terrible Personality Conflict with unbridled HATE sticking out all over, ey? Sure looks like it. :-) I can't actually hear you, Len. Unlike you, I've never ordered anyone to leave the newsgroup. :-) You have. I've never claimed to "work in the FCC." Quit ACTING like you do. You have NO AUTHORITY in regulating amateur radio. I gave you factual information. Ambiguous misdirection is all WE've seen. What was your AFSC? *WHAT* did Heil *DO* in Vietnam? Try to be more specific than "serving his country" or being "in a country at war." What is it to you, Len? I'm not feeding you information. You can't tell the truth, can you? FAKES and wanna-be heroes always use LIES and ambiguous generalities to describe their past experiences. You fit that syndrome. I've told you quite DIRECTLY that I've seen what you do with a little information. You don't have any and I'm not providing it for you. Now what will you do? Call you a liar and a fake is what I might do. You must have missed a bunch of bio material, Len. I worked in broadcast radio in Miami and Cincinnati, was an outside salesman for a couple of industrial electronics distributors, played in a traveling rock band and was ten years with Cincinnati's Big Joe Duskin. You can even Google Duskin if you like. Don't forget the other classified info: I worked part-time at Sears as a high schooler and my car is yellow. Yellow fits. I made no statement to the time frame in which teletype was used. Yes you did, in this newsgroup. What are you going to do NOW, your Grateness? Write Special Counsel Riley Hollingsworth and demand the FCC take away my amateur radio license due to "bad attitudes?" I'm dealing with your attitude this very moment. Poorly, Grate One. :-) can't silence my comments... I can't hear your comments. Neither can you understand Figures of Speech. :-) Yet you go on and on about other minutae of English language written words and phrases AS IF you were a linguistic expert. You are NOT one. I'm not going to silence you. You said you "can't hear me." :-) I'm going to counter you and make you an object of ridicule. You've tried to do that for years. To little effect... :-) That doesn't mean there are no beginners in amateur radio. Everyone with an amateur radio license was a newcomer at some point. Not the Grate Heil!!! Never! :-) Only you are trying to deny your beginner status. "Beginner?" :-) You're now a neophyte in amateur radio. The FCC doesn't use "neophyte" anywhere in Title 47 C.F.R. Do you consider yourself "above" the FCC? ...but not qualifying for the colloquial amateur radio expression "Extra *right* out of the box." Tsk, tsk, I've already told you what the colloquial phrase means, yet you continue to "redefine" it to suit your own hatred. Naughty, naughty... I don't want to hang out with you. I don't want you as an on-air pal. I really don't expect to encounter you on the ham bands. You certainly sound anti-social. Tsk, tsk. You know and I know and Jim knows that the 5 wpm Morse Code test had you beat. It did? I didn't know that! I quit bothering about morse code skill a long time ago...didn't make sense to me to keep it so long just to satisfy some minority amateurs who favored that mode for federal licensing. The FCC stated publicly in 1990 that the morse code test was not considered a determining factor for their granting amateur radio licenses...but they had to follow adminstrative policy by agreeing to ITU amateur radio regulations ("the treaty" as mislabeled by so many). Are you saying I could NEVER learn morse code? Tsk, tsk, so many (morsemen) have said that is EASY! Are you saying I exhibit "sloth" in "not wanting to learn?" How could you possibly say that without observing how I have worked or accomplished in my life? Of course you could WRITE IT here (no one can hear you scream over the Internet) but that would be woefully inaccurate. No, you and Miccolis are carefully phrasing things about me in a highly negative, derogatory way, intended to insult and demean. It's always been that way in here. :-) You got the license the way you could get the license. Brilliant deduction! Did you spend hours thinking that phrase up? Tsk, if you have some dispute about my getting an amateur radio license, you are free to contact the FCC and complain to them. Mention that I tested with a ARRL VEC examination team, the ARRL VEC in Newington confirmed that, and forwarded my test data to the FCC. Mention also your "elite status" as a supreme authority on amateur radio matters and how you consider yourself as primary judge and jury over and above those who disagree with you. That should go over big. I run into a number of folks who can't do high speed CW and whom I've never "put down". Tsk, tsk, you are losing your grip. :-) Is old age finally getting to you? Amateur structures falling down and damaging your house? Worked more Frenchmen out of band? What was your AFSC? AF6AY |
What Revolution?
