libel and VE Testing
 

wrote:

nope it is becuase I did not yeaild to the blackmail of Steve J
robeson 9 years agao

Blackmail is a very serious crime. One has to wonder why the Houghton County
Prosecuting Attorney didn't haul Steve in 8.5 years ago...

libel and VE Testing
 

"KH6HZ" wrote in message
...
wrote:

nope it is becuase I did not yeaild to the blackmail of Steve J
robeson 9 years agao

Blackmail is a very serious crime. One has to wonder why the Houghton
County
Prosecuting Attorney didn't haul Steve in 8.5 years ago...

You know how Mark is. He makes up "laws" as he sees fit depending on the
time and curcumstances.
In fact, one could well make the claim that Mark is unjustly and wrongfully
accusing others of "staking", harrassment, and a myriad of other allegations
that suit his fancy at the moment.

Mark is the little boy crying WOLF!

libeland VE Testing
 

wrote in message
...
On Sun, 11 Mar 2007 04:55:36 -0400, "KH6HZ" wrote:


more name calling Mike
http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

No name calling. Mere observation of facts.
If one were given to name-calling, one could refer to you as a functional
retard, or a ****head, or any number of descriptors. But far be it from me
to do so.

VE Testing Rules
 

wrote in message
...
On Sun, 11 Mar 2007 04:45:02 -0400, "KH6HZ" wrote:

wrote:

I was pleased with my local VE team's performance (all four,
not just three) and congratulated them after the testing was
over. [I observed them while they were observing me and the
applicant group]

They were ARRL VEs, weren't they?

Perhaps this was the same VE team that tested the 4 1/2 year old?
mike they were a ARRL VEC team as told by the FCC no perhaps about
that

Odd that a 4.5 year old can pass a test that you are incapable of.

Oh, wait! That is a conspiracy fomented by a few VE's that allegedly dislike
you.
You are not well liked in many arenas. QRZ and NimBusters to name a couple.

Are you getting the drift?

Morkie and VE Testing
 

On Mar 10, 1:02 pm, Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
On Mar 10, 11:07 am, Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
On Mar 10, 12:15 am, "Dee Flint" wrote:
wrote in message
egroups.com...
On Mar 9, 9:53 pm, "Mork" Dork@anon wrote:
[snip]
So less than two dozen ( 24) amateurs aren't enough to make up a VE
team? That IS news to me.
If the numbers presented earlier were correct, it would not matter if they
were all VEs. They could not have tested Mark since only one of them held a
license class higher than General. To conduct a General license exam, they
must hold either an Advanced or Extra license.
Dee is a cheerleader for Morse Code and the ARRL. That's known as
"bias."
My support of Morse code has no bearing on the number of VEs in Mark's area
who are eligible to administer the General exam.
Dee, N8UZE
Fair enough.
I was just disgusted by your legitimizing Robesin's sexual inuendo and
accusations that Mark's wife is a man.
That is all.
I sometimes get the feeling that you're about as peculiarly wired as Mark.
Sometimes? Don't hold back. What do you think of me the rest of the
time?

I wasn't writing about the rest of the time. I expressed my view
concisely.

Nothing was said about your inability to express a view concisely.
And I asked for you to cover all of the bases.

Since you've asked: Much of the time, you write like an
insecure fellow with a chip on his shoulder.

See? I knew you could do it. All it took was a little gentle
coaxing.

There have been occasions
though, when you've posted something in a fairly rational manner.

To ascribe some sinister motivation to Dee Flint is at best, absurd.

Dee was an unwitting accomplice in Robesin's plan. She could have
snipped that part out if she had read it and understood what she was
reading.

Dave K8MN- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

libel and VE Testing
 

On Mar 10, 7:57 pm, "Fat Cassie" anon@anon wrote:

You sick, twisted freak.

Ahh, a Glenn Beck fan.

VE Testing Rules
 

On Mar 11, 3:45�am, "KH6HZ" wrote:
wrote:

AF6AY wrote:
* *I was pleased with my local VE team's performance (all four,
* *not just three) and congratulated them after the testing was
* *over. *[I observed them while they were observing me and the
* *applicant group]

They were ARRL VEs, weren't they?

Perhaps this was the same VE team that tested the 4 1/2 year old?

I doubt it.

Those 4-1/2 year olds were tested in Indiana. AF6AY was tested in
California. AF6AY does
not know and has never met anyone involved
in the VE testing of those children back in 1998.
He simply *ASSUMES* that there is no way
they could have passed the tests honestly.

His proposed "cure" for that "problem" was to
propose that no one under the age of 14 years
be allowed to earn a US amateur radio license.

That way,
they could likewise "mentor" old geezers during their examination, so said
bitter old geezers could get their 'license'?

All the VEs and volunteer examiners I have
known and met have been very careful to follow
both the spirit and letter of the rules. That doesn't
mean all VEs are perfect. Just that I don't have any
first hand objective evidence of any VEs "mentoring"
during a test. Neither does AF6AY have any first
hand objective evidence of such behavior by those
VEs in Indiana.

Of course there have been documented cases of
VEs not following the rules to the letter. FCC has
conducted investigations and retests. AFAIK, no
such investigation has ever been done on the
VEs discussed by AF6AY.

As for "bitter old geezers", there's never been any
sort of age requirement, maximum or minimum, for
any class of US amateur radio license. Nor should
there be, IMHO, even though in recent years the
worst violators of FCC rules for the Amateur Radio
service have been in a certain age group. Ex-KG6IRO, who lived less
than 25 miles from AF6AY
and was recently sentenced to seven years in prison
for radio-related crimes, is well past retirement age.
So is the unlicensed person in Florida (Flippo?) who
is still behind bars IIRC.

--

Then there's the issue of the analogy between
ARS rules changes and real estate zoning
changes, but that's another thread....

73 de Jim, N2EY

libel and VE Testing
 

On Mar 11, 5:01 am, "KH6HZ" wrote:
wrote:
nope it is becuase I did not yeaild to the blackmail of Steve J
robeson 9 years agao

Blackmail is a very serious crime. One has to wonder why the Houghton County
Prosecuting Attorney didn't haul Steve in 8.5 years ago...

Robesin has an attorney on retainer - gratis.

Then he started guessing who the attorney's new bride was sleeping
with, right here on RRAP.

I wonder if Robesin will be well represented by such an attorney who
offers to work for free then suffers Robesin's insults?

With Robesin, it's always about the wives...

libel and VE Testing
 

On Mar 11, 5:55 am, "Morkie" anon@anon wrote:

Mark is the little boy crying WOLF!

Robesin is the little creep crying WIFE!

VE Testing Rules
 

On Mar 10, 8:32 pm, "Dean M" wrote:
wrote in message

ups.com...

On Mar 10, 11:29 am, "Dean M" wrote:

How's that report on me going. Should be at least 500 words double
spaced

The report was completed back when I said I made it.

I so doubt that. You're all bluster like your trainer

I so don't care. But here's an interesting little factoid so that
you'll sleep better at night:

You asked for my State's Attorney General and I gave his info to you,
but I had merely reported you to your ISP.

You jump to conclusions then harass me when the AG office doesn't
check on you. What an idiot.

libel and VE Testing
 

wrote:

Not at all. You're the one who claims Steve "lied".

because he did

No, he didn't. You may not agree with his statement, but just because you
disagree with it doesn't mean he "lied". Factually, Steve's statement is
correct. There are 19 licensed amateurs in Chasell, MI.


the lie is asserting that the number of chassell hams is relavant to
to the question

The number of area hams *is* pertinent to the question. If you live in a low
population-density area, then the likelihood of having an adequate number of
hams who are Extra-class VEs is likewise low, and thus, the number of
possible test sessions low as well.

