What Revolution?
 

On Apr 14, 8:15�pm, Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
On Apr 14, 3:36?am, "Dudley" anon@anon wrote:
"Dave Heil" wrote in message
nk.net...

Dudley wrote:
"Dave Heil" wrote in message
ink.net...
AF6AY wrote:
On Apr 12, 1:59?pm, wrote:
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.

Then again, if someone who has done something
honorable does tell about
it in this forum, Len will belittle him or call him a liar.

Only if that person expresses disagreement with any
of Len's statements.

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.

...or at very least, does not feel compelled to document it by providing
Len Anderson scans of orders, documents or photographs.

Only if that person expresses disagreement with any
of Len's statements.

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.

Precisely!

So there's no point in giving any information.

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.

Woe betide any man whose experience in any area
exceeds that of Leonard Anderson.

Only if that person expresses disagreement with any
of Len's statements.

I can think of many areas where my experience
exceeds that of Len Anderson. Most of those areas
have nothing to do with Morse Code or amateur radio.

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.

I keep forgetting about the newer version. *I'll save it for future use.

Think of it as a living document, like the Constitution. Refined
and revised, but essentially the same over time.

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.

Len, with an amateur radio license, acts no differently
than Len without
an amateur radio license.

Here on rrap, at least.

We do not know how he behaves away from Usenet.

Which reminds me that I have had QSOs on the amateur
bands with at least 10 hams who have also posted to RRAP.
Len, otoh....

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.

...and not just one time. *He has done so over and over and over.

A clear and consistent pattern over time.

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.

Right. *Len's inferiority complex crops up frequently. *He certainly
doesn't like having it pointed out that he is a beginner in something or
that he has less experience than another. *

Yet there is no shame in being a beginner, novice, neophyte,
greenhorn, tyro, wet-behind-the-ears newcomer. But for some
reason Len takes offense at those words.

He has difficulties with
anything he perceives to be rank, class or status, but he's the first
guy to do a "look what *I've* done."

You don't see the pattern, Dave?

Len is all about rank, class and status - as long as the system
used puts *him* at the top of the list.

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.

There are times when I'd swear that he sees himself as a short story
writer, getting paid by the word.

A PROFESSIONAL short story writer...

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.

Indded...er indedd...um...indeed!

Something like that. When did it become unreasonable to
expect proper spelling, grammar, capitalization and punctuation?

Seems to me that something worth doing is worth doing right.

73 de Jim, N2EY

What Revolution?
 

On Apr 17, 11:06 am, Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
On Apr 17, 1:11 am, Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
On Apr 16, 8:42 am, Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
On Apr 15, 10:15 am, Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
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.
It seems that your response includes intentional mistakes, used purely
for baiting others.
It seems that your response fits the "unreasonable need to correct
others" profile.
I made no effort to correct you.
My statement above is true.
I made no effort to bait you, yet here you are.
The first portion of your statement is false.

The first step in the process of correction is recognizing or
manufacturing an error.

I recognized the error which you manufactured.

You manufactured the error which you claim to have recognized. Now
what?

I'm here when I want to be and I'm not here when I choose not to be here.
Ditto.

I made no comment about your presence. You did make a comment about my
presence.

Dave K8MN

And?

What Revolution?
 

On Apr 17, 1:27 pm, John Smith I wrote:
wrote:
You are in his killfile. Live with it.

if only that were so
http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com

Mark:

You'd be wise to killfile dave, don't you think he has given you enough
chit. Krist, the whole ng is filled with his trash ...

JS

Dave is picking up where the seven hostile actions hero left off...

What Revolution?
 

On Apr 17, 2:41 pm, Dave Heil wrote:
John Smith I wrote:
wrote:

You are in his killfile. Live with it.

if only that were so
http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com

Mark:

You'd be wise to killfile dave, don't you think he has given you enough
chit. Krist, the whole ng is filled with his trash ...

The fact is, nobody has abused this newsgroup with more strangled cries
for attention than Mark Morgan.