AF6AY wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Thu, 12 Apr 2007 05:13:47 GMT AF6AY wrote: From: Dave Heil on Wed, 11 Apr 2007 03:57:35 GMT I've told you a number of times that YOU are NOT the FCC and HAVE NO AUTHORITY over amateur radio. Are you losing control of yourself, Leonard? I wrote nothing about my being the FCC. You ACT like it. No, Len, I don't. I told you that the FCC does not define amateur radio as a hobby. That's completely true. I told you that the FCC does not use the word "hobby" to define amateur radio. It's a fact! Incorrect as to everyone's INTERPRETATION of regulations. If anyone cares to look at Part 97, it can be demonstrated that you are incorrect. Any activity receiving NO MONETARY COMPENSATION is generally considered as a HOBBY. That's very interesting. Someone who likes to sit on his porch then has a hobby of porch sitting. A guy who drinks a twelve-pack every evening is, by your logic, a hobbyist. Heh. Of course that could be a CHARITABLE activity...but the IRS can interpret charitable work as the equivalent of monetary compensation and demand some tax payment on that. Wow! If you work for a charity and receive no compensation from that charity, the IRS can demand payment based on the money you didn't ever receive? It is indeed a topsy-turvy world. Amateur Radio MIGHT be considered RELIGIOUS. The FCC doesn't define it as religious or a hobby. Cerainly many are devoted to amateur radio AS IF it were a religion, especially morse code skill. :-) In my country, people are free to devote as much or as little time as they like to an activity which is not part of their job. So it is different where you live? What do you define amateur radio as? I'm quite comfortable with the FCC definition. It can't be "broad- casting" because that is forbidden in regulations (very few exceptions there). I've never called amateur radio "broadcasting." It can't be for business purposes because that is not allowed by regulations. I've never called amateur radio "business." Are you thinking that amateur radio is a national "service?" I'm quite comfortable with the FCC definition of amateur radio. The word "service" as used throughout Title 47 C.F.R. is a regulatory term denoting type and kind of radio activity being regulated; i.e., Private Land Mobile Radio SERVICE, Radio Control Radio SERVICE, Citizens Band Radio SERVICE. I'm aware of that. Why don't you tell me something that I don't already know? The FCC does NOT use the terms "green," "tyro," "beginner," "newbie," "neophyte," or "brand new" anywhere in Title 47 C.F.R. (including Part 97) as any sort of "classification" or other identification of radio amateurs. That's "cerainly" true, Len. Anyone who is a beginner at anything is considered a newbie, neophyte, novice, beginner or green. It doesn't apply only to amateur radio. But...a long time ago the "amateur community" decided it wanted (terribly) the RANK-STATUS-PRIVILEGES of multiple classes, especially the morsemen holding on (with dear life) to their beloved morse code. The "upper" classes could then look down (and put down) the "lower" classes in great personal glee. That seems to be your version of events and it seems that, despite of reality, you're sticking to it. It IS reality. No, Leonard, it is not. Prove it. Show your work. The burden would be upon you to show that is is reality. In fact, if you'll read your own words, just down the page, you'll see a guy with a brand new callsign acting as if he were very conscious of his new found RANK-STATUS-PRIVILEGES. Tsk. Sarcasm to the Elite code-tested "Extras" who think they are the hottest snit in town. :-) Double tsk. I don't think I'm the hottest "snit" in this or any other town. I'm just a guy with forty-three years more experience in amateur radio than you. That's a fact. Just how long have you had this idea that you are NOBILITY? Did God give that to you or did you develop it on your own? I wrote nothing of NOBILITY or God. You are NOT nobility or God, yet you act as if you were. :-) I wrote nothing of NOBILITY or God. So? I took and passed all the test elements for a US amateur radio license on 25 Feb 07. The FCC (not your royal asshole self) granted me an AMATEUR EXTRA class license on 7 Mar 07. So I've noted. I've noted written that I handed you your new license. "You handed me [any] license?" GREAT BIG *FACTUAL ERROR* BY HEIL !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Nope, just a typo. Read "I've not written..." Please continue your rant. Well, when you're an unbearable horse's patoot *without* an amateur radio license and an unbearable horse's patoot *with* an amateur radio license, it couldn't have been much of a surprise to you. Tsk, still have that terrible Personality Conflict with unbridled HATE sticking out all over, ey? Sure looks like it. :-) I don't think about you often enough to hate you, Len. I've provided my opinion that you're an unbearable horse's patoot with or without an amateur radio license. I can't actually hear you, Len. Unlike you, I've never ordered anyone to leave the newsgroup. :-) You have. No, Len, you've made another factual error. ...can't change my mind. You've done that on your own on a number of occasions. :-) Ergo, YOU MUST RULE. Sorry, you DO NOT rule. You don't even work in the FCC. I've never claimed to "work in the FCC." We're in the same boat. Neither of us works for the FCC. Quit ACTING like you do. I'm not ACTING like I "work in the FCC", Len. You have NO AUTHORITY in regulating amateur radio. I've claimed no Federal authority, Len. I gave you factual information. Ambiguous misdirection is all WE've seen. We? Do you have a Vibroplex in your pocket? I gave you factual information without a hint of misdirection. What was your AFSC? Just a day or two ago, you thought it was an MOS. I told you that it's none of your business then. *WHAT* did Heil *DO* in Vietnam? Try to be more specific than "serving his country" or being "in a country at war." What is it to you, Len? I'm not feeding you information. You can't tell the truth, can you? I surely can tell you the truth, Len. The truth is that I'm not