Compare this to a high population area, such as Boston:

http://www.arrl.org/arrlvec/examsear...02111&dist=100

or NYC:

http://www.arrl.org/arrlvec/examsear...10001&dist=100

which have 83 and 133 test sessions, respectively, scheduled in the near
future.


but indeed how could his refusaul to schedule a testing for his own
personal affect his license? you are lying a big one there

Your statements clearly indicated that you were denied a test session
locally because the VEs in the area are "procoders" -- specifically in
Message-ID:

Being denied a test session because you're a codeless tech would be a
serious offense and could result in a VE teams credentials being revolked.

However, as I (and many others) suspect, you were not denied access to a
test session because the teams consisted of "procoders", but instead because
the VE team probably thinks you are an utter retard, or you made some type
of "demand", such as a special examination session on Feb 23rd, when the VE
team already had a test session scheduled for April 14th.


he is welcome to explain why refused a request from myself and others
to do what was promised by him when he changed the number of test
session the club sponered team would hold to 2 per year and as many as
might be needed

Refer to what the first letter in the term VE stands for. Volunteer. If you
asked for a special examination session, VE teams are in no way obligated to
hold special test sessions for you, especially when they already have a
session scheduled in a mere 6 weeks.

However, in typical Morkie Perpetual Victim fashion, you whine, stomp your
feet, and cry "i discriminalgated agist by porcodrs!!!!"


If you feel there is adequate demand for more than 2 test sessions per year
in Chasell, then you're welcome to take the requisite examinations, obtain
VE certifications, and form your own VE team. However, if you do that, I
suspect you'll be in here whining that "nobody showed up 'cuz we're no-code
Extras".


My wife would also be delighteted to discuss it with him since it
mean't she is still a tech since both of us could risk traveling to
Milwakeee or anyplace else for session this time of year

A quick search yields a test session which was held yesterday under 100
miles from your home, by the Hiawatha ARA. What was wrong with that one? Are
they all Procoders too? Otherwise it looks like you'll have to wait until
CCRAA has their next test session on April 14th.

VE Testing Rules
 

On Mar 10, 9:59 pm, wrote:
On Mar 10, 2:02 pm, "
wrote:



I was pleased with my local VE team's performance (all four,
not just three) and congratulated them after the testing was
over. [I observed them while they were observing me and the
applicant group]

They were ARRL VEs, weren't they?

However, that is not extendable to "all" VEs
nor all those involved in this newsgroup.

Why not?

Most of the statements
in this thread about VEs are just using it as a springboard to
talk trash to other old "enemies." :-(

Considering the number of statements you make to
rrap, Len, it seems you are projecting your motivations on others.

In an extreme example, amateur radio station N2EY has to
bring up the 1998 ARRLweb story of two FOUR-YEAR-OLDS
who "passed" a Technician and Novice class written exam
(respectively) as well as the required low-rate morse code
test. An accompanying picture in the web story shows one
of the VEs, of kindly grandfatherly mien, with arms around
both of them. Obvious one-hankie kind of "feel-good" story
that is no stranger to journalistic media everywhere.

You left out the most important parts of that
story, Len.

First off, the 4-1/2-year-olds in question were from families composed
almost entirely of radio amateurs, and were part of a an educational
environment that included amateur radio as an integral part of the
curriculum. Both could read and write well above age level.

Second, the written tests they passed were the old Novice and Tech
elements.

Third, there has never been any objective evidence presented that the
VE session in question was compromised in any way.

Fourth, your response to that story was to propose, in Reply Comments
to FCC, that there be a new mandatory age requirement of *14* years
for any class of amateur radio license.

Fifth, you have not been able to produce a single example of problems
to the US Amateur Radio Service caused by a lack of an age
requirement. Amateurs have been licensed by the US Government since
1912, yet in all those 85 years you cannot name even one actual
problem caused by the licensing of people under the age of 14. Not
one.

Four year olds capable of responsible cognition of the
written-English test material?

Irrelevant, Len. "Responsible cognition" is not a requirement of the
license test.

Ask any working teacher
of K to 3 classes if any of their students have either
cognition or sense of responsibility about such test
material. The end result will be an almost unamous
NO, the won't. I've asked three that I know, plus one
who was then a grade 4 teacher but later moved up to
middle-school level when I had met him.

Doesn't matter.

The FCC has been using multiple-choice written
exams for all amateur written elements for more
than 40 years. The question pools have been
publicly available for more than 20 years.

FCC does not require that a prospective amateur demonstrate
understanding of the material, nor "cognition", nor a sense of
responsibility. Nor is it necessary to get 100% correct on the test,
or even 80%.

All FCC requires is that the prospective amateur get at least the
required number of questions correct on the written test, without
cheating. Nothing more. Doesn't matter to FCC if the prospective ham
has a Ph.D in EE and a stack of patents, or is in the first grade.
Doesn't matter to FCC if the prospective ham can explain each question
and answer in exquisite detail, with exact formulas and calculations,
or if the correct answer came from random guessing, or rote
memorization.

All that matters to FCC is that the prospective amateur got at least
the minimum required number of correct answers, without cheating.

When you allegedly asked those teachers, did you
happen to mention that:

1) The test materials were available for study, so the children would
have seen them before the test?

2) The questions were multiple choice, one out of four?

3) That as long as there was no cheating, any method of getting the
right answer was OK?

4) That a passing grade was 74%, regardless of how much was actually
understood?

I don't think so.

What is
rather obvious is that there was some "mentoring"
during the actual test, not allowed nowadays (nor in
1998 according to all the law-abiding whosis in here).

No, that's not obvious at all. You are claiming that the VE session
was compromised. That's a serious charge.

You were not there, Len, and you don't know any of the people
involved.

I have seen bright three-year-olds reading well above their age level.
Whether they understood what they read is besides the point.

Ah, but the least little hint of "fraud" involved evoked a
storm of PROTEST from the Believers of the League,
angry denunciations of anyone who would DARE say
nasty of their beloved ARRL.

Claims of fraud without any objective evidence deserve to be denounced
as false.

I wonder if the VEs who handled your testing knew that you accused
other VEs of fraud back in 2002?
Or that you accused the ARRL VEC of hypocrisy at the same time?

All without any evidence at all.


On an almost constant irregular basis, amateur station
N2EY has to bring this tidbit out in the open...and has
for 8 years. It gets inserted into threads which don't
involve VEs or testing as the general subject. Some in
here burn and burn inside for the longest time...perhaps
of unrequited spite that must have retribution.

The only spite is *yours*, Len.





Let's take a realistic look at Volunteer Examiners. Are all
VEs "saints?" No. They are human beings. Are they
"exceptional" human beings? Perhaps, but exceptional in
that they volunteer their time to proctor testing. Volunteerism
happens in MANY different human endeavors, not just
amateur radio. Do VEs need exceptional training to perform
their tasks? No. All it requires is attention to paperwork,
using the correct template to score test sheets, filling out
the correct blanks on forms, keeping the test papers for an
individual in order, double-checking each (in a team) other's
work, making sure a test session's paper packet gets sent
quickly to a VEC center for final processing (for big VECs)
or direct to the FCC (for small VECs). Part of a VE team's
task is to simply observe applicants, make sure they do not
cheat, make sure they behave during a session, check their
identity by other documents.

They must also hold the required class of amateur radio license.



Is the example of one VE team applicable to the entire VEC?
No.

Yet you accuse some VEs of fraud and hypocrisy.

Here are links to the actual postings:

Len's reply comments - 16 pages page 13 of 16

http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/r...or_pdf=pdf&id_...

or:

http://tinyurl.com/y6uhr3

ARRL Letter:

http://www.arrl.org/arrlletter/98/980320/

Hans pointer:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.r.../msg/2c6d67f88...

http://tinyurl.com/y2er8x

Len's rejoinder:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.r.../msg/fa1332a10...

http://tinyurl.com/yxq3rr

Len accusing fraud:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.r.../msg/f91dda07a...

Jim, N2EY- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Jim, get over yourself. The story presented in QST is preposterous.
Only you believed it.

Morkie and VE Testing
 

wrote:

Dee was an unwitting accomplice in Robesin's plan. She could have
snipped that part out if she had read it and understood what she was
reading.

More rubbish.