Nor more strangled cries for help than Robesin...

You needn't be embarrassed by your apostrophe debacle. You can always
choose a new pseudonym. I don't think anyone is using "John Doe" right now.

Dave K8MN

Dave, how's your run for the ARRL Roanoke Division office coming?

What Revolution?
 

On Apr 17, 8:14 pm, wrote:
On Apr 14, 8:15?pm, Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
On Apr 14, 3:36?am, "Dudley" anon@anon wrote:
"Dave Heil" wrote in message
nk.net...
Dudley wrote:
"Dave Heil" wrote in message
ink.net...
AF6AY wrote:
On Apr 12, 1:59?pm, wrote:
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.

Then again, if someone who has done something
honorable does tell about
it in this forum, Len will belittle him or call him a liar.

Only if that person expresses disagreement with any
of Len's statements.

I've often disagreed with Len, yet we don't seem to have the problems
that you describe. Perhaps you're a little thin-skinned.

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.

...or at very least, does not feel compelled to document it by providing
Len Anderson scans of orders, documents or photographs.

Only if that person expresses disagreement with any
of Len's statements.

I've often disagreed with Len, yet we don't seem to have the problems
that you describe. Perhaps you're a little thin-skinned.

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.

Sure it does. For example, if someone is always correcting others,
even when wearing the "cloak of well-meaningness," Len is not deceived
and responds appropriately.

He will use
his attack techniques on them regardless of, say,
their actual military/combat experience.

Precisely!

So there's no point in giving any information.

So if by military service an asshole were to be given a pass, what
would you say about that?

On the other hand, why would some panty-waist claim that they've
served in other ways?

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.

Woe betide any man whose experience in any area
exceeds that of Leonard Anderson.

Only if that person expresses disagreement with any
of Len's statements.

Len and I have had disagreements, Len has no professional experience
in meteorology, yet we don't seem to have the problems that you two
seem to have. Perhaps the both of you have thin skins...

I can think of many areas where my experience
exceeds that of Len Anderson.

I can't.

Most of those areas
have nothing to do with Morse Code or amateur radio.

Kindly list them.

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.

I keep forgetting about the newer version. ?I'll save it for future use.

Think of it as a living document, like the Constitution. Refined
and revised, but essentially the same over time.

Hardly.

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.

Len, with an amateur radio license, acts no differently
than Len without
an amateur radio license.

Here on rrap, at least.

We do not know how he behaves away from Usenet.

Why not try coaxing him on the air during a thunderstorm like you did
Cecil???

Which reminds me that I have had QSOs on the amateur
bands with at least 10 hams who have also posted to RRAP.
Len, otoh....

Len would be wise to steer away from you two.

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.

...and not just one time. ?He has done so over and over and over.

A clear and consistent pattern over time.

At least when Len gets his point across, there's no fake cloak of well-
meaningness. That's a far more honorable way of conducting oneself
than your example.

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.

Right. ?Len's inferiority complex crops up frequently. ?He certainly
doesn't like having it pointed out that he is a beginner in something or
that he has less experience than another. ?

Yet there is no shame in being a beginner, novice, neophyte,
greenhorn, tyro, wet-behind-the-ears newcomer. But for some
reason Len takes offense at those words.

Then why do you try so hard to make it so?

He has difficulties with
anything he perceives to be rank, class or status, but he's the first
guy to do a "look what *I've* done."

You don't see the pattern, Dave?

Len is all about rank, class and status - as long as the system
used puts *him* at the top of the list.

"Look what I've done" is a little different than "Look at what tests
I've passed."

So, Jim, what have you done? In what ways and areas are you more
knowledgeable than Len? Kindly make a list.

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.

There are times when I'd swear that he sees himself as a short story
writer, getting paid by the word.

A PROFESSIONAL short story writer...

All of the stories in "Ham Radio" magazine are short. Kindly list
your published works...

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.

Indded...er indedd...um...indeed!