feeding you information. I could provide you the information you seek but I'm not doing so. FAKES and wanna-be heroes always use LIES and ambiguous generalities to describe their past experiences. I'm not a military FAKE, Len. I've not lied. I've not claimed any heroics. I've just not provided you with the information you seek. Now what will you do? You fit that syndrome. You're badly mistaken. I've told you quite DIRECTLY that I've seen what you do with a little information. You don't have any and I'm not providing it for you. Now what will you do? Call you a liar and a fake is what I might do. Then we'd have two more factual errors that you would have made. A man can't be called a liar when he has made no claims. A man can't be called a fake when he has made no claims. You have a dilemma. I'm not that concerned with boy-wonder rock musician turned "diplomat" that I care to look unless someone sends me the web addresses. You must have missed a bunch of bio material, Len. I worked in broadcast radio in Miami and Cincinnati, was an outside salesman for a couple of industrial electronics distributors, played in a traveling rock band and was ten years with Cincinnati's Big Joe Duskin. You can even Google Duskin if you like. Don't forget the other classified info: I worked part-time at Sears as a high schooler and my car is yellow. Yellow fits. Remember your hissy fit a few days back--the one where you harped on people you said wouldn't say things to your face that they'd written here? Remember that I told you that such a description could easily be applied to you and that if you'd said some of the things to my face that you'd written here, you'd find yourself the victim of a memorable wedgie? Your "yellow fits" would be such a statement. AS IF radio teletype hasn't been used for 50 years before that. I made no statement to the time frame in which teletype was used. Yes you did, in this newsgroup. No, Leonard. None of my comments or statements indicated that Teletype had not been used in the fifty years before my assignment to Guinea-Bissau. You're just wrong--again. What are you going to do NOW, your Grateness? Write Special Counsel Riley Hollingsworth and demand the FCC take away my amateur radio license due to "bad attitudes?" I'm dealing with your attitude this very moment. Poorly, Grate One. :-) You aren't tough to handle, Leonid. can't silence my comments... I can't hear your comments. Neither can you understand Figures of Speech. :-) :-) :-) :-) Yet you go on and on about other minutae of English language written words and phrases AS IF you were a linguistic expert. You are NOT one. You don't know if I am or if I am not. I'm doing much better with my native tongue that the self-proclaimed "PROFESSIONAL WRITER." I'm not going to silence you. You said you "can't hear me." :-) There you go! If I can't hear you, I can't silence you. :-) :-) I'm going to counter you and make you an object of ridicule. You've tried to do that for years. To little effect... :-) You should think about that. You certainly lost control of yourself--and not for the first time. It is plain to see that you enjoy dishing out the insults and denigrations. You don't like it at all when someone gets the best of you. That doesn't mean there are no beginners in amateur radio. Everyone with an amateur radio license was a newcomer at some point. Not the Grate Heil!!! Never! :-) Yes, Len, forty-three years ago, I was a beginner in amateur radio. Back then, I was both a Novice and a novice. Only you are trying to deny your beginner status. "Beginner?" :-) Yes, Len, you're a beginner in amateur radio. That's a fact. You're now a neophyte in amateur radio. The FCC doesn't use "neophyte" anywhere in Title 47 C.F.R. That doesn't matter. The term applies to a beginner in any endeavor. Someone who has never played a guitar and who buys one and attempts to play it, is a beginner. A man who just obtained his first amateur radio license is a beginner at amateur radio. Live with it. Do you consider yourself "above" the FCC? In what way, Leonard? I'm part of "We the people." In that way, I consider myself above the FCC. Don't you? ...but not qualifying for the colloquial amateur radio expression "Extra *right* out of the box." Tsk, tsk, I've already told you what the colloquial phrase means, yet you continue to "redefine" it to suit your own hatred. Naughty, naughty... The continuing is yours. You continue to leave out that word "right" which precedes the phrase "out of the box" in your vintage boast. I don't want to hang out with you. I don't want you as an on-air pal. I really don't expect to encounter you on the ham bands. You certainly sound anti-social. Tsk, tsk. You've made a common mistake. If a guy says, "I don't like peach ice cream", it doesn't mean that the man doesn't like ice cream. You know and I know and Jim knows that the 5 wpm Morse Code test had you beat. It did? Yes, it did. I didn't know that! Yes, you did. I quit bothering about morse code skill a long time ago...didn't make sense to me to keep it so long just to satisfy some minority amateurs who favored that mode for federal licensing. You told us that you gave up. You quit. Now you describe it as "I quit bothering about Morse code..." The FCC stated publicly in 1990 that the morse code test was not considered a determining factor for their granting amateur radio licenses...but they had to follow adminstrative policy by agreeing to ITU amateur radio regulations ("the treaty" as mislabeled by so many). What about it? It was a requirement for obtaining an amateur radio license until very recently. You "quit bothering" a long, long time ago. Are you saying I could NEVER learn morse code? When did you start to learn it? How old are you now? Tsk, tsk, so many (morsemen) have said that is EASY! It was a snap, Len. Are you saying I exhibit "sloth" in "not wanting to learn?" You told us that you gave up. How could you possibly say that without observing how I have worked or accomplished in my life? I didn't say you exhibited "sloth". You brought up the term. As you mention, I didn't observe what you did in your life. I