Since there are several states which allow same-sex marriages, it is not
outside the realm of possibility that Mark's 'wife' is male.

I also think that the majority of the legitimately signed participants here
could care less one way or the other if Mark's wife is male, female, or a
holstein cow.

libel and VE Testing
 

On Mar 11, 4:52 am, "KH6HZ" wrote:
wrote:
I spuse I confused stave when I said Local as oposed to
houghton/hancock area

and mike just followed suit

Not at all. You're the one who claims Steve "lied".

Steve made a factual statement, as did I. There are 19 licensed amateurs in
Chasell. That is not a "lie". Anyone can go to QRZ and see for themselves

How many licensed amateurs are in Hermann's PO Box? Where should they
be?

libel and VE Testing
 

wrote:

becuase they read Steve posts and concluded he was total nut job for
threatening to murder as he did over code testing

that was the response of he FBI as well

An individual's mental state plays no role when local officials investigate
whether or not a crime has been committed. For example, you don't get a free
pass from commiting armed robbery simply because your IQ is under 80.

In fact, if anything, they are *more* likely to do "something" (even if it
involves calling the person on the phone and telling them to 'back off') if
they suspect the individual is of dubious mental abilities.


I suspect what "really" happened is both the local DA and the 'FBI' both
thought the person filing the complaint was a 'total nut job' and opted to
tell you to go away.

Morkie and VE Testing
 

On Mar 11, 4:55 am, "KH6HZ" wrote:
"Dee Flint" wrote:
I was thinking more along the lines of irate applicants posing a threat to
the Volunteer Examiners.

I stand corrected.

Wouldn't that be a good reason for VEs to "pack heat"?

The RF Commando's will deal with any such issues!

VE Testing Rules
 

wrote:

Perhaps this was the same VE team that tested the 4 1/2 year old?

I doubt it.

Yes, I realize that. Unfortunately there is no emoticon for
"tongue-in-cheek".


His proposed "cure" for that "problem" was to
propose that no one under the age of 14 years
be allowed to earn a US amateur radio license.

Why would one suggest a "cure" for a non-existant "problem"?


As for "bitter old geezers", there's never been any
sort of age requirement, maximum or minimum, for
any class of US amateur radio license.

However, should there be periodic retesting, such as with driver's licenses?
It would be a shame, for instance, if a geezer's amplifer malfunctioned,
arc'd over to his oxygen bottle, and an explosion resulted.


Ex-KG6IRO, who lived less than 25 miles from AF6AY
and was recently sentenced to seven years in prison
for radio-related crimes, is well past retirement age.
So is the unlicensed person in Florida (Flippo?) who
is still behind bars IIRC.

Seems to happen a lot, unfortunately.

Just think how embittered you would be if you had to wait 80 years to get
your ham ticket.

VE Testing Rules
 

wrote in message
oups.com...
On Mar 10, 8:32 pm, "Dean M" wrote:
wrote in message

ups.com...

On Mar 10, 11:29 am, "Dean M" wrote:

How's that report on me going. Should be at least 500 words double
spaced

The report was completed back when I said I made it.

I so doubt that. You're all bluster like your trainer

I so don't care. But here's an interesting little factoid so that
you'll sleep better at night:

You asked for my State's Attorney General and I gave his info to you,
but I had merely reported you to your ISP.


Oh my gosh gee whiz there Bry You stated previously that you reported this
to the Ohio AG. Now you back pedal and state you reported to my ISP. Which
one is the truth there Bry? Taking lessions from Marcus Stupideous I C.

No problem, My ISP, if indeeed I am posting from them gave you comlaint the
same weight and thoght as I imagine the Ohio AG did NONE!!!! ha ha he he

You make me raff


You jump to conclusions then harass me when the AG office doesn't
check on you. What an idiot.

How can you be harrassed in a public forum there BRY? No one forces you to
read anything, no one forces you you to reply. Taking lessons from thae
ither trained monkey Marcus Idiotous I C

Feel free to report me to the FCC as well there Bry. I am sure they'll give
you the same consideration as the others

You very funny man, you make me raff or on this case ralph

Ta ta Turtle man give my regards to the rest of the Bizzaro people

Hey Bry could be a new Batman villian... Bluster Man a villian who
attempts to defaet his enemies with lies, inneuendo and various blustery
phrases

Maybe you should go back to Michigan there Bry, I am sure Marcus Deviatous
would puit you up

It's been fun Have a week

Morkie and VE Testing
 

On Mar 11, 9:16 am, "KH6HZ" wrote:
wrote:
Dee was an unwitting accomplice in Robesin's plan. She could have
snipped that part out if she had read it and understood what she was
reading.

More rubbish.

Since there are several states which allow same-sex marriages, it is not
outside the realm of possibility that Mark's 'wife' is male.

Is Michigan one of those states? You need to check your facts before
running your mouth.

I also think that the majority of the legitimately signed participants here
could care less one way or the other if Mark's wife is male, female, or a
holstein cow.

Robesin makes other peoples wives the center of attention.

VE Testing Rules
 

On Mar 11, 9:35 am, "Dean M" wrote:
wrote in message

oups.com...





On Mar 10, 8:32 pm, "Dean M" wrote:
wrote in message

roups.com...

On Mar 10, 11:29 am, "Dean M" wrote:

How's that report on me going. Should be at least 500 words double
spaced

The report was completed back when I said I made it.

I so doubt that. You're all bluster like your trainer

I so don't care. But here's an interesting little factoid so that
you'll sleep better at night:

You asked for my State's Attorney General and I gave his info to you,
but I had merely reported you to your ISP.

Oh my gosh gee whiz there Bry You stated previously that you reported this
to the Ohio AG.

No. You jumped to a conclusion because you're a paranoid little
freak. I let you work under a false assumption all this time.

Now you back pedal and state you reported to my ISP. Which
one is the truth there Bry? Taking lessions from Marcus Stupideous I C.

No backpedalling. I'm just not responsible for how your freaky little
mind works.

No problem, My ISP, if indeeed I am posting from them gave you comlaint the
same weight and thoght as I imagine the Ohio AG did NONE!!!! ha ha he he

I never contacted the AG's office. You made that assumption up all by
yourself.

You make me raff

You make yourself riff and raff.

You jump to conclusions then harass me when the AG office doesn't
check on you. What an idiot.

How can you be harrassed in a public forum there BRY? No one forces you to
read anything, no one forces you you to reply. Taking lessons from thae
ither trained monkey Marcus Idiotous I C

You you make all kinds of assumptions. Too bad for you.

Feel free to report me to the FCC as well there Bry. I am sure they'll give
you the same consideration as the others

Nah. I'll wait for you to really screw up, then... "Dialing..."

You very funny man, you make me raff or on this case ralph

So now you're claiming to be Riff-Ralph? How appropriate.

Ta ta Turtle man give my regards to the rest of the Bizzaro people

Hey Bry could be a new Batman villian... Bluster Man a villian who
attempts to defaet his enemies with lies, inneuendo and various blustery
phrases

Maybe you should go back to Michigan there Bry, I am sure Marcus Deviatous
would puit you up

It's been fun Have a week

Sayonara Mr. Riff-Ralph.

libel and VE Testing
 

wrote in message
...
On Sun, 11 Mar 2007 09:11:28 -0400, "KH6HZ" wrote:
If you feel there is adequate demand for more than 2 test sessions per
year
in Chasell, then you're welcome to take the requisite examinations, obtain
VE certifications, and form your own VE team.

Now indeed I am or more properly soon will be


You can't even read at a 1st grade level without screwing up. How the hell
are you going to be able to grade papers without making mistakes.