Something like that. When did it become unreasonable to
expect proper spelling, grammar, capitalization and punctuation?

Seems to me that something worth doing is worth doing right.

73 de Jim, N2EY

Heil once said that a person who cannot spell correctly couldn't
lead. Shortly thereafter he made a spelling error which I pointed out
to him.

Now he's running for an ARRL office...

Seems to me that a person should at least adhere to their own
convictions.

What Revolution?
 

What Revolution?
 

What Revolution?
 

On Apr 18, 12:14�am, Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
On Apr 14, 8:15?pm, Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
On Apr 14, 3:36?am, "Dudley" anon@anon wrote:
"Dave Heil" wrote in message
link.net...
Dudley wrote:
"Dave Heil" wrote in message
hlink.net...
AF6AY wrote:
On Apr 12, 1:59?pm, wrote:

*A person doesn't
necessarily have to disagree with Len. *We've seen
examples of Len
biting the hand of one who is in basic agreement
with him. *

That's true.

There are
also examples where Len has lashed out at someone he
perceives as having
higher rank, status or class than Leonard.

Also true.

Remember what the shrinks call "projection"
(when a person thinks that everyone else
thinks the same way they do) and
"transference" (when a person blames
someone for perceived wrongs committed
by a completely different person). Those
are also in play.

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.

...or at very least, does not feel compelled to
document it by providing
Len Anderson scans of orders, documents or photographs.

Only if that person expresses disagreement with any
of Len's statements.

...is perceived by Len to have higher rank, status or
class than Len
*or* if Len suddenly decides to bite the hand which feeds him.

True enough.

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.

Precisely!

So there's no point in giving any information.

Right. *It prevents *some* of the behavior listed
in the profile *and*
it drives Len nuts.

In mathematical terms, such information
"drops out of the equation".

If a person doesn't give information, Len
demands it and insults the person for not
giving it.

If a person does give information, Len uses
it to make up new insults.

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.

Woe betide any man whose experience in any area
exceeds that of Leonard Anderson.

Only if that person expresses disagreement with any
of Len's statements.

...is perceived by Len to have higher rank, status or class than Len
*or* if Len suddenly decides to bite the hand which feeds him.

I can think of many areas where my experience
exceeds that of Len Anderson. Most of those areas
have nothing to do with Morse Code or amateur radio.

It doesn't matter to him. *

Exactly.

Len has attacked my work in the Foreign
Service. *Len has no experience whatever in that area.
*He knows little
of State Department communications techniques and
practices of the past
or present. *He knows little of the workings of the
diplomatic community
in general.

Doesn't matter. The information you did give offended
him in some way, and so it became the base for insults.

However, I recall that at least some of your information
involved the use of Morse Code to arrange RTTY
radio communication for the Foreign Service. That alone
was enough to set Len off.

*I can easily guess what he'd do with detailed information
about my Air Force service, based upon what he has
written about my
State Department employment.

Of course - and not just that. Look at the classic "sphincters
post", most of which consists of Len disparaging the work
of a *US military* radio operator.

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.

I keep forgetting about the newer version. I'll save it for future use.

Think of it as a living document, like the Constitution. Refined
and revised, but essentially the same over time.

You could always add amendments when the need arises.

I just rework it a bit.

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.
Len, with an amateur radio license, acts no differently
than Len without
an amateur radio license.

Here on rrap, at least.

Of course.

We do not know how he behaves away from Usenet.

I'm really beyond caring. *This is where I encounter him.

Actually, I made a mistake in my previous statement. We've
seen how Len behaves outside Usenet in comments to FCC.

Which reminds me that I have had QSOs on the amateur
bands with at least 10 hams who have also posted to RRAP.
Len, otoh....

That isn't something I find myself looking forward to.

I don't think most hams will ever encounter Len on the amateur
bands.

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.
...and not just one time. ?He has done so over and over and over.

A clear and consistent pattern over time.

That time now exceeds ten years. *That's a pretty good baseline.