do know that you told us that you reached a point in learning Morse code where you simply gave up. Of course you could WRITE IT here (no one can hear you scream over the Internet) but that would be woefully inaccurate. I think you found learning the Morse code tougher than you thought. Is that why you gave up on learning it? No, you and Miccolis are carefully phrasing things about me in a highly negative, derogatory way, intended to insult and demean. It's always been that way in here. :-) You left out "accurate" in your list of carefully phrased things. You got the license the way you could get the license. Brilliant deduction! Did you spend hours thinking that phrase up? It wasn't necessary to stew on it or to mull it over. You were waiting over seven years back but the FCC only reduced the Morse exam to f i v e wpm. You waited for another s e v e n years until the Morse exam went away. You got the license the way you could get the license. Be proud! You've finally done it. You were "otherwise qualified." You must have been the guy about whom Carl was writing. You were the "otherwise qualified" guy. Tsk, if you have some dispute about my getting an amateur radio license, you are free to contact the FCC and complain to them. Mention that I tested with a ARRL VEC examination team, the ARRL VEC in Newington confirmed that, and forwarded my test data to the FCC. I don't have any dispute, Len. You obtained your license under the regulations currently in place. Be happy! Mention also your "elite status" as a supreme authority on amateur radio matters and how you consider yourself as primary judge and jury over and above those who disagree with you. That should go over big. I don't claim any elite status, Len. I'm just not a Lennie-come-lately. I run into a number of folks who can't do high speed CW and whom I've never "put down". Tsk, tsk, you are losing your grip. :-) Not at all, Len. Most folks I run into as I go about my daily life don't act the way you act. :-) Is old age finally getting to you? I'm not yet old, Len. I plan to be some day. Amateur structures falling down and damaging your house? We had some hail recently. It didn't do any damage. I didn't think to ask if it was professional or amateur hail. Since it came down with no monetary compensation, it was hobby hail. Worked more Frenchmen out of band? Worked *any* Frenchmen, Len? What was your AFSC? I'm thinking of a number... Dave K8MN |
What Revolution?
AF6AY wrote:
The usual ham who doesn't build or bother to check antennas more than "open" or "closed' connections won't bother with it, An antenna tuner, manual or automatic, can do all that stuff of matching. Antenna measurement equipment such as the Autek or MFJ-259 series has never been more affordable than now. But, is it better to remain ignorant of certain operating characteristics of one's station or try to know it in more specific detail? :-) Have you run the numbers on your new vertical? Dave K8MN |
What Revolution?
AF6AY wrote:
On Apr 12, 1:59�pm, wrote: Heil isn't going to tell anyone directly. �He will cloud his "answer" in generalized, ambiguous terms without being specific. Yup. So far he's holding true to form. :-) He "knows where he was" but won't say where or what he was doing there. You're starting to get it! WE are "supposed" to take "His Word" for it without yielding anything... Take my word for what? What claim have I made? (WE don't have to be supplied with detailed answers?). That's correct. Any way one slices that it is olde-tyme "snake oil salesman" BS. If you slice it correctly, it means you don't know much of anything about my military service. It bugs you. Dave K8MN |
What Revolution?
Dudley wrote:
"Dave Heil" wrote in message . net... AF6AY wrote: On Apr 12, 1:59?pm, wrote: Heil isn't going to tell anyone directly. ?He will cloud his "answer" in generalized, ambiguous terms without being specific. Yup. So far he's holding true to form. :-) He "knows where he was" but won't say where or what he was doing there. You're starting to get it! WE are "supposed" to take "His Word" for it without yielding anything... Take my word for what? What claim have I made? (WE don't have to be supplied with detailed answers?). That's correct. Any way one slices that it is olde-tyme "snake oil salesman" BS. If you slice it correctly, it means you don't know much of anything about my military service. It bugs you. Dave K8MN My curiousity is piqued. Why does Len feel that you how HIM any bits of history or personal details regarding YOUR military service? Len wants me to provide the information so that he can live up to the terms of the very accurate profile of his actions which N2EY wrote some years back. It says: "No matter what job, educational level, employer, or government/military service that a radio amateur has, if said radio amateur opposes Mr. Anderson's views, he/she will be the target of Mr. Anderson's insults, ridicule, name-calling, factual errors, ethnic/racial/religious slurs, excessive emoticons and/or general infantile behavior." --N2EY Len likes to refer to the profile as character assassination. The problem with that is that he can be shown to have done all of these things over and over and over. For it to be character assassination, it would have to be shown that Len has not engaged in such behavior. You certainly "owe" him nothing in this regard, and other than Len is issuing some kind of childish grade-school challenge ("step over this line...I dare ya..") his queries are pointless babble. I think you've summed it up in a nutshell. You are correct. It clearly bothers Len that you are mum on this topic, as well you should be. What will Len next do? Issue another, more serious challenge and "double dog dare you" to satisfy his perverse curiousity? Keep him guessing. It gives Len something to further grouse about...as if he needs same. Len lives up to the N2EY profile of his actions today as he did for all of those years during which he had no amateur radio license. What he claims to decry in others, he does himself. Name and callsign not given because of you-know-who. Dave K8MN |
What Revolution?