I'm sorry, you didn't pass but you got 45 out of 35 wrong. Don't argue with
me..I have a 249 IQ and was a commissioned, yet drafted officer in the CSA
Chemical Corpse


Know give me another $14 and shut up Just remember EVA A MA I and now
what's what

I can guess the ARRL will not have anything to do with you I can imagine
that Fred will be happy to take you money to make you a VE right up until
the first complaint from a person taking a test who is unhappy with how you
run things

Here's a banana. Do with it as you will...WAIT...never mind, I'd rather not
know what YOU"D do with a banana

Have you ever thought of taking your act on the road? I hear Vaudeville is
making a comeback (no pun intended there Marcus) and you'd fit in great. Or
perhaps, you could be the Circus Geek

See the Drafted Commissioned Officer...See the man with a 249 IQ who can't
spell or read..See what be does to a bat..Marvel that he can even stand
upright

A new career perhaps?? time will tell

ta ta to the next Batman villain Spammer Man See Spammer man post 100's of
messages a day..sometimes even minutes from when the first poster hits send
See Spammer Man morph into Professional Victim Man..who's strange powers
are....Strange

it's now 7:20 am Marcus. Let's time how fats you can reply to this and
100's of others posts

VE Testing Rules
 

wrote in message
oups.com...
On Mar 11, 9:35 am, "Dean M" wrote:
wrote in message

oups.com...





On Mar 10, 8:32 pm, "Dean M" wrote:
wrote in message

roups.com...

On Mar 10, 11:29 am, "Dean M" wrote:

How's that report on me going. Should be at least 500 words double
spaced

The report was completed back when I said I made it.

I so doubt that. You're all bluster like your trainer

I so don't care. But here's an interesting little factoid so that
you'll sleep better at night:

You asked for my State's Attorney General and I gave his info to you,
but I had merely reported you to your ISP.

Oh my gosh gee whiz there Bry You stated previously that you reported
this
to the Ohio AG.

No. You jumped to a conclusion because you're a paranoid little
freak. I let you work under a false assumption all this time.

I did HHmmmm This post from your stubby little fingered keyboard sez you're
wrong

Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.policy
From:
Date: 10 Feb 2007 18:52:28 -0800
Local: Sun, Feb 11 2007 2:52 am
Subject: Schlecks' Schlock!
Reply | Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show
original | Report this message | Find messages by this author
On Feb 10, 11:38 am, "Dean M" wrote:


why? don;t you like getting male



"Getting male?" Are you a pervert?

Suspicious US mail is opened by the postal inspector.


Suspicious packages from other carriers get opened by the Sheriff.


Harassing emails are both forwarded to the state attorney general, and
printed and mailed to the attorney general.


Your stalking is now documented. Proceed at your own risk. Best of
Luck.


Note the mention of attorney general at least twice




Now you back pedal and state you reported to my ISP. Which
one is the truth there Bry? Taking lessions from Marcus Stupideous I C.

No backpedalling. I'm just not responsible for how your freaky little
mind works.

Backpedaliing. Classic example Now you'll refute





No problem, My ISP, if indeeed I am posting from them gave you comlaint
the
same weight and thoght as I imagine the Ohio AG did NONE!!!! ha ha he he

I never contacted the AG's office. You made that assumption up all by
yourself.


See above Oh that's right You're Bluster Man. Say one thing but don't do
another. Kinda like when monkeys bear their teeth in an attempt to bluster
their way out of a situation. Are you bearing your teeth right now Bluster
Man??



You make me raff

You make yourself riff and raff.

You jump to conclusions then harass me when the AG office doesn't
check on you. What an idiot.

How can you be harrassed in a public forum there BRY? No one forces you
to
read anything, no one forces you you to reply. Taking lessons from thae
ither trained monkey Marcus Idiotous I C

You you make all kinds of assumptions. Too bad for you.

Feel free to report me to the FCC as well there Bry. I am sure they'll
give
you the same consideration as the others

Nah. I'll wait for you to really screw up, then... "Dialing..."

You very funny man, you make me raff or on this case ralph

So now you're claiming to be Riff-Ralph? How appropriate.

That's you're claim Phineas T.



Ta ta Turtle man give my regards to the rest of the Bizzaro people

Hey Bry could be a new Batman villian... Bluster Man a villian who
attempts to defaet his enemies with lies, inneuendo and various blustery
phrases

Maybe you should go back to Michigan there Bry, I am sure Marcus
Deviatous
would puit you up

It's been fun Have a week

Sayonara Mr. Riff-Ralph.

libel and VE Testing
 

wrote in message
...
On Sun, 11 Mar 2007 14:25:35 -0000, "Dean M" wrote:


wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 11 Mar 2007 09:11:28 -0400, "KH6HZ" wrote:
If you feel there is adequate demand for more than 2 test sessions per
year
in Chasell, then you're welcome to take the requisite examinations,
obtain
VE certifications, and form your own VE team.

Now indeed I am or more properly soon will be


You can't even read at a 1st grade level without screwing up.

interesting fantasy you have

How the hell
are you going to be able to grade papers without making mistakes.

it is easyenough in college I used to get paid to do that


I'm sorry, you didn't pass but you got 45 out of 35 wrong.

get some therapy

Don't argue with
me..I have a 249 IQ and was a commissioned, yet drafted officer in the CSA
Chemical Corpse

gee I never read about any serious WMD program of the south

I still love the part how ytou were a Drafted Officer in the military. That
is great stuff. Where do you get your material Marcus?





Know give me another $14 and shut up Just remember EVA A MA I and now
what's what

you like posting such crap on purpose how do you expeect to be taken
seriously?

or do you?

I can guess the ARRL will not have anything to do with you

you assume i want something to do with THEM

I can imagine
that Fred will be happy to take you money to make you a VE right up until
the first complaint from a person taking a test who is unhappy with how
you
run things

I doubt Fred would have any cuase to complain

but I have never expressed any real intent to become a VE

EXSQUEEZE ME!!! Read the following qute from this very post..a quote from
a post YOU made in regards to becoming a VE/VEC

If you feel there is adequate demand for more than 2 test sessions per
year
in Chasell, then you're welcome to take the requisite examinations,
obtain
VE certifications, and form your own VE team.

Now indeed I am or more properly soon will be

You are an "idoit" Marcus




Here's a banana. Do with it as you will...WAIT...never mind, I'd rather
not
know what YOU"D do with a banana

then don't bring it up
I didn't



Have you ever thought of taking your act on the road?

no act here

then everything you post and the way you do it is for real?? amazing



I hear Vaudeville is
making a comeback (no pun intended there Marcus) and you'd fit in great.
Or
perhaps, you could be the Circus Geek

See the Drafted Commissioned Officer...See the man with a 249 IQ who can't
spell or read..See what be does to a bat..Marvel that he can even stand
upright

A new career perhaps?? time will tell

ta ta to the next Batman villain Spammer Man See Spammer man post 100's
of
messages a day..sometimes even minutes from when the first poster hits
send
See Spammer Man morph into Professional Victim Man..who's strange powers
are....Strange

it's now 7:20 am Marcus. Let's time how fats you can reply to this and
100's of others posts

there are not hunders of other posts


the numbers prove otherwise and what are hunders


I am just filling time as I chase some DX

ya right



http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

VE Testing Rules
 

wrote in message
...
On Sun, 11 Mar 2007 14:38:20 -0000, "Dean M" wrote:


wrote in message
groups.com...
On Mar 11, 9:35 am, "Dean M" wrote:
wrote in message

oups.com...





On Mar 10, 8:32 pm, "Dean M" wrote:
wrote in message

roups.com...

On Mar 10, 11:29 am, "Dean M" wrote:

How's that report on me going. Should be at least 500 words
double
spaced

The report was completed back when I said I made it.

I so doubt that. You're all bluster like your trainer

I so don't care. But here's an interesting little factoid so that
you'll sleep better at night:

You asked for my State's Attorney General and I gave his info to you,
but I had merely reported you to your ISP.

Oh my gosh gee whiz there Bry You stated previously that you reported
this
to the Ohio AG.

No. You jumped to a conclusion because you're a paranoid little
freak. I let you work under a false assumption all this time.

I did HHmmmm This post from your stubby little fingered keyboard sez
you're
wrong

Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.policy
From:
Date: 10 Feb 2007 18:52:28 -0800
Local: Sun, Feb 11 2007 2:52 am
Subject: Schlecks' Schlock!
Reply | Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show
original | Report this message | Find messages by this author
On Feb 10, 11:38 am, "Dean M" wrote:


why? don;t you like getting male



"Getting male?" Are you a pervert?