Also over 10,000 postings to rrap alone, under a whole bunch of screen
names.

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.

Right. Len's inferiority complex crops up frequently. He certainly
doesn't like having it pointed out that he is a beginner in something or
that he has less experience than another.

Yet there is no shame in being a beginner, novice, neophyte,
greenhorn, tyro, wet-behind-the-ears newcomer.

I freely admitted that I'd been a beginner. *You've admitted to being a
beginner. *Every new ham has to start somewhere.

The trouble is, Len wants to start at the top.

But for some
reason Len takes offense at those words.

I think it for reasons of rank, status or class. *Len does not want to
be seen as junior to anyone.

Which makes him junior to almost everyone!

He has difficulties with
anything he perceives to be rank, class or status, but he's the first
guy to do a "look what *I've* done."

You don't see the pattern, Dave?

Len is all about rank, class and status - as long as the system
used puts *him* at the top of the list.

I've been aware of it for years.

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.
There are times when I'd swear that he sees himself as a short story
writer, getting paid by the word.

A PROFESSIONAL short story writer...

Heh.

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.
Indded...er indedd...um...indeed!

Something like that. When did it become unreasonable to
expect proper spelling, grammar, capitalization and punctuation?

About the same time as educators adopted the view that
we shouldn't do
anything to harm a student's self-esteem.

The problem isn't with the self-esteem issue, but with
the interpretation.

Here in Radnor Township, the educators I know think
that having clear and consistent high standards is an
essential part of building a student's self-esteem. Accepting
poor work, in their view, actually damages a student's self-
esteem far more than a correction.

The idea is that if you expect, for example, proper spelling, grammar,
capitalization and punctuation, and follow up by
marking mistakes, you are telling the students that those
things matter *and* that they can do all of them correctly.

But if you accept shoddy work and don't call attention to
mistakes, you are telling the students that they aren't
smart enough to do it right.

Most students know the difference. They see proper
spelling, grammar, capitalization and punctuation all
around them. Most will live up to - or down to - the
expectations of the educators.

The term "educators" includes parents, btw.

Seems to me that something worth doing is worth doing right.

Ah, Jim, 'tis a brave new world.

In some places it is, Dave. But not everywhere. Newer isn't
always better despite what some would have us believe.

73 de Jim, N2EY

What Revolution?
 

On Apr 18, 1:23 am, Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
On Apr 17, 11:06 am, Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
On Apr 17, 1:11 am, Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
On Apr 16, 8:42 am, Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
On Apr 15, 10:15 am, Dave Heil wrote:
The mistake is used to bait those who have an unreasonable need to
correct others. Miccolis, Heil and Robesin fit that profile.
It seems that your response includes intentional mistakes, used purely
for baiting others.
It seems that your response fits the "unreasonable need to correct
others" profile.
I made no effort to correct you.
My statement above is true.
I made no effort to bait you, yet here you are.
The first portion of your statement is false.
The first step in the process of correction is recognizing or
manufacturing an error.
I recognized the error which you manufactured.

You manufactured the error which you claim to have recognized. Now
what?

Now you've manufactured another error.

Dave K8MN

That distinction is yours.

What Revolution?
 

From: on 17 Apr 2007 18:10:22 -0700

Subject: What Revolution?

On Apr 17, 8:14 pm, wrote:
On Apr 14, 8:15?pm, Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
On Apr 14, 3:36?am, "Dudley" doodoo@wrong wrote:


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.
Then again, if someone who has done something
honorable does tell about
it in this forum, Len will belittle him or call him a liar.

Only if that person expresses disagreement with any
of Len's statements.

I've often disagreed with Len, yet we don't seem to have the problems
that you describe. Perhaps you're a little thin-skinned.

A LOT thin-skinned. :-)


I've often disagreed with Len, yet we don't seem to have the problems
that you describe. Perhaps you're a little thin-skinned.

Jimmie Noserve has a personality conflict with me because
I am an "atheist" to the religion of morse...or perhaps
I allow myself to change my mind like other human beings.