"Dave Heil" wrote in message . net... AF6AY wrote: On Apr 12, 1:59?pm, wrote: Heil isn't going to tell anyone directly. ?He will cloud his "answer" in generalized, ambiguous terms without being specific. Yup. So far he's holding true to form. :-) He "knows where he was" but won't say where or what he was doing there. You're starting to get it! WE are "supposed" to take "His Word" for it without yielding anything... Take my word for what? What claim have I made? (WE don't have to be supplied with detailed answers?). That's correct. Any way one slices that it is olde-tyme "snake oil salesman" BS. If you slice it correctly, it means you don't know much of anything about my military service. It bugs you. Dave K8MN My curiousity is piqued. Why does Len feel that you how HIM any bits of history or personal details regarding YOUR military service? You certainly "owe" him nothing in this regard, and other than Len is issuing some kind of childish grade-school challenge ("step over this line...I dare ya..") his queries are pointless babble. You are correct. It clearly bothers Len that you are mum on this topic, as well you should be. What will Len next do? Issue another, more serious challenge and "double dog dare you" to satisfy his perverse curiousity? Keep him guessing. It gives Len something to further grouse about...as if he needs same. Name and callsign not given because of you-know-who. |
What Revolution?
"Dave Heil" wrote in message .net... Dudley wrote: "Dave Heil" wrote in message . net... AF6AY wrote: On Apr 12, 1:59?pm, wrote: Heil isn't going to tell anyone directly. ?He will cloud his "answer" in generalized, ambiguous terms without being specific. Yup. So far he's holding true to form. :-) He "knows where he was" but won't say where or what he was doing there. You're starting to get it! WE are "supposed" to take "His Word" for it without yielding anything... Take my word for what? What claim have I made? (WE don't have to be supplied with detailed answers?). That's correct. Any way one slices that it is olde-tyme "snake oil salesman" BS. If you slice it correctly, it means you don't know much of anything about my military service. It bugs you. Dave K8MN My curiousity is piqued. Why does Len feel that you how HIM any bits of history or personal details regarding YOUR military service? Len wants me to provide the information so that he can live up to the terms of the very accurate profile of his actions which N2EY wrote some years back. It says: "No matter what job, educational level, employer, or government/military service that a radio amateur has, if said radio amateur opposes Mr. Anderson's views, he/she will be the target of Mr. Anderson's insults, ridicule, name-calling, factual errors, ethnic/racial/religious slurs, excessive emoticons and/or general infantile behavior." --N2EY Len likes to refer to the profile as character assassination. The problem with that is that he can be shown to have done all of these things over and over and over. For it to be character assassination, it would have to be shown that Len has not engaged in such behavior. You certainly "owe" him nothing in this regard, and other than Len is issuing some kind of childish grade-school challenge ("step over this line...I dare ya..") his queries are pointless babble. I think you've summed it up in a nutshell. You are correct. It clearly bothers Len that you are mum on this topic, as well you should be. What will Len next do? Issue another, more serious challenge and "double dog dare you" to satisfy his perverse curiousity? Keep him guessing. It gives Len something to further grouse about...as if he needs same. Len lives up to the N2EY profile of his actions today as he did for all of those years during which he had no amateur radio license. What he claims to decry in others, he does himself. Name and callsign not given because of you-know-who. Dave K8MN Allow me the luxury of but a comment or two, then I shall no longer lend any further credibility to Len by discussing this. I've noted that Len takes, as I said, a childish, perverted pleasure in playing word games while smiling to himself and needling others, yourself especially. He should be left ignored. Len is apparently self-absorbed and, as noted, becomes somewhat disgruntled when his diatribes go unanswered. Len desires attention...nay...NEEDS attention as evidenced by his lengthy posts. To ignore Len is to insult Len. He needs you far more than you need him. I look at Len with a sidewards, understanding glance. His comments are bolstered by but a few in these groups and if his supporters, such as the Myna Bird are any indication of his standing...well, that pretty much sums it up. 73 |
What Revolution?
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 03:33:48 GMT, Dave Heil
wrote: AF6AY wrote: From: Dave Heil on Thu, 12 Apr 2007 05:13:47 GMT AF6AY wrote: From: Dave Heil on Wed, 11 Apr 2007 03:57:35 GMT snip What do you define amateur radio as? I'm quite comfortable with the FCC definition. Personally, I prefer the definition of Amateur Radio provided by the ARRL, RAC, RSGB (and most other Amateur Radio organizations) - a hobby activity. From a regulatory perspective, it is a service provided to the public. It's what we do with that service that makes it a hobby - and an excellent one at that! ....although sitting on the porch with a dozen beers may also have some merit - I'll check that one out this summer :P snip 73, Leo |
What Revolution?