Suspicious US mail is opened by the postal inspector.


Suspicious packages from other carriers get opened by the Sheriff.


Harassing emails are both forwarded to the state attorney general, and
printed and mailed to the attorney general.

are you admitting to sending harrassing email Dean?

who wants to know? I thought you were out chasing parked cards..errr DX.
What are you still doing spamming the group Spammer Man??



otherwise it don't aply


aply as interior plywood? Learn to spell



Your stalking is now documented. Proceed at your own risk. Best of
Luck.


Note the mention of attorney general at least twice

it only apllies to you if you are sending him harrassing emails

are you?

who wants to know? I thought you were out chasing parked cards..errr DX.
What are you still doing spamming the group Spammer Man??





Now you back pedal and state you reported to my ISP. Which
one is the truth there Bry? Taking lessions from Marcus Stupideous I
C.

No backpedalling. I'm just not responsible for how your freaky little
mind works.

Backpedaliing. Classic example Now you'll refute

no you are being paranoid or confessing you sent him harrassing email

Paranoid? You're the living definition there Professional Victim Man







No problem, My ISP, if indeeed I am posting from them gave you comlaint
the
same weight and thoght as I imagine the Ohio AG did NONE!!!! ha ha he
he

I never contacted the AG's office. You made that assumption up all by
yourself.


See above Oh that's right You're Bluster Man. Say one thing but don't
do
another. Kinda like when monkeys bear their teeth in an attempt to
bluster
their way out of a situation. Are you bearing your teeth right now
Bluster
Man??



You make me raff

You make yourself riff and raff.

You jump to conclusions then harass me when the AG office doesn't
check on you. What an idiot.

How can you be harrassed in a public forum there BRY? No one forces
you
to
read anything, no one forces you you to reply. Taking lessons from
thae
ither trained monkey Marcus Idiotous I C

You you make all kinds of assumptions. Too bad for you.

Feel free to report me to the FCC as well there Bry. I am sure they'll
give
you the same consideration as the others

Nah. I'll wait for you to really screw up, then... "Dialing..."

You very funny man, you make me raff or on this case ralph

So now you're claiming to be Riff-Ralph? How appropriate.

That's you're claim Phineas T.



Ta ta Turtle man give my regards to the rest of the Bizzaro people

Hey Bry could be a new Batman villian... Bluster Man a villian who
attempts to defaet his enemies with lies, inneuendo and various
blustery
phrases

Maybe you should go back to Michigan there Bry, I am sure Marcus
Deviatous
would puit you up

It's been fun Have a week

Sayonara Mr. Riff-Ralph.






http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Morkie and VE Testing
 

"KH6HZ" wrote in message
...
wrote:

Dee was an unwitting accomplice in Robesin's plan. She could have
snipped that part out if she had read it and understood what she was
reading.

More rubbish.



Besides it's not my job to edit Steve's posts simply to make other's happy.
I was replying sole to the error. When I have the time to do some snipping,
I'll do so on longer posts but don't bother on shorter ones as it's not
worth the effort.

Dee, N8UZE

libel and VE Testing
 

wrote:

no in fact there are not

I do not live in chassel nor does my wife onor at least one other of
that 19 we merely get our mail through the post office there we
neither live cthe village of chassell nor the township

If you're no longer residing at 17366 N River Road in Chassell yet still
have a PO box there, as far as the FCC is concerned, there are still 19
amateurs in Chassell.


as far as I know no Ham lives within the village of chassel

The FCC doesn't care about the "village", merely the USPS zip code
designator. Which, according to QRZ.COM, places the following amateurs in
Chassell, MI:

KB8FCX BROOKS JR RICHARD E 21525 E Henry Rd CHASSELL MI 49916
KB8VZU KEMPPAINEN LEIGH M 39304 TAPIOLA ROAD CHASSELL MI 49916
KB9RQZ Morgan Mark C PO BOX 212 Chassell MI 49916
KC7CLC kohtala WENDY L 39184 N Sturgeon River Rd Chassell MI 49916
KC8BSU ZITO JAMES P 41861 HANCOCK ST CHASSELL MI 49916
KC8FUS BROOKS JON A 21525 E Henry Rd CHASSELL MI 49916
KC8LBR SMITH KURT C 402 HANCOCK ST PO BOX 111 CHASSELL MI 49916
KD8ALE Loughead Mike J 18841 Chassell Painesdale Rd Chassell MI 49916
N8BFL KEMPPAINEN JOHN H 39304 TAPIOLA ROAD CHASSELL MI 49916
N8HVS Uuro Betty J 39115 US Highway 41 Chassell MI 49916
N8HVT UURO GEORGE A 39115 Highway US 41 CHASSELL MI 49916
N8KLV SZYSZKOSKI STEPHAN J 25155 SOUTH KLINGVILLE RD CHASSELL MI 49916
N8LND STUROS WILLIAM A ROUTE 2 BOX 247 CHASSELL MI 49916
KD8CTL Hojnacki Gavrielah C L P O Box 212 Chassell MI 49916
WA1UJU RANTALA GLEN W 37358 Tapiola Road Chassell MI 49916
WD8ODL HONGISTO EDWARD G RT 1 BOX 247 DENTON RD CHASSELL MI 49916
KC8MMU YARINA KIRK E 35263 Pike River Road CHASSELL MI 49916
KC8MVV YARINA TAMASIN R RR 2 BOX 299 CHASSELL MI 49916
W8WAY McDowell Scott A 18143 Moscow Rd Chassell MI 49916


and yet we have a VE team with 18 members

Completely meaningless. The "local" VE team could consist of people who have
to drive 200 miles to administer a VE session.


nope only in your demnted reams Mike

Why not lodge a formal complaint with the ARRL VEC regarding this VE Teams'
actions?


they can be expected to uphold the comitments they make however

Not really. They're volunteers. They require 3 VEs to administer an exam
session. If they can't get at least 3 VEs (if not more for safety) to donate
their time, it doesn't matter what 'commitments' you think they have made --
they can't conduct a session.


and you just said they could refuse a test session without rsiking
their licenses

That's correct. A VE team is under no obligation to conduct a session at the
whim of the testee. A VE team that refuses to conduct a session on the basis
that the applicants are codeless techs, however, risks having their
credentials pulled by the VEC they work under.


Now indeed I am or more properly soon will be

I'm sure the FCC will oh so enjoy attempting to decypher your submittals.


nah I miight well be be moaning the fact their are few hams ready for
a test at any given time in the area

Given there are 19 hams in Chassell, what happens after they all upgrade?


likely I'll get my extra at AES supperfest in march, if the weather is
good enough to leave my dad alone then my wife wil get her general at
that time

If you do Mark, good for you.


I do wish you could tell the truth about much of anything Mike but
given your track record with the FCC I supose that is beyond you

My postings are always 100% factually accurate to the best of my knowledge,
or simply represent my opinions (whether you like them or not)

libel and VE Testing
 

wrote:

Since there are several states which allow same-sex marriages, it is not
outside the realm of possibility that Mark's 'wife' is male.

why is it your affair

It isn't, nor do I care, which is why I wrote the following:

I also think that the majority of the legitimately signed participants
here
could care less one way or the other if Mark's wife is male, female, or a
holstein cow.

libel and VE Testing
 

wrote:

An individual's mental state plays no role when local officials
investigate
whether or not a crime has been committed. For example, you don't get a
free
pass from commiting armed robbery simply because your IQ is under 80.

your source for this?

The General Laws of your state. I see nothing that excuses crimes on the
basis of being a nitwit.



In fact, if anything, they are *more* likely to do "something" (even if it
involves calling the person on the phone and telling them to 'back off')
if
they suspect the individual is of dubious mental abilities.

as they did with steve

If they did call Steve, it doesn't seem to have worked, has it? Might want
to alert them again.