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.

Sure it does. For example, if someone is always correcting others,
even when wearing the "cloak of well-meaningness," Len is not deceived
and responds appropriately.

Brian, these creatures just aren't acquainted with the Nature
of the computer-modem beast. They are new to the jungle and
resent not being accepted as a Tarzan. :-)

They be Cheetah. Ook, ook.

He will use
his attack techniques on them regardless of, say,
their actual military/combat experience.

Precisely!

So there's no point in giving any information.

So if by military service an asshole were to be given a pass, what
would you say about that?

Jimmie Noserve knows not about "assholes" nor military service.
He's never served. He might have gone to a lot of movies and
seen war films, though...

On the other hand, why would some panty-waist claim that they've
served in other ways?

Good question!


Only if that person expresses disagreement with any
of Len's statements.

Len and I have had disagreements, Len has no professional experience
in meteorology, yet we don't seem to have the problems that you two
seem to have. Perhaps the both of you have thin skins...

I'd say NO skin. All hyper-sensitive nerve endings. :-)


I can think of many areas where my experience
exceeds that of Len Anderson.

I can't.

I can. Morsemanship.

Jimmie REALLY did his thing on that, "serving the nation in
other ways."


Most of those areas
have nothing to do with Morse Code or amateur radio.

Kindly list them.

Brian, don't hold your breath waiting for an answer on THAT! :-)



Think of it as a living document, like the Constitution. Refined
and revised, but essentially the same over time.

Hardly.

Indeed! Jimmie Noserve must have "served his own constitution"
by making up "profiles."

Maybe he swore under oath to serve the "constitution" of his
fantasy world?



We do not know how he behaves away from Usenet.

Why not try coaxing him on the air during a thunderstorm like you did
Cecil???

Well...not many thunderstorms happen here in southern
California.

Why does Jimmie think I'd be using OOK CW? :-)


Which reminds me that I have had QSOs on the amateur
bands with at least 10 hams who have also posted to RRAP.
Len, otoh....

Len would be wise to steer away from you two.

Er, I've never traveled steerage. Never herded any steers.

I've steered automobiles successfully for 56 years...even
in eastern Pennsylvania! :-)


At least when Len gets his point across, there's no fake cloak of well-
meaningness. That's a far more honorable way of conducting oneself
than your example.

Tsk, I never went to a parochial school. From what I've heard
about them, I wouldn't want to be "taught" by Sister Nun of
the Above, either. :-)


Yet there is no shame in being a beginner, novice, neophyte,
greenhorn, tyro, wet-behind-the-ears newcomer. But for some
reason Len takes offense at those words.

Then why do you try so hard to make it so?

Jimmie must think that "amateur radio" operates ENTIRELY
DIFFERENT and with DIFFERENT LAWS OF PHYSICS than all
other radio. Perhaps he also thinks that "amateur radio"
procedures and protocol are SO COMPLEX AND DIFFERENT than
all other radio services?

Now, if he has bought into that fantasy, then, of course,
he would be "right" in laying into "newbies" about them
being "beginners, novices, neophytes, greenhorns, tyros,
wet-behind-the-ears newcomers!" Jimmie loves the fantasy
role-playing of being a ruff and tuff dill sergeant "chewing
out recruits" and "putting them in their place!" :-)

Trouble is, ALL radios work by the SAME laws of physics.
Each radio service has its OWN jargon and procedures.
Jimmie not know this, never having any experience with
anything BUT amateur radio.

Jimmie have experience IN military radio? Absolutely not.
Jimmie have experience IN broadcasting service? He hasn't
admitted it. [has he had experiences with broads? we
don't know that, either]
Jimmie have experience IN aviation radio services, either
on the ground or in the air? He hasn't said so.
Jimmie have experience IN maritime radio services? He
no say that either.
Jimmie have experience IN Private Land Mobile Radio Service?
No, Jimmie not say that.
Jimmie have experience IN radio working with Department of
Defense contracts? Jimmie not admit that.
Jimmie ever use a CB? :-) Probably not, no place to plug
in a code key on those.
Jimmie ever use an FRS HT? He no say.
Jimmie ever use an amateur radio above 30 MHz? He no say
dat (not much Morse up there, some but sparse)
Jimmie ever use a cordless or cell phone? He no say dat.
Jimmie ever use a "keyless entry" transmitter to lock or
unlock his car? Does Jimmie own a car?