On Apr 14, 3:36�am, "Dudley" anon@anon wrote:
"Dave Heil" wrote in message .net... Dudley wrote: "Dave Heil" wrote in message .net... AF6AY wrote: On Apr 12, 1:59?pm, wrote: Heil isn't going to tell anyone directly. He will cloud his "answer" in generalized, ambiguous terms without being specific. Yup. So far he's holding true to form. *:-) Actually, K8MN *will* tell people directly. He just won't tell Len what Len demands to know. He "knows where he was" but won't say where or what he was doing there. Sure he will. He just won't tell Len. You're starting to get it! WE are "supposed" to take "His Word" for it without yielding anything... Take my word for what? *What claim have I made? (WE don't have to be supplied with detailed answers?). That's correct. Note the use of the papal/royal "WE" by Len. And the use of K8MN's last name, rather than callsign or first name. Any way one slices that it is olde-tyme "snake oil salesman" BS. If you slice it correctly, it means you don't know much of anything about my military service. *It bugs you. Len appears to presume that anyone who has done something honorable will tell all about it in a public forum like this. He also appears to presume that failure to do so means the person has something to hide. In my experience, both those presumptions are simply incorrect as general rules. Often a person who has done something honorable does not feel the need to blab it all over the place. There is also the fact that if someone is on Len's enemies list, what they have done makes no difference in how Len will treat them. He will use his attack techniques on them regardless of, say, their actual military/combat experience. This has been demonstrated so many times that anyone with sense whom Len considers an "enemy" doesn't bother to tell Len anything about their life experience. My curiousity is piqued. Why does Len feel that you how HIM any bits of history or personal details regarding YOUR military service? Len wants me to provide the information so that he can live up to the terms of the very accurate profile of his actions which N2EY wrote some years back. *It says: "No matter what job, educational level, employer, or government/military service that a radio amateur has, if said radio amateur opposes Mr. Anderson's views, he/she will be the target of Mr. Anderson's insults, ridicule, name-calling, factual errors, ethnic/racial/religious slurs, excessive emoticons and/or general infantile behavior." * * * * * * * * * * * * --N2EY Yep. But that's an old version of the profile, which has been refined and updated over the years. Here's the latest version, straight from the author: "No matter what employment, education, life experience or government/military service someone has, if that person disagrees with any of Len's views, or corrects any of Len's mistakes, s/he will be the target of Len's insults, ridicule, name-calling, factual errors, ethnic/gender/racial slurs, excessive emoticons, orders to shut up and/or general infantile behavior." Sums it all up in one long but accurate sentence. Len likes to refer to the profile as character assassination. *The problem with that is that he can be shown to have done all of these things over and over and over. *For it to be character assassination, it would have to be shown that Len has not engaged in such behavior. Exactly. You certainly "owe" him nothing in this regard, and other than Len is issuing some kind of childish grade-school challenge ("step over this line...I dare ya..") his queries are pointless babble. I think you've summed it up in a nutshell. You are correct. It clearly bothers Len that you are mum on this topic, as well you should be. What will Len next do? Issue another, more serious challenge and "double dog dare you" to satisfy his perverse curiousity? That's one possibility. Another is to accuse the person of having something to hide, being ashamed, or outright lying. Keep him guessing. It gives Len something to further grouse about...as if he needs same. Len lives up to the N2EY profile of his actions today as he did for all of those years during which he had no amateur radio license. *What he claims to decry in others, he does himself. That's what the shrinks call "projection". Len also exhibits classic textbook "transference" behavior, where he attributes to one person the actions of someone completely different. Then there's the inclusion of obviously intentional mistakes in Len's posts, as a way of getting attention from those who correct those mistakes. That one presents a bit of a moral dilemma, because to leave the mistakes uncorrected may cause some to be deceived by them. IMHO, it's all about Len somehow "proving" he is better than anyone who disagrees with him. Name and callsign not given because of you-know-who. Lord Voldemort? Allow me the luxury of but a comment or two, then I shall no longer lend any further credibility to Len by discussing this. I've noted that Len takes, as I said, a childish, perverted pleasure in playing word games while smiling to himself and needling others, yourself especially. He should be left ignored. Agreed. In the end, most people do just that. KH6HZ was probably the first, almost a decade ago. Len is apparently self-absorbed and, as noted, becomes somewhat disgruntled when his diatribes go unanswered. Len desires attention...nay...NEEDS attention as evidenced by his lengthy posts. To ignore Len is to insult Len. He needs you far more than you need him. Compare the number, length and tone of Len's posts (under a variety of screen names) and the truth of your statements becomes apparent. I look at Len with a sidewards, understanding glance. His comments are bolstered by but a few in these groups and if his supporters, such as the Myna Bird are any indication of his standing...well, that pretty much sums it up. I'm not sure who "Myna Bird" is, but I think you are on target. 73 de Jim, N2EY ....going back to just-reading mode.... |
What Revolution?
wrote:
KH6HZ was probably the first, almost a decade ago. For the most part. Every now and then I like to needle Grandpa a little, though. I look at it as sort of holding a mirror under his nose to make sure he's still breathing. Can't be too sure at his age, after all. 73 kh6hz |
What Revolution?
|
What Revolution?
|
What Revolution?
|
What Revolution?
|
What Revolution?
|
What Revolution?
|
What Revolution?