I notice you cut out the references to your stupidity

If I cut the stupidity out of your posts, Mark, they'd be empty.

Morkie and VE Testing
 

wrote:

Is Michigan one of those states? You need to check your facts before
running your mouth.

Immaterial. Mark could easily travel to VT, MA, NJ, or any other state which
offers same-sex marriages.

Mark *is* capable of travelling, isn't he?

VE Testing Rules
 

On Mar 11, 8:14�am, wrote:
On Mar 10, 9:59 pm, wrote:





On Mar 10, 2:02 pm, "
wrote:

* *I was pleased with my local VE team's performance (all four,
* *not just three) and congratulated them after the testing was
* *over. *[I observed them while they were observing me and the
* *applicant group] *

They were ARRL VEs, weren't they?

However, that is not extendable to "all" VEs
* *nor all those involved in this newsgroup.

Why not?

Most of the statements
* *in this thread about VEs are just using it as a springboard to
* *talk trash to other old "enemies." *:-(

Considering the number of statements you make to
rrap, Len, it seems you are projecting your motivations on others.

* *In an extreme example, amateur radio station N2EY has to
* *bring up the 1998 ARRLweb story of two FOUR-YEAR-OLDS
* *who "passed" a Technician and Novice class written exam
* *(respectively) as well as the required low-rate morse code
* *test. *An accompanying picture in the web story shows one
* *of the VEs, of kindly grandfatherly mien, with arms around
* *both of them. *Obvious one-hankie kind of "feel-good" story
* *that is no stranger to journalistic media everywhere.

You left out the most important parts of that
story, Len.

First off, the 4-1/2-year-olds in question were from families composed
almost entirely of radio amateurs, and were part of a an educational
environment that included amateur radio as an integral part of the
curriculum. Both could read and write well above age level.

Second, the written tests they passed were the old Novice and Tech
elements.

Third, there has never been any objective evidence presented that the
VE session in question was compromised in any way.

Fourth, your response to that story was to propose, in Reply Comments
to FCC, that there be a new mandatory age requirement of *14* years
for any class of amateur radio license.

Fifth, you have not been able to produce a single example of problems
to the US Amateur Radio Service caused by a lack of an age
requirement. Amateurs have been licensed by the US Government since
1912, yet in all those 85 years you cannot name even one actual
problem caused by the licensing of people under the age of 14. Not
one.

* *Four year olds capable of responsible cognition of the
* *written-English test material? *

Irrelevant, Len. "Responsible cognition" is not a requirement of the
license test.

Ask any working teacher
* *of K to 3 classes if any of their students have either
* *cognition or sense of responsibility about such test
* *material. *The end result will be an almost unamous
* *NO, the won't. *I've asked three that I know, plus one
* *who was then a grade 4 teacher but later moved up to
* *middle-school level when I had met him.

Doesn't matter.

The FCC has been using multiple-choice written
exams for all amateur written elements for more
than 40 years. The question pools have been
publicly available for more than 20 years.

FCC does not require that a prospective amateur demonstrate
understanding of the material, nor "cognition", nor a sense of
responsibility. Nor is it necessary to get 100% correct on the test,
or even 80%.

All FCC requires is that the prospective amateur get at least the
required number of questions correct on the written test, without
cheating. Nothing more. Doesn't matter to FCC if the prospective ham
has a Ph.D in EE and a stack of patents, or is in the first grade.
Doesn't matter to FCC if the prospective ham can explain each question
and answer in exquisite detail, with exact formulas and calculations,
or if the correct answer came from random guessing, or rote
memorization.

All that matters to FCC is that the prospective amateur got at least
the minimum required number of correct answers, without cheating.

When you allegedly asked those teachers, did you
happen to mention that:

1) The test materials were available for study, so the children would
have seen them before the test?

2) The questions were multiple choice, one out of four?

3) That as long as there was no cheating, any method of getting the
right answer was OK?

4) That a passing grade was 74%, regardless of how much was actually
understood?

I don't think so.

*What is
* *rather obvious is that there was some "mentoring"
* *during the actual test, not allowed nowadays (nor in
* *1998 according to all the law-abiding whosis in here).

No, that's not obvious at all. You are claiming that the VE session
was compromised. That's a serious charge.

You were not there, Len, and you don't know any of the people
involved.

I have seen bright three-year-olds reading well above their age level.
Whether they understood what they read is besides the point.

* *Ah, but the least little hint of "fraud" involved evoked a
* *storm of PROTEST from the Believers of the League,
* *angry denunciations of anyone who would DARE say
* *nasty of their beloved ARRL.

Claims of fraud without any objective evidence deserve to be denounced
as false.

I wonder if the VEs who handled your testing knew that you accused
other VEs of fraud back in 2002?
Or that you accused the ARRL VEC of hypocrisy at the same time?

All without any evidence at all.

* *On an almost constant irregular basis, amateur station
* *N2EY has to bring this tidbit out in the open...and has
* *for 8 years. *It gets inserted into threads which don't
* *involve VEs or testing as the general subject. *Some in
* *here burn and burn inside for the longest time...perhaps
* *of unrequited spite that must have retribution.

The only spite is *yours*, Len.

* *Let's take a realistic look at Volunteer Examiners. *Are all
* *VEs "saints?" *No. They are human beings. *Are they
* *"exceptional" human beings? *Perhaps, but exceptional in
* *that they volunteer their time to proctor testing. *Volunteerism
* *happens in MANY different human endeavors, not just
* *amateur radio. *Do VEs need exceptional training to perform
* *their tasks? *No. *All it requires is attention to paperwork,
* *using the correct template to score test sheets, filling out
* *the correct blanks on forms, keeping the test papers for an
* *individual in order, double-checking each (in a team) other's
* *work, making sure a test session's paper packet gets sent
* *quickly to a VEC center for final processing (for big VECs)
* *or direct to the FCC (for small VECs). *Part of a VE team's
* *task is to simply observe applicants, make sure they do not
* *cheat, make sure they behave during a session, check their
* *identity by other documents.

They must also hold the required class of amateur radio license.

* *Is the example of one VE team applicable to the entire VEC?
* *No.

Yet you accuse some VEs of fraud and hypocrisy.

Here are links to the actual postings:

Len's reply comments - 16 pages page 13 of 16

http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/r...or_pdf=pdf&id_....

or:

http://tinyurl.com/y6uhr3

ARRL Letter:

http://www.arrl.org/arrlletter/98/980320/

Hans pointer:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.r.../msg/2c6d67f88...

http://tinyurl.com/y2er8x

Len's rejoinder:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.r.../msg/fa1332a10...

http://tinyurl.com/yxq3rr

Len accusing fraud:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.r.../msg/f91dda07a...

Jim, N2EY- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Jim, get over yourself.

What would you have me do, Mr. "Cheese"? (I'd use your
name and/or callsign, but you don't include either in your
postings.)

It seems you want me to stop posting the facts here,
particularly when you don't like the facts presented.

*The story presented in QST is preposterous.

Do you mean this story on the ARRL website?

http://www.arrl.org/arrlletter/98/980320/

Why is it preposterous?

It's a fact that gifted young children, placed in a
supportive environment, can often learn things far
beyond the mean/average/median for their biological
age.

Only you believed it.

That's demonstrably untrue.

The folks at ARRL believed it enough to put it
on the website.

The folks at FCC believed it enough to issue the
licenses.

And even when AF6AY pointed out the story to
FCC in his Reply Comments to 98-143, FCC still
believed it.

There have been other verified stories about
young amateurs. Since 2000, a six-year-old has
passed the General, and a seven-year-old has
passed the Extra. Both stories in QST.
FCC had no problem believing either.

In fact that seven-year-old broke the previous record,
held by an eight-year-old who passed the old pre-2000
Extra, complete with 20 wpm code and five written tests.

All those young amateurs still have their licenses. They
haven't gotten into any problems with FCC.

If anything is preposterous, it's the idea that amateur
radio needs some sort of minimum age limit.