Tsk, I've done all the above, all legally. Over the last 55
years. Sometimes using voice, sometimes using data, sometimes
using modulation that isn't allocated or allowed by the FCC
for radio amateurs. No sweat. It's all RADIO of one form or
another.

Ah, but in Jimmieworld, amateur radio is SO DIFFERENT, SO
COMPLEX that one MUST go "through the ranks" from raw,
"duh" level recruit to apprentice, then progress to
journeyman level. Only after YEARS of dilligent hard work
can anyone begin to approach the majesty of his Master
level (naturally by morsemanship).

Jimmie once write that amateur extra is too complex to
reach for me. Poor baby. I took and passed all required
US amateur radio tests to reach Amateur Extra in one test
session. Jimmie very ****ed I do that. I not ask his
majesty's permission first. Tsk, tsk, I so bad...

Jimmie get ****ed I can pay for Icom 746Pro on credit card
without time payment. Poor baby. I work long time to earn
money, put away in accounts, earn interest. I spend and
Jimmie get angry...he no got money put away?



Len is all about rank, class and status - as long as the system
used puts *him* at the top of the list.

"Look what I've done" is a little different than "Look at what tests
I've passed."

Jimmie earn BS and MS degrees at college long time ago.
He be very smart, he say. Jimmie not say how smarts
allow him do things at work or even what work is.


So, Jim, what have you done? In what ways and areas are you more
knowledgeable than Len? Kindly make a list.

Jimmie have MS. That better than BS he speak about Morse.

Jimmie be code-tested Amateur Extra. Very smart, very big on
amateur knowledge, "renowned amateur historian" self-description
for ham history knowledge cribbed from League sources.

I not smart enough for Jimmie's crowd. Not know fast OOK CW,
never do it. Bad, bad, wrong attitude for olde-tyme hamateur
radio, not appreciate Jimmie pioneering radio airwaves while
helping Reggie Fessenden back in ought-six.


There are times when I'd swear that he sees himself as a short story
writer, getting paid by the word.

A PROFESSIONAL short story writer...

All of the stories in "Ham Radio" magazine are short. Kindly list
your published works...

I have sold *NO* fiction to Ham Radio magzine. None to Byte,
none to Microcomputing, none to Call-A.P.P.L.E., none to
ELECTROMICS magazine (that was). All FACT, all articles that
had information that could be duplicated by others, all
compensated by monies duly reported to IRS.

I've sold some fiction to non-electronic, non-radio, non-
computer interest magazines. That doesn't include the fantasy-
oriented radio amateurs in here. :-)



Seems to me that something worth doing is worth doing right.

Heil once said that a person who cannot spell correctly couldn't
lead. Shortly thereafter he made a spelling error which I pointed out
to him.

Now he's running for an ARRL office...

I think that's good. It's a long distance from West Virginia
to Newington, CT. The exercise will help him lose his excess
baggage. Maybe Jimmie can run alongside him and help him
along? :-)


Seems to me that a person should at least adhere to their own
convictions.

Well, I've never been arrested, much less convicted of anything.

I've been TO a couple jails but never locked up in one. :-)

I once squeezed out too much crazy glue and it adhered to three
fingers.

I made a statement seven years ago and Jimmie thought that I'd
made an Oath for Life! Bad me. I thought some folks could take
a turn-of-phrase correctly but Jimmie be a hidebound conservative
Literalist and doesn't EVER accept that folks can change their
minds!

Am I having fun yet? *NOT* in here! :-)

73, Len AF6AY