John Smith I wrote:
wrote: ... why do you care? I guess you are ashamed of your service ... He hasn't the sense. Now we've heard from the anonymous "John Smith". Well "John", what is it for which I haven't the sense? Is it that I haven't the sense to care who is asking or are you stating that I haven't the sense to be ashamed of my military service. It has to be one of those. Either way, your comments don't make sense. He is a noble hero in his own mind... I've never claimed hero status and in fact, I've denied hero status here. Your statement goes *poof* ! ...a petty bickering slob in the minds of others ... That's another interesting take you have, "John". A couple of characters want me to disclose information on my military service. I haven't provided it, yet the quizzing doesn't stop. Where is the bickering coming from? You have no information on whether I'm a slob of any kind, but you're quick to make such a claim. You haven't disclosed much about yourself, "John". Feel free to send Len and hot-ham-and-whatever your military service information if you like. Dave K8MN |
What Revolution?
"John Smith I" wrote in message ... wrote: ... why do you care? I guess you are ashamed of your service ... He hasn't the sense. He is a noble hero in his own mind, a petty bickering slob in the minds of others ... JS Oh, my. Speaking of petty... |
What Revolution?
"Dave Heil" wrote in message ink.net... John Smith I wrote: wrote: ... why do you care? I guess you are ashamed of your service ... He hasn't the sense. Now we've heard from the anonymous "John Smith". Well "John", what is it for which I haven't the sense? Is it that I haven't the sense to care who is asking or are you stating that I haven't the sense to be ashamed of my military service. It has to be one of those. Either way, your comments don't make sense. He is a noble hero in his own mind... I've never claimed hero status and in fact, I've denied hero status here. Your statement goes *poof* ! ...a petty bickering slob in the minds of others ... That's another interesting take you have, "John". A couple of characters want me to disclose information on my military service. I haven't provided it, yet the quizzing doesn't stop. Where is the bickering coming from? You have no information on whether I'm a slob of any kind, but you're quick to make such a claim. You haven't disclosed much about yourself, "John". Feel free to send Len and hot-ham-and-whatever your military service information if you like. Dave K8MN Again, I stand by my earlier statements that nobody, especially Dave, "owes" anybody any kind of details or history of any military service. For those who ask, no, DEMAND such details, I submit that it is nobody's business. John is merely employing the school yard taunt that Len has perfected. He is challenging you to prove that you engaged in some sort of military service while "John" makes no such claims of having done same. "John" apparently suffers from undersized cujones.... upon refelction I agree uutterly |
What Revolution?
we have your words here always attack others but being unwilling to expose yourself at all you are almost as much a chipher as "JS" but he is a cipher by choice. you OTOH are what? a cipher by chooice or being a nothing more than a cipher I've yet to see Dave attack others. Dave is one of the nicer respondents in this group and comports himself very well. He responds accordingly, but has never, in my experience, attacked anyone. His responses to the attacks of others, yourself included, are most often met with a great amount of civility. If you can prove otherwise, Morkie, please quote the posts. Oh, and Mork? May I remind you that Dave long ago killfiled you, so your snippets to his responses go unseen by him. Unlike myself, Dave feels that responding to you is beneath his dignity. I should follow Dave's example, but sometimes I cannot help but lower myself into your dysfunctional gutter and post an occasional response to your delusional comments. At the very least, Morkie, I can climb out of your gutter and continue with my life. You, on the other hand, have no life other than Usenet and the Nim board. You are hopelessly stuck in your gutter and have no way out. I pity you. |
What Revolution?
Dave Heil wrote:
... That's another interesting take you have, "John". A couple of characters want me to disclose information on my military service. I haven't provided it, yet the quizzing doesn't stop. Where is the bickering coming from? You have no information on whether I'm a slob of any kind, but you're quick to make such a claim. You haven't disclosed much about yourself, "John". Feel free to send Len and hot-ham-and-whatever your military service information if you like. Dave K8MN You fill this ng with more chit than mark battling his insane persecutors. If your example here is applied towards defining amateur policy, you would have us all becoming a bunch of old bickering women. Of course, some already are ... JS |
What Revolution?
Dudley wrote:
... "John" apparently suffers from undersized cujones.... upon refelction I agree uutterly Well, I have never examined the size of the cojones of the bickering women here, but I suspect they have none ... their opinion of themselves most likely differs, and this is obvious--as I previously stated. JS |
What Revolution?
Dudley wrote:
... Oh, my. Speaking of petty... So, you seen heils' example of petty bickering and think you can do better. What? Now a contest between you and heil to fill the ng with this worthless chit? JS |
What Revolution?
John Smith I wrote:
Dave Heil wrote: ... That's another interesting take you have, "John". A couple of characters want me to disclose information on my military service. I haven't provided it, yet the quizzing doesn't stop. Where is the bickering coming from? You have no information on whether I'm a slob of any kind, but you're quick to make such a claim. You haven't disclosed much about yourself, "John". Feel free to send Len and hot-ham-and-whatever your military service information if you like. You fill this ng with more chit than mark battling his insane persecutors. Nobody fills this newsgroup with anything, more than Mark Morgan. He has only a few persecutors and, as far as I know, only one of them is actually insane. My posts are few when compared to Mark's. My posts are far fewer than Len Anderson's and don't run to lengthy, pontificating diatribes. In contrast with your own posts, I post using my own name and my callsign. Give it a try, "John." If your example here is applied towards defining amateur policy, you would have us all becoming a bunch of old bickering women. If your example were used, we'd all act like people in a witness protection program. It is quite easy to hide in the shadows of anonymity and snipe. Of course, some already are ... I'm thinking of the name "John"... Dave K8MN |
What Revolution?