If anything is preposterous, it's someone accusing
complete strangers of "fraud" and "hypocrisy" without
any objective evidence.

Jim, N2EY

Morkie and VE Testing
 

VE Testing Rules
 

On Mar 11, 8:29?am, "KH6HZ" wrote:
wrote:
Perhaps this was the same VE team that tested the 4 1/2 year old?

I doubt it.

Yes, I realize that. Unfortunately there is no emoticon for
"tongue-in-cheek".

How about this one:

;-^


His proposed "cure" for that "problem" was to
propose that no one under the age of 14 years
be allowed to earn a US amateur radio license.

Why would one suggest a "cure" for a non-existant "problem"?

I can think of a couple of reasons:

1) Doesn't like children, or doesn't want to deal with them.

2) Doesn't want amateur radio to be "G-rated".

3) Thinks radio should be an adults-only activity.
(There's a quote to this effect).

4) Wants to cut off a source of new amateurs

5) Wants to spite those amateurs who were
licensed at an early age. (I earned my Novice
at age 13, Technician and Advanced at 14, and Extra at 16. The only
reason I took me to 16 to get
the Extra was the old 2 year experience rule.)

6) Is jealous of the accomplishments of young
amateurs

7) Believes that young people learn Morse Code
more easily, and are more likely to become
skilled in its use and actually use it as radio
amateurs. Cutting off the supply of young, Morse-
Code-skilled amateurs at the source is one way to
fight the *use* of the mode.

How's that?

As for "bitter old geezers", there's never been any
sort of age requirement, maximum or minimum, for
any class of US amateur radio license.

However, should there be periodic retesting, such as with driver's licenses?

Possibly. The problem is that such retesting would
place a burden both on the licensees and the VE
system.

It would be a shame, for instance, if a geezer's amplifer malfunctioned,
arc'd over to his oxygen bottle, and an explosion resulted.

Yes, that would be a shame.

Ex-KG6IRO, who lived less than 25 miles from AF6AY
and was recently sentenced to seven years in prison
for radio-related crimes, is well past retirement age.
So is the unlicensed person in Florida (Flippo?) who
is still behind bars IIRC.

Seems to happen a lot, unfortunately.

Actually it's quite rare. But it's certainly a lot
more common
than such violations by young amateurs.

Just think how embittered you would be if you had to wait 80 years to get
your ham ticket.

Heck, I'd be embittered if I'd had to wait until I was
14 years old!

AF6AY did not have to wait 80 years, however. When *he* was young,
there was no age requirement. He wants to impose a requirement
that *he* did not have to deal with.

He has always been eligible to get an amateur radio license. He could
have earned an amateur
radio license whenever he wanted. He *chose*
to wait all those years.

73 de Jim, N2EY

Morkie and VE Testing
 

On Mar 11, 12:18 pm, "KH6HZ" wrote:
wrote:
Is Michigan one of those states? You need to check your facts before
running your mouth.

Immaterial. Mark could easily travel to VT, MA, NJ, or any other state which
offers same-sex marriages.

It isn't legal in his state of residence. You just keep running that
mouth, doncha?

Mark *is* capable of travelling, isn't he?

Moreso than you. You live vicariously through other people's PO
Boxes.

Morkie and VE Testing
 

On Mar 11, 12:03 pm, "Dee Flint" wrote:
"KH6HZ" wrote in message

...

wrote:

Dee was an unwitting accomplice in Robesin's plan. She could have
snipped that part out if she had read it and understood what she was
reading.

More rubbish.

Besides it's not my job to edit Steve's posts simply to make other's happy.

That's easy to say when you are not the target of Robesin's attacks.

I was replying sole to the error.

Which one? Robesin made several.

When I have the time to do some snipping,
I'll do so on longer posts but don't bother on shorter ones as it's not
worth the effort.

Dee, N8UZE

So if Robesin's attacks are short and sweet, you're good with it?

VE Testing Rules
 

On Mar 11, 10:38 am, "Dean M" wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
On Mar 11, 9:35 am, "Dean M" wrote:
wrote in message
groups.com...
On Mar 10, 8:32 pm, "Dean M" wrote:
wrote in message
roups.com...
On Mar 10, 11:29 am, "Dean M" wrote:

How's that report on me going. Should be at least 500 words double
spaced

The report was completed back when I said I made it.

I so doubt that. You're all bluster like your trainer

I so don't care. But here's an interesting little factoid so that
you'll sleep better at night:

You asked for my State's Attorney General and I gave his info to you,
but I had merely reported you to your ISP.

Oh my gosh gee whiz there Bry You stated previously that you reported
this
to the Ohio AG.

No. You jumped to a conclusion because you're a paranoid little
freak. I let you work under a false assumption all this time.

I did HHmmmm

Yep. You did. Are you now admitting to harassing behavio[u]r?

This post from your stubby little fingered keyboard sez you're
wrong

Nope, it proves I'm right.

Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.policy
From:
Date: 10 Feb 2007 18:52:28 -0800
Local: Sun, Feb 11 2007 2:52 am
Subject: Schlecks' Schlock!
Reply | Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show
original | Report this message | Find messages by this author
On Feb 10, 11:38 am, "Dean M" wrote:

why? don;t you like getting male

"Getting male?" Are you a pervert?

Suspicious US mail is opened by the postal inspector.

Suspicious packages from other carriers get opened by the Sheriff.

Harassing emails are both forwarded to the state attorney general, and
printed and mailed to the attorney general.

Your stalking is now documented. Proceed at your own risk. Best of
Luck.

Note the mention of attorney general at least twice

I see what I wrote. Do you see what I wrote?

Now you back pedal and state you reported to my ISP. Which
one is the truth there Bry? Taking lessions from Marcus Stupideous I C.

No backpedalling. I'm just not responsible for how your freaky little
mind works.

Backpedaliing. Classic example Now you'll refute

No backpedalling. See what I wrote. Understand what I wrote. Then
compare it to your actions.

No problem, My ISP, if indeeed I am posting from them gave you comlaint
the
same weight and thoght as I imagine the Ohio AG did NONE!!!! ha ha he he

I never contacted the AG's office. You made that assumption up all by
yourself.

See above

Yep. I see above. Do you see above?

Oh that's right You're Bluster Man.

I am? I've never claimed to be him.

Say one thing but don't do another.

Huh? It's supposed to be, "Say one thing but DO another."

Kinda like when monkeys bear their teeth in an attempt to bluster
their way out of a situation.

Monkey's "bare" "thier" teeth.

Are you bearing your teeth right now Bluster
Man??

Am I Mr. Riff-Ralph?

You make me raff

You make yourself riff and raff.

You jump to conclusions then harass me when the AG office doesn't
check on you. What an idiot.

How can you be harrassed in a public forum there BRY? No one forces you
to
read anything, no one forces you you to reply. Taking lessons from thae
ither trained monkey Marcus Idiotous I C

You you make all kinds of assumptions. Too bad for you.

You continue to operate under false assumptions. Too bad for you.

Feel free to report me to the FCC as well there Bry. I am sure they'll
give
you the same consideration as the others

Nah. I'll wait for you to really screw up, then... "Dialing..."

You very funny man, you make me raff or on this case ralph

So now you're claiming to be Riff-Ralph? How appropriate.

That's you're claim Phineas T.

Awww. You act stupid and now it's my fault?

Ta ta Turtle man give my regards to the rest of the Bizzaro people

Hey Bry could be a new Batman villian... Bluster Man a villian who
attempts to defaet his enemies with lies, inneuendo and various blustery
phrases

Maybe you should go back to Michigan there Bry, I am sure Marcus
Deviatous
would puit you up

It's been fun Have a week

Sayonara Mr. Riff-Ralph.

Sayonara Mr. Rfff-Ralph.

VE Testing Rules
 

On Mar 11, 12:34 pm, wrote:
On Mar 11, 8:14?am, wrote:
On Mar 10, 9:59 pm, wrote:

Jim, N2EY- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Jim, get over yourself.