John Smith I wrote:
Dudley wrote: ... "John" apparently suffers from undersized cujones.... upon refelction I agree uutterly "During the time I read his posts, he's managed to screw up almost all of them at one time or another." --Dave Heil, writing of Mark Morgan's scrambling of words Well, I have never examined the size of the cojones of the bickering women here... Let us pause to ponder your peculiar statement for a moment. ...but I suspect they have none ... their opinion of themselves most likely differs, and this is obvious--as I previously stated. You're a fellow who won't even use his own name or his callsign. You sit in the shadows and make statements about the courage of others. You're pathetic. Dave K8MN |
What Revolution?
Dave Heil wrote:
[chit] Dave K8MN Get in the habit of using more toilet paper, the smell is displeasing ... JS |
What Revolution?
John Smith I wrote:
Dudley wrote: ... Oh, my. Speaking of petty... So, you seen heils' example of petty bickering and think you can do better. "Heil's" It really is interesting to read what you find to be petty bickering. If you're really reading the newsgroup, you can surely find at least two individuals who are harping about the Air Force Specialty Code of another. What? Now a contest between you and heil to fill the ng with this worthless chit? Feel free to point us toward any of your posts which you feel are of significance, "John." Dave K8MN |
What Revolution?
John Smith I wrote:
Dave Heil wrote: [chit] Get in the habit of using more toilet paper, the smell is displeasing ... I don't find the smell of toilet paper to be displeasing. Was your statement (above) one of your significant posts? Dave K8MN |
What Revolution?
On Apr 14, 2:16 pm, wrote:
Then there's the inclusion of obviously intentional mistakes in Len's posts, as a way of getting attention from those who correct those mistakes. That one presents a bit of a moral dilemma, because to leave the mistakes uncorrected may cause some to be deceived by them. The mistake is used to bait those who have an unreasonable need to correct others. Miccolis, Heil and Robesin fit that profile. |
What Revolution?
|
What Revolution?
Dave Heil wrote:
... "Heil's" ... OK. It seems a quick lesson in grammar is necessary at this point, so you do not keep appearing as an illiterate idiot. It is can be stated at it's, let us can be stated as let's, he is can be stated as he's ... Possession is shown as that guys' car, that girls' clothes, sues' home ... And, heils' manner is barbaric, idiotic and moronic! Get it right moron, take an english class! JS |
What Revolution?
John Smith I wrote:
Dave Heil wrote: ... "Heil's" ... OK. It seems a quick lesson in grammar is necessary at this point, so you do not keep appearing as an illiterate idiot. It is can be stated at it's, let us can be stated as let's, he is can be stated as he's ... So far, so good. Possession is shown as that guys' car, that girls' clothes, sues' home ... *snicker* "guy's car", "girl's clothes", "Sue's home" You have very little idea of how to use an apostrophe, much less a capital letter. And, heils' manner is barbaric, idiotic and moronic! "Heil's" manner is none of the above. Get it right moron, take an english class! It is because I've taken English classes that I'm able to see your errors. Dave K8MN |
What Revolution?
John Smith I wrote:
Dave Heil wrote: ... "Heil's" ... OK. It seems a quick lesson in grammar is necessary at this point, so you do not keep appearing as an illiterate idiot. By the way, "John", I was happy that I provide the quick lesson in grammar which you requested. Dave K8MN |
What Revolution?
On Apr 14, 9:18 pm, Dave Heil wrote:
wrote: Hey, Dave. What word did you think Mark might have scrambled??? During the time I read his posts, he's managed to screw up almost all of them at one time or another. Dave K8MN Dave, when I posted "reap," what word did YOU have in mind that Mark might scramble??? |
What Revolution?
Dave Heil wrote:
.. "guy's car", "girl's clothes", "Sue's home" ... Right: guy is car (guess he could be, on some alien planet.) girl is clothes, well, sometimes it seems the xyl is ... sue is home, she just might be ... JS |
What Revolution?
Dave Heil wrote:
John Smith I wrote: Dave Heil wrote: ... "Heil's" ... OK. It seems a quick lesson in grammar is necessary at this point, so you do not keep appearing as an illiterate idiot. By the way, "John", I was happy that I provide the quick lesson in grammar which you requested. Dave K8MN you have no shame, moron ... JS |
What Revolution?
"John Smith I" wrote:
Get it right moron, take an english class! http://chuma.cas.usf.edu/~olson/pms/apostrophe.html Sorry John. Dave is right. You are incorrect. Contractions are formed as 's: He Is = he's. Posessives are likewise formed as 's: Heil's contacts all used CW. Plural possessives are formed as s': Heil's contacts' radios were set to CW mode. 73 kh6hz |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:08 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com