What would you have me do, Mr. "Cheese"? (I'd use your
name and/or callsign, but you don't include either in your
postings.)

(Shhhh. I'm working undercover for Riley.)

It seems you want me to stop posting the facts here,
particularly when you don't like the facts presented.

Most thinking people know enough to smile and move on. Like some of
the things Mark says.

Is it really worth a mailing campaign to his neighbors and neighboring
hams? Does that make you feel better?

libel and VE Testing
 

On Mar 10, 5:37 pm, "KH6HZ" wrote:
wrote:
A quick search of Chassel, MI shows 19 licensed amateurs, 1 of which you
live with.

so?

You can't claim someone "lied" simply because their figures are different.

You can't? Tell that to Jim.

You could also claim that there are 600K+ licensed amateurs in your "area",
depending on how large of an "area" you want to use.

You could also claim they are all in Jeff Hermann's PO Box. And you'd
almost be right.

that is not the region from which the VE';s of the area are drawn

It is safe to say that in areas with low population density, there will be
an equally low number of licensed amateurs.

In this group it's never safe to say anything. Just the facts, Ma'am.

Of those licensed amateurs, only
1/6th of them are likely to be Extra-class operators.

So there cannot be enclaves of Extra class hams who are mostly VE's?

If so then there can't be two (2) four and a half year olds (4.5)
passing amateur exams.

They don't fit the normal distribution.

What are their callsigns?

why so you can harrass thme further

Translation: I don't want to say 'cuz then they'd refute my claims I was
discriminated against, and I can't be a victim any longer.

Translation: Mike is out to get Mark.

libel and VE Testing
 

On Mar 10, 8:36 pm, wrote:
On 10 Mar 2007 16:32:33 -0800, wrote:

On Mar 10, 4:22 pm, "KH6HZ" wrote:
wrote:
whoe ever it was lied about the hams of in area i n number

How, exactly?

A quick search of Chassel, MI shows 19 licensed amateurs, 1 of which you
live with.

A quick search of one Jeff Hermann's PO Box used to show what?

C'mon Mad Dog Mike, you of all people should know that you don't have
to reside in Chassel, MI to be a VE there.

I spuse I confused stave when I said Local as oposed to
houghton/hancock area

With Robesin it wouldn't have mattered.

and mike just followed suit

He smelled blood in the water.

For the record I have never asked for session in chassell but one in
Houghton in the same room that can be used by Husky ARS members and
CCARS member almost anytime (if MTU is hosting some conference
restrictions aplly)http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/

For teh record, these guys just want to hang you.

Libel and VE Testing
 

On Mar 11, 9:29 am, wrote:
On 11 Mar 2007 06:27:11 -0700, wrote:

On Mar 11, 4:55 am, "KH6HZ" wrote:
"Dee Flint" wrote:
I was thinking more along the lines of irate applicants posing a threat to
the Volunteer Examiners.

I stand corrected.

Wouldn't that be a good reason for VEs to "pack heat"?

The RF Commando's will deal with any such issues!

amazing how fast he and steve get to tlaking about gunshttp://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/

Compensating...

VE Testing Rules
 

wrote in message
...
On 11 Mar 2007 10:27:30 -0700, wrote:

On Mar 11, 10:38 am, "Dean M" wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
On Mar 11, 9:35 am, "Dean M" wrote:
wrote in message
groups.com...
On Mar 10, 8:32 pm, "Dean M" wrote:
wrote in message
roups.com...
On Mar 10, 11:29 am, "Dean M" wrote:

How's that report on me going. Should be at least 500 words
double
spaced

The report was completed back when I said I made it.

I so doubt that. You're all bluster like your trainer

I so don't care. But here's an interesting little factoid so that
you'll sleep better at night:

You asked for my State's Attorney General and I gave his info to
you,
but I had merely reported you to your ISP.

Oh my gosh gee whiz there Bry You stated previously that you
reported
this
to the Ohio AG.

No. You jumped to a conclusion because you're a paranoid little
freak. I let you work under a false assumption all this time.

I did HHmmmm

Yep. You did. Are you now admitting to harassing behavio[u]r?

This post from your stubby little fingered keyboard sez you're
wrong

Nope, it proves I'm right.

indeeed unless (after the quoted message

Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.policy
From:
Date: 10 Feb 2007 18:52:28 -0800
Local: Sun, Feb 11 2007 2:52 am
Subject: Schlecks' Schlock!
Reply | Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show
original | Report this message | Find messages by this author
On Feb 10, 11:38 am, "Dean M" wrote:

why? don;t you like getting male

"Getting male?" Are you a pervert?

Suspicious US mail is opened by the postal inspector.

Suspicious packages from other carriers get opened by the Sheriff.

Harassing emails are both forwarded to the state attorney general, and
printed and mailed to the attorney general.

Your stalking is now documented. Proceed at your own risk. Best of
Luck.

Note the mention of attorney general at least twice

I see what I wrote. Do you see what I wrote?

.....did dean send you harrassing email?

nope, wouldn't waste the time, besides, a private e-mail wuldn't allow
everyone else the ability to see good ol Mr Bluster in action

Whay have fun with invitations all around to join in watching the Circus
side show. It's more fun to see "superior intellect" with a group than a
one on one, even if that's your sort of thin


if did then you did or did forward and report him or then maybe you
could be lying

definitely the former and complete true about the latter, or is it the other
way around. Either case, Ol Phineas T was all bluster or as you'll say, he
am a lier

he's not the notorious Batman villian Mr Bluster for nothing




Now you back pedal and state you reported to my ISP. Which
one is the truth there Bry? Taking lessions from Marcus Stupideous I
C.

No backpedalling. I'm just not responsible for how your freaky little
mind works.

Backpedaliing. Classic example Now you'll refute

No backpedalling. See what I wrote. Understand what I wrote. Then
compare it to your actions.

No problem, My ISP, if indeeed I am posting from them gave you
comlaint
the
same weight and thoght as I imagine the Ohio AG did NONE!!!! ha ha
he he

I never contacted the AG's office. You made that assumption up all by
yourself.

See above

Yep. I see above. Do you see above?

Oh that's right You're Bluster Man.

I am? I've never claimed to be him.

Say one thing but don't do another.

Huh? It's supposed to be, "Say one thing but DO another."

Kinda like when monkeys bear their teeth in an attempt to bluster
their way out of a situation.

Monkey's "bare" "thier" teeth.

Are you bearing your teeth right now Bluster
Man??

Am I Mr. Riff-Ralph?

You make me raff

You make yourself riff and raff.

You jump to conclusions then harass me when the AG office doesn't
check on you. What an idiot.

How can you be harrassed in a public forum there BRY? No one forces
you
to
read anything, no one forces you you to reply. Taking lessons from
thae
ither trained monkey Marcus Idiotous I C

You you make all kinds of assumptions. Too bad for you.

You continue to operate under false assumptions. Too bad for you.

and blame others for his mistakes

Sorry Marcus Ridiculous , we can't all emulate you and be Professional
Victims


Feel free to report me to the FCC as well there Bry. I am sure
they'll
give
you the same consideration as the others

Nah. I'll wait for you to really screw up, then... "Dialing..."

You very funny man, you make me raff or on this case ralph

So now you're claiming to be Riff-Ralph? How appropriate.

That's you're claim Phineas T.

Awww. You act stupid and now it's my fault?

of course it is juist like with Robeson

Ta ta Turtle man give my regards to the rest of the Bizzaro people

Hey Bry could be a new Batman villian... Bluster Man a villian who
attempts to defaet his enemies with lies, inneuendo and various
blustery
phrases

Maybe you should go back to Michigan there Bry, I am sure Marcus
Deviatous
would puit you up

It's been fun Have a week

Sayonara Mr. Riff-Ralph.

Sayonara Mr. Rfff-Ralph.

too bad we can't realy say goodbye to his ilk


You could, trying putting your head in the oven, playing with a loaded gun,
catching moving cars out on the freeway. There are loads of ways for you to
say good bye

Please feel to try several until you succeed